Website thinks killing used games is a good thing


Recommended Posts

Why yes, having a different opinion from your own on the Xbox One makes journalists 'Microshills'. You're being ridiculous.

Funny how Valve implemented a similar system with Steam hardly anyone complains about, save for those wanting to pirate games.

The Internet is the greatest tool humankind has to spread misinformation.

Used games will still be around, but now the people that make the games get some money.

This means jobs in the gaming industry to make new games.

It's only a problem if you don't have common sense. Don't believe the nerd heard on Twitter.

I am not a shill, I just use facts that Microsoft has been providing everyone. If you don't like

those facts, then that is a problem that you will have to work out on your own.

Surely you have your terminology mixed up here, if a media outlet is being paid to talk nice about Microsoft, then that makes the media outlet themselves the Microshills, no?

I think your title should read, "Media outlets getting paid off by Microsoft"

The word Microshills was not needed.

Or, if by Microshills you mean another party or parties, please make note of them.

PS. I didn't read the article, but judging by your lack of ability to even articulate your own concerns, I believe I will disagree with your assertion.

The Internet is the greatest tool humankind has to spread misinformation.

Used games will still be around, but now the people that make the games get some money.

This means jobs in the gaming industry to make new games.

It's only a problem if you don't have common sense. Don't believe the nerd heard on Twitter.

I am not a shill, I just use facts that Microsoft has been providing everyone. If you don't like

those facts, then that is a problem that you will have to work out on your own.

It opens a dangerous precedence, will plumbers start knocking at my door for selling my house that had work done by them in it?

  • Like 1

The Internet is the greatest tool humankind has to spread misinformation.

Used games will still be around, but now the people that make the games get some money.

This means jobs in the gaming industry to make new games.

It's only a problem if you don't have common sense. Don't believe the nerd heard on Twitter.

I am not a shill, I just use facts that Microsoft has been providing everyone. If you don't like

those facts, then that is a problem that you will have to work out on your own.

Samsung doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my TV

LG doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my Monitor

Sony doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PS3

Google doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my phone

Movie studios don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my movie collection

Intel doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PC

Book publishers don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my book collection

Why should Microsoft/Publishers get a cut of the sale if I sell or buy games?

Why yes, having a different opinion from your own on the Xbox One makes journalists 'Microshills'. You're being ridiculous.

Funny how Valve implemented a similar system with Steam hardly anyone complains about, save for those wanting to pirate games.

I love how everyone completely ignored this comment.

  • Like 2

The PC has never had a massive trade in or rental scene. I've been renting games ever since the SNES and for each console since then. Though you can trade in digital downloads if you bought them from Green Man Gaming.

Samsung doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my TV

LG doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my Monitor

Sony doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PS3

Google doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my phone

Movie studios don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my movie collection

Intel doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PC

Book publishers don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my book collection

Why should Microsoft/Publishers get a cut of the sale if I sell or buy games?

If you buy used games at GameStop right now you have to pay. Gamestop gets all of the money, with the new system Microsoft and publishers get money instead of it all going to Gamestop. I don't see the problem.

Used games will still be available like always and they still will be cheaper for the consumer. So, I am not sure what you are getting at.

It's a fair system and I will be selling my current game consoles to buy the new Xbox One console. I have no problem with this, less piracy, same pluses as the old system and more money for publishers and developers who create the games we all enjoy.

We have had a lot of closures of quality game companies as of late and so this helps maintain jobs and so we all can enjoy our games.

You still have your freedom, it's just more pronounced and I don't see a problem with it at all.

Funny how Valve implemented a similar system with Steam hardly anyone complains about, save for those wanting to pirate games.

Why are people comparing Steam to Xbox One! How many times have you gone around to your mates sat down and play a two player game on a computer like you would with a console! How many times have you seen Xbox have there super cheap sales like you would with Steam. Console users have a history of trading your games in to pay for newer games, swaping games with mates or even finding a old game for cheap! I can see the reason for Online games, for the reason of servers, but single player games NO.

If you buy used games at GameStop right now you have to pay. Gamestop gets all of the money, with the new system Microsoft and publishers get money instead of it all going to Gamestop. I don't see the problem.

Used games will still be available like always and they still will be cheaper for the consumer. So, I am not sure what you are getting at.

I buy used games from ebay/amazon, the person who paid full price for the game gets a reduced amount depending on condition and age of the game.

If and when this system goes into place I will only be able to buy from shops like Game, when someone buys a used game Microsoft will charge Game ?35 per title which means they will have to sell the used game for at least ?40 to make any profit which puts it at the same price as a new game.

Games are tied to the users account, you can only remove the license by selling the game to a videogame store, you can't sell games privately anymore and you cant use rental services like Gamefly, Lovefilm etc..

It is Anti-Consumer they are using their position in the videogame market to force videogame shops to accept the terms and conditions if they want to sell used games, How is this a good thing?

  • Like 3

I love how everyone completely ignored this comment.

Cause looking at people comparing the two makes use laugh and move on. BTW Activision reported sales figures for Black Ops II in the U.S. being more than 7.5 million copies sold on launch day and grossed over $500 million, in the US alone in its first 24 hours, making it the biggest entertainment launch of all time. BUT yet they seem to think they need more money with second hand games.

Why are people comparing Steam to Xbox One! How many times have you gone around to your mates sat down and play a two player game on a computer like you would with a console! How many times have you seen Xbox have there super cheap sales like you would with Steam. Console users have a history of trading your games in to pay for newer games, swaping games with mates or even finding a old game for cheap! I can see the reason for Online games, for the reason of servers, but single player games NO.

played a lot of hot-seat gaming when I was younger, with friends and a like.

Also there are still a huge array of LAN parties out there where people play games against each other via local network, where all of them own the same games.

But I think the whole trading in thing and lending out games might simply be different per region, Never had such things growing up here. And it is something I barely see nowadays either, mostly because the people I know want to have their own copies of a game, so that they can a: play single player if they want. b: Play multi player, whether it be over network with friends of locally with another controller.

No need to lend out games, people usually bring their controllers.

And the whole trading in things to get other things cheap..Maybe just me, but that's not really how life works.

oh and "even finding a old game for cheap" people do this quite heavily on PC too.

Cause looking at people comparing the two makes use laugh and move on. BTW Activision reported sales figures for Black Ops II in the U.S. being more than 7.5 million copies sold on launch day and grossed over $500 million, in the US alone in its first 24 hours, making it the biggest entertainment launch of all time. BUT yet they seem to think they need more money with second hand games.

All I got to say about this is..Eew, ****ing Call of Duty. I don't look in the gutter for games.

I buy used games from ebay/amazon, the person who paid full price for the game gets a reduced amount depending on condition and age of the game.

If and when this system goes into place I will only be able to buy from shops like Game, when someone buys a used game Microsoft will charge Game ?35 per title which means they will have to sell the used game for at least ?40 to make any profit which puts it at the same price as a new game.

Games are tied to the users account, you can only remove the license by selling the game to a videogame store, you can't sell games privately anymore and you cant use rental services like Gamefly, Lovefilm etc..

It is Anti-Consumer they are using their position in the videogame market to force videogame shops to accept the terms and conditions if they want to sell used games, How is this a good thing?

If amazon adopts the system Microsoft has set up as they should then it's still not a problem. Steam associates games with an account as well and nobody worries about that. Why is it so different when Microsoft even goes so far as allowing retail to clear the games for resale?

You can't rent a PC game (at least in the USA and it would make sense as you install the game to your hard drive)

As for rental services, I am unsure yet how this works. I am sure Microsoft will announce something at or right before E3.

It is still a problem because Microsoft will charge the seller ?35, there is no room to sell the game at a lesser price.

Why do people keep comparing Steam to consoles, when you buy a PC game thesedays it is usually tied to some service such as Origin, Uplay or Steam, when you buy a console game it's not tied to anything, you can put the disk in and play.

I know you can't rent PC games which is why I'm saying its a flawed comparison, I have been able to rent console games since the 90's now all of a sudden i can't because of some arbitrary paywall for used/rental games. Microsoft and publishers already got their cut when the game sold new why do they deserve a second, third, fourth or even fifth cut of subsequent sales.

As for your "it's good for developers" do you REALLY think they will get a meaningful amount of this fee, no most of it will go to Microsoft and Publishers, developers will get a fraction of the amount just like the pennies they get when the game sells new.

It's doing nothing but lining the pockets of the big boys, it doesn't benefit the developer one iota.

Samsung doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my TV

LG doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my Monitor

Sony doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PS3

Google doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my phone

Movie studios don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my movie collection

Intel doesn't get a cut of the sale if I sell my PC

Book publishers don't get a cut of the sale if I sell my book collection

Why should Microsoft/Publishers get a cut of the sale if I sell or buy games?

Most of those products aren't comparable in that they no longer hold their full value after being used, a game however still offers you the exact same value and gameplay as when it was bought new. also books isn't entirely true, e-books, same system.

They should just tie each game to one account/console as a one time thing and be done with it. No trade-ins or sales.

Valve do it with Steam and everybody loves them. All this hate is just because its microsoft and people like LegendofMart and Audioboxer seem to love any chance to jump in with their holier than thou sony is great agenda. So childish. I haven't seen one mature discussion these guys have been a part in. So childish.

As for your "it's good for developers" do you REALLY think they will get a meaningful amount of this fee, no most of it will go to Microsoft and Publishers, developers will get a fraction of the amount just like the pennies they get when the game sells new.

It's doing nothing but lining the pockets of the big boys, it doesn't benefit the developer one iota.

Firstly, that's again made up conjecture, secondly the publisher in general paid for pretty much the whole game, a game costs tens of millions to develop, the publisher provided that 30+ million to pay for the developer being able to develop, then they paid for marketing and production and everything else. The developer gets their fair share.

Games have gotten a lot more expensive to make, and a lot cheaper to buy. if this helps prevent games from going way more expensive, then it's a good thing. that's besides all the other positives all games being DD provides.

Most of those products aren't comparable in that they no longer hold their full value after being used, a game however still offers you the exact same value and gameplay as when it was bought new. also books isn't entirely true, e-books, same system.

Which the developer was paid in full for..........if you are talking server capacity once the game changes hands it's not using more resources it's using the same resources as the first person who played it who no longer can play it as he doesn't have the game anymore.

Games have gotten a lot more expensive to make, and a lot cheaper to buy. if this helps prevent games from going way more expensive, then it's a good thing. that's besides all the other positives all games being DD provides.

Why is it the consumers fault that games cost millions to make and are cheaper to buy?

Most of those products aren't comparable in that they no longer hold their full value after being used, a game however still offers you the exact same value and gameplay as when it was bought new. also books isn't entirely true, e-books, same system.

How so? A game disc degrades and eventually becomes unplayable, a book however can lasts hundreds of years, a book also retains the same contents, games get made better by new releases and old releases look worse, etc.

So your point doesn't have any merit or make any sense.

  • Like 2

played a lot of hot-seat gaming when I was younger, with friends and a like.

Also there are still a huge array of LAN parties out there where people play games against each other via local network, where all of them own the same games.

But I think the whole trading in thing and lending out games might simply be different per region, Never had such things growing up here. And it is something I barely see nowadays either, mostly because the people I know want to have their own copies of a game, so that they can a: play single player if they want. b: Play multi player, whether it be over network with friends of locally with another controller.

No need to lend out games, people usually bring their controllers.

Yes when i was a kid mates would come over and played games on the computer, only cause we had one and alot of mates didnt, but they did have NES/Mega Drive/PS1. And we would trade games cause the cost of them were to high to own them all. Sister has kids and they swap and lead game between mates.

And the whole trading in things to get other things cheap..Maybe just me, but that's not really how life works.

oh and "even finding a old game for cheap" people do this quite heavily on PC too.

Well were i come from we trade or sell our old stuff and use that money to get newer things. Upgrade my iPhone each yea cause i look after the current one i have and sell it to get me the new model. Computer hardware, sell video card to offset the cost for the new model, console games ill buy on trademe or ebgames second hand, no need to buy new when i can get cheap within a week or two of release. It would have to be a really good game to buy it on release day. Maybe you have the money to just go out and buy what you want and when you want but some people still like to look around for a bargin or even sell things to offset costs BTW people sell there house to buy another house dont they?

MS have nothing to lose on second hand games, they are just doing what game makers want and not the great kind like indie game makers.

All I got to say about this is..Eew, ****ing Call of Duty. I don't look in the gutter for games.

yea COD was dead to me after COD4

Which the developer was paid in full for..........if you are talking server capacity once the game changes hands it's not using more resources it's using the same resources as the first person who played it who no longer can play it as he doesn't have the game anymore.

Since games are sold with a non transferable license and the dame disk is just a disk, no they're not. 10 people can play the same game for the price of one game to the developer/publisher. this isn't conductive to making more games. a used car, is used, worn out, needs constant services and isn't the same ride as when it was new.

Why is it the consumers fault that games cost millions to make and are cheaper to buy?

because consumers are the ones demanding more and more graphically heavy games, with better sounds, more and bigger stories and animations bigger and bigger levels with everything being realistic.

Since games are sold with a non transferable license and the dame disk is just a disk, no they're not. 10 people can play the same game for the price of one game to the developer/publisher. this isn't conductive to making more games. a used car, is used, worn out, needs constant services and isn't the same ride as when it was new.

10 people can watch the same film, 10 people can read the same book, etc.. etc.. they can put in the EULA that I must give my first born child to them but it's not legally enforceable. EULA's are a civil matter, the worst they can do is to not support you if you have a problem.

I still fail to see why games are a special case.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!