Xbox One: Microsoft, publishers 'to profit from used game sales' R

[MorganX]

The whole used car argument is also bogus guys, let's be serious here. Car makers make money from that car they sold you in other ways till you give it up. Service costs? Parts costs? Have any of you needed to fix something in their car at a shop? You never wonder why things that seem small and cheap cost so damn much to buy and replace? If you want to make a connection between cars and games then car makers are selling you a long list of patches for you car till you buy a new one.

Now what if you had to pay for updates for your games as well? uh huh.

I find this argument ridiculous. You could compare all those things to paid DLC that not only should be in the original game most of the time but ship on the disc.

Just face it, it's a money grab and either you're willing to pay it or you're not. I'm not, I don't buy used games. But depending on what PS4 offers, I may support it in objection to some of what MS is doing with regards to charging for everything. This didn't really hit me as a 4 year Gold Subscriber until I let it lapse and could even use Netflix which I pay a separate subscription for.

Sony has an opportunity here unless they 1) totally drop the ball, or 2) join in and follow suit.

[kaotic]

"Those who wish to use a second-hand game outside the system - like borrowing a game from a friend - will be charged a fee of ?35, added the source."

I hope there not serious about the $35 fee. If they are gonna do that then players will go to a different platform.

What are players gonna do when all the platforms have the same system? Do you think the publishers will only keep this with the Xbox? Nope.

[+primortal Subscriber²]

True, if you sell it yourself then no, though there are other costs, minor ones iirc, nothing that goes back to the maker.

I highly doubt a dealer would send profits from a sale of a used car to the manufacture.

[George P Global Moderator]

I highly doubt a dealer would send profits of a used car to the manufacture.

A used car dealer? No, I never said that though. A registered dealer? Not the profits exactly but they do pay the maker something in order to be official etc. Like any franchise out there, it could be actually owned by someone else but there are fees paid each year to use the name and so on. That Ford dealer down the street does pay Ford something each month, or year or however it's arranged.

[+primortal Subscriber²]

A used car dealer? No, I never said that though. A registered dealer? Not the profits exactly but they do pay the maker something in order to be official etc. Like any franchise out there, it could be actually owned by someone else but there are fees paid each year to use the name and so on. That Ford dealer down the street does pay Ford something each month, or year or however it's arranged.

Franchise cost is a whole different ball of wax. Yes profit from anything the dealer sells does wind back up the manufacture to pay for the franchise but it's not something in their franchise agreement that they take more money from you for each car you bought from them initially and then sold to a customer or the an additional percentage of that case of oil filters you bought from us and sold it to a customer when an oil change is done. That would be double-dipping :D

[spacer]

The whole problem with the "but charging for used games helps the developers!" argument is the incorrect assumption that said developers are only paid if the game sells well. (like some sort of commission) Developers are given a budget by a publisher to create a game. They may get bonuses if a game sells well, but no one in development is paid by commission. Retailers buy those games in bulk in order to sell at a profit. Which means when you buy a game from a retailer the publisher has already been paid for that copy of the game, and what you're really doing is paying back the retailer. Same is true if the retailer is the publisher or the publisher is the developer. Once the copy of the game is sold, they have their money.

A publisher failing to meet expected sales figures is not due to the used game market. It's a problem with their budgeting, projections, and quality of the game. The fact that these companies have a false sense of entitlement to some portion of the sale of a game a that has already been paid for is where this whole problem comes from. Not allowing the private selling of games or lending of games is a money-grab, pure and simple.

Privately selling or lending a game is the exact same principle as selling/lending a book, movie, car, or any other non-edible product. (like furniture, or a collender) There is absolutely no legitimate reason why publishers should deserve another payment for the same product.