Buying used games? Developers, publishers don't care about you


Recommended Posts

Maybe I'm slow, but how does buying a used copy of a game cause the developer to pay more in server costs? No one seemed to mention that at some point the used copy was bought new, at which point the developer got paid their share which went towards online costs. So if I trade my game in and some other joe buys it and plays it online, how is that any more expensive than if I had just kept the game and played it online myself?

Edit: whoops didn't see there another page where people have brought up the same question. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered this: although you’re not directly sending money to the developer, they are benefiting because when you buy used, there is now one less copy available in the market. If enough people buy used, there will be only new copies left.

Also, keep in mind, when you buy new, a check for $60 (or whatever the developer’s cut is) is not being sent off to the developer. Developers get their cut up front, when Gamestop/retailers buy the game in bulk at the beginning of a game’s lifecycle. Gamestop might choose to order more copies at a later date, but it’s basically a onetime payment from retailers that pays the developers and publishers not the consumer’s purchase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

movies don't degrade either that are on dvd, so should we pay $20 bucks every time we want to watch a used and old movie?

This is all about greed. They made their money the first time off the product, you can't ask for any more. This is the same debate as piracy. They can not prove that someone who buys only used games would pay for only new games if this was to happen. Could be because people are on a budget, and at a age where the companies are already nickle and diming us for add on content that is already on a disc... if you are for this, you really just want to waste money, because there is no reason to really be for this, that or you make games and feel you should get more money from second hand sales.....

A painting does not degrade in quality, but an artist will not get any more money for its sale after the initial.

A song will not degrade in quality, yet an artist does not get used sales from it.

But the things that they are on can degrade and wear out, thus why usually 2nd hand sold items are cheaper. That is the whole point. But asking for more money on a sale you had no part of, is just bull****.

This is the thing that drove a lot of pc'ers away from pc's. We could not take games back or anything after making a purchase, thus making people fear for wasting their money, and driving them towards piracy. This will only make things worse for them, as many will find other ways to get what they want, so that they can save some money.

What about if the codes are hacked, you buy a new game but come to find you can not play it because somehow the code was used. Welp, there's a whole lot of hassle for you. DRM is never a good thing, especially when it does nothing to benefit the actual purchaser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issues with this argument:

1) A game has to be purchased first in order to become "used". Therefore all initial copies which are sold to distributors are technically payed for unless the distributor returns the order. Sure, the developer doesn't gain any additional money from the sale but they do earn money from the distributor purchase, such as Gamestop. Target, Best Buy, Walmart, Hollywood Video, Blockbuster, etc.

2) Initially used games are barely even $5 cheaper than the brand new game. The difference is negligeable when you look at the difference between possibly broken games and a pristine new disc. If I see a used game that is only $5 cheaper than the new one I usually buy the new one due to it being a better investment.

3) When the above doesn't apply (section 2 specifically) and the game is $30 or $20 used in respect to the full sale price of $50-$60 that either means one of two things: a) The game was returned a lot and therefore the price for the game dropped at the used retailer or b) the game has been out long enough for the used price to depreciate that much and the price of the new game is equally lessened.

Anyone knows that used games are not paying respect to the developer, but anyone who actually considers that respect usually buys a game from said developer on day one anyways, forgoing even the possibility of purchasing a used title. I know that I could easily buy a copy of Halo Reach used probably a month after its release, but being a Bungie fan I've pre-ordered my copy and will pick it up at the midnight release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems pretty short sighted to not see the benefits of a healthy used game market. How many people buy a game knowing they'll be able to sell it as a used game when they were done with it? How many people wouldn't be as excited to buy a game if they found out it had a unique nontransferable code that would make the resale value nill? How many people sell their copy of a 2009 game to buy the newest 2010 game? I think if people knew there was no way to sell a game they had bought via stores like Gamestop, sites like Craigslist, or to friends, the whole industry would be different in many ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the dev should make online playing such that it will be appreciated for a long time. if it does, no one is going to sell their old games b/c they would want to play it on a regular basis. if they make a crappy online play, people are going to get bored pretty quickly and trade in the game. charging extra for online play on used games is purely greed and nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I see it, and my logic for buying used games is this:

1) I'll buy a game new if it's a game I'm truly interested in and from a developer/publisher that I can expect a quality game from, no matter the difference in price in new versus used.

2) I'll buy used if it's a game that is not available new, or that I feel isn't worth the new price (either because I'm unsure of whether it will be good , or because there's no demo and it's a much less expensive investment to buy it used for a significant discount from the new price).

And as others have pointed out, the developers have already gotten their money from the purchase of the used copy when it was sold new. By the time the game is sold used, the original purchaser is obviously not playing it anymore and there is no additional load on the developer's/publisher's resources for online play or any other related services once the used copy is sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If developers stopped putting out **** games at full price that have about 8 - 11 hours game time then maybe id consider buying stuff new...

I'll pay for quality games new like Red Dead Redemption , Mass effect series and some others... however stuff like Crackdown 2, Singularity, Shadowrun - Hell no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If developers stopped putting out **** games at full price that have about 8 - 11 hours game time then maybe id consider buying stuff new...

I'll pay for quality games new like Red Dead Redemption , Mass effect series and some others... however stuff like Crackdown 2, Singularity, Shadowrun - Hell no

+1

?40-50 games that only last 5-10hours of Single player content is simply not worth the price, online play is not the reason I play games. Although it can be fun, its not something I base my purchases on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems pretty short sighted to not see the benefits of a healthy used game market. How many people buy a game knowing they'll be able to sell it as a used game when they were done with it? How many people wouldn't be as excited to buy a game if they found out it had a unique nontransferable code that would make the resale value nill? How many people sell their copy of a 2009 game to buy the newest 2010 game? I think if people knew there was no way to sell a game they had bought via stores like Gamestop, sites like Craigslist, or to friends, the whole industry would be different in many ways.

Exactly, not everyone can afford to spend $50-60 per game when there are maybe 3-5 games per month at peak times that they might want. Im betting a lot of people sell their older games so they can put money towards buying another game. Its not all about the big bad consumer trying to rip off game developers just so they can save money.

I dont see why they should charge people an extra $10 just to be able to play online when they already sold the game once at a price they think is commensurate with the online capacity usage of that game, if someone stole the game then sold it on then fair enough, but if someone paid full price for it the developers have already been paid for that games slice of online capacity.

Dont give me the crap about omg no wear and tear, no degredation, etc.. it doesnt wash with me you are just trying to make excuses. If the game is worth full price and people can afford it then people will pay for it, dont gimp the game so that people are forced to fork over more money just to play the game online even though the game code on the disk hasnt changed. That just smacks of companies like EA who include DLC on the disk which is locked out until someone buys a code for content thats already on the disk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never buy used games as don?t like having to pay money for a second hand product like buying all the stuff in your house from cash converters or something. However my line is game company?s aren?t mega rich nor are game developers if you don?t pay full price for a game there won?t be any games to pay its self-defeating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2 cents. Since most of the major arguments against this move have already been made, I just wanted to add that this move is really self defeating. New games sales will tank because of this, and piracy/used games/_______ will be blamed.

The problem is that these guys, apart from being greedy, are not inventive enough. I mean, if they have a problem with gamestop, why go after their own customers. They could offer their own trade in systems, trade in 2 EA games, and get a latest game at half price, etc. Hell, they could even start their own chain stores, and sell directly to the public, and have their own second hand sections...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never buy used games as don?t like having to pay money for a second hand product like buying all the stuff in your house from cash converters or something. However my line is game company?s aren?t mega rich nor are game developers if you don?t pay full price for a game there won?t be any games to pay its self-defeating.

Yeah, people shouldnt buy used cars as there wont be any more cars in the future.

Yeah, people shouldnt buy used houses as there wont be any more houses in the future.

Yeah, people shouldnt buy used xxxxx as there wont be any more xxxxx in the future.

Some people will always buy new just like some people will buy used, you cant use a potential unforseen future to justify the prices and wanting to charge people more money for a game they already got paid for.

Ok so games cost millions to make but whose fault is that, blame the companies that create the consoles and tools, dont try and stiff the guys that pay for the games just because you have to recoup the outlay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does have a point regarding that used game buyers are not their target audience, especially if you purchase only used titles...

That being said, I don't feel the consumer should be dealing with any of this. It clearly states in the terms of use for every and any game you buy that you are not allowed to sell or redistribute the game in any way without prior consent.

Knowing that they should go after gamestop [insert favorite retailer here], require a license/fee that allows the copyright owner to obtain monetary gain on the sales of their merchandise and drop it. I think people are making more a fuss about this than there needs to be. This needs to be handled between corporation/companies, not the consumer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.