One more update on the case on used games has come to light, in form of an article here written by Soren Johnson, one of the designers for Civilization III and IV (excellent games where the player chooses a civilization from ancient history and guides them through the ages).
One point that he brings up is a very valid one, the point of breaking up game sales similar to the movie industry. In the movie industry, one movie leads to a long term supply of cash. First, there is the theater release, followed by the DVD release, then the network television release, then the cheap DVD release near supermarket checkouts, followed by the anniversary edition, followed by...you get the idea.
Soren makes the point that the games industry is extremely poor at this type of work. essentially, there are only two game sale points in this industry: new and used.
I see this as an opportunity for growth. How many have an old X-box or an old Gamecube sitting around somewhere that they no longer use (OK, granted the Wii plays Gamecube games, but still)? Why doesn't the industry branch out in a new direction? Personally, I'd like too spend $10 on an old classic Gamecube/X-box game that I found at the checkout of my local Wal-mart. If they can pump out cheap movies on DVDs they can do the same with games. It would not be difficult, and it would be an easy way to create a small sub-market out of all those old systems lying around with classic games available for them.
This is one place however, that players can only influence through sales and writing to their favorite developer. Lets get on it people!
Showing posts with label The battle of Used Games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The battle of Used Games. Show all posts
11.18.2008
11.14.2008
Wii Wars--Nintendo makes its offensive move against the used games market...
Looks like Epic isn't the only company hurting from used game sales, Nintendo, the juggernaut of gaming, has just made its first offensive move against the used games industry by causing its new Wii-Speak microphone to be one use only. You buy it, it comes with a 16 digit code that one time downloads the software to make it work onto your Wii. After that, no more software...meaning its useless to a secondary buyer without the original Wii.
The full story is here.
On another note, I've been discussing the used game industry with many gamer friends, and so far the response is mixed. Those who take the time to look into the issue usually come to the conclusion that GameStop is harming the industry, while those who refuse to take the time tend to throw the un-researched argument of "that's how capitalism works" followed by "movies do it." Interestingly enough, the above article brings up the movie industry and how very different it is, so be forewarned, those who don't take the time: Your arguments don't hold water. The above article is pretty clear on the differences. Please read it.
The full story is here.
On another note, I've been discussing the used game industry with many gamer friends, and so far the response is mixed. Those who take the time to look into the issue usually come to the conclusion that GameStop is harming the industry, while those who refuse to take the time tend to throw the un-researched argument of "that's how capitalism works" followed by "movies do it." Interestingly enough, the above article brings up the movie industry and how very different it is, so be forewarned, those who don't take the time: Your arguments don't hold water. The above article is pretty clear on the differences. Please read it.
11.12.2008
The Price we Pay
So earlier this week, a slashdot article caught my eye. It appears that some game developers are considering making vital parts of games downloadable only content after the initial owner finishes his game.
Hold off on the raging for one moment, please. This is why.
As most gamers know, a common sight these days in a game shop is the 'Used game' trend. Used games are typically sold for five dollars less then their counterparts regardless of quality or damage, and have become a very popular alternative for those looking to buy games, because hey, five bucks is five bucks.
Here's why developers are so against it. When those games are sold, the profit generated is 100% completely the stores. Rather then paying the developer $20-$30 per copy when they originally purchased the games, game resale stores tend to buy back games for 5-8 dollars (for brand new games), then turn and sell them for $5 less then the new copy. Ultimate result? The game store makes far more selling Used games then it does new games, and the developer never sees a shade of that profit.
This is why game developers are considering making vital content download only. Each time a gamer buys a used copy of the game, its essentially the same to the developer as if he had purchased a bootleg. The developer makes no profit from his game, while someone else rakes in large amounts of cash selling the same disc multiple times.
Picture it this way. Say you are a game developer. You produce a game which takes approximately two years to produce. The game goes to stores, were it sells at $50 a copy. You make $30 off of each copy sold. In the end, you sell 300,000 copies (which is a respectfully good run) making your company 9 million dollars (profitable isn't it). All is well and good, until you notice that 900,000 copies of the game sold, 300,000 new and 600,000 'used', netting the game store 6 million in profit that was from new copies and twenty-seven million dollars in used copies, of which none goes to you. Essentially, they benefited directly from your hard work with no recompense to you or difficulty on their part.
Understandably, game developers are angry with the whole situation. The root of the problem lies in the fact that video games is still a young industry that is still experiencing growing pains. Some people that take advantage of this unfortunately cause more. Due to lack of response from any other party, game developers are taking the fight into their own hands, and fighting back the only way they know how--making used games not worth the hassle.
One such method already being utilized is an initial activation code. It works by packaging a one-time activation code with the game that when entered into the game, unlocks content central to the game. Since the code is of one time use only, those who buy used copies of the game are either A) denied access to the content or B) must purchase the content for an additional price online.
Due to the profit loss brought on by used games however, developers are suggesting that instead of bonus maps or similar bonus material as an activation code, why not entire levels, such as the last bit of the game? Some have discussed the possibility of charging up to $20 dollars for the "other half of the game".
Obviously, this method would work, but in the meantime, it punishes those who either A) Rent the game B) Replace their console or even C) trade the game with a friend.
Honestly, as bad as that is for that group, I have to honestly say I support the developers on this one. They are simply fighting back against an unjust system costing them MILLIONS of dollars. Mind you, they lose millions if they sell only 300,000 copies. Epic's Gears of War 2 sold over 2.1 million copies in its first day, but according to the company the amount of X-box's reporting playing the game was over double that. You can do the math yourself, but that's a FAT wad of cash. Not even politicians are that morally decrepit.
I will declare that I do support used games. I think its a fine idea...when done rationally. A used car sells for less then a half of its original value. Same with a book. A brand new Subaru 2006 WRX retails for $34,000. A used version will cost you at most $24,000. That's about a 1/3 the price at the highest. By that rule a used copy of the game should cost far less then the $5 discount you see in GameStop.
Only one other solution presents itself outside of the solution developers are presenting. We as a public need to get off our collective couches and take action. If we stop buying used games, developers won't need to switch to making vital parts of our games downloads only. Boycott the used games, and GameStop just might get the message.
Don't just be passive either. Make it known. Buy the new game, reject their always offered offer to 'buy the used one instead' and let them know you won't be buying used anymore.
Hold off on the raging for one moment, please. This is why.
As most gamers know, a common sight these days in a game shop is the 'Used game' trend. Used games are typically sold for five dollars less then their counterparts regardless of quality or damage, and have become a very popular alternative for those looking to buy games, because hey, five bucks is five bucks.
Here's why developers are so against it. When those games are sold, the profit generated is 100% completely the stores. Rather then paying the developer $20-$30 per copy when they originally purchased the games, game resale stores tend to buy back games for 5-8 dollars (for brand new games), then turn and sell them for $5 less then the new copy. Ultimate result? The game store makes far more selling Used games then it does new games, and the developer never sees a shade of that profit.
This is why game developers are considering making vital content download only. Each time a gamer buys a used copy of the game, its essentially the same to the developer as if he had purchased a bootleg. The developer makes no profit from his game, while someone else rakes in large amounts of cash selling the same disc multiple times.
Picture it this way. Say you are a game developer. You produce a game which takes approximately two years to produce. The game goes to stores, were it sells at $50 a copy. You make $30 off of each copy sold. In the end, you sell 300,000 copies (which is a respectfully good run) making your company 9 million dollars (profitable isn't it). All is well and good, until you notice that 900,000 copies of the game sold, 300,000 new and 600,000 'used', netting the game store 6 million in profit that was from new copies and twenty-seven million dollars in used copies, of which none goes to you. Essentially, they benefited directly from your hard work with no recompense to you or difficulty on their part.
Understandably, game developers are angry with the whole situation. The root of the problem lies in the fact that video games is still a young industry that is still experiencing growing pains. Some people that take advantage of this unfortunately cause more. Due to lack of response from any other party, game developers are taking the fight into their own hands, and fighting back the only way they know how--making used games not worth the hassle.
One such method already being utilized is an initial activation code. It works by packaging a one-time activation code with the game that when entered into the game, unlocks content central to the game. Since the code is of one time use only, those who buy used copies of the game are either A) denied access to the content or B) must purchase the content for an additional price online.
Due to the profit loss brought on by used games however, developers are suggesting that instead of bonus maps or similar bonus material as an activation code, why not entire levels, such as the last bit of the game? Some have discussed the possibility of charging up to $20 dollars for the "other half of the game".
Obviously, this method would work, but in the meantime, it punishes those who either A) Rent the game B) Replace their console or even C) trade the game with a friend.
Honestly, as bad as that is for that group, I have to honestly say I support the developers on this one. They are simply fighting back against an unjust system costing them MILLIONS of dollars. Mind you, they lose millions if they sell only 300,000 copies. Epic's Gears of War 2 sold over 2.1 million copies in its first day, but according to the company the amount of X-box's reporting playing the game was over double that. You can do the math yourself, but that's a FAT wad of cash. Not even politicians are that morally decrepit.
I will declare that I do support used games. I think its a fine idea...when done rationally. A used car sells for less then a half of its original value. Same with a book. A brand new Subaru 2006 WRX retails for $34,000. A used version will cost you at most $24,000. That's about a 1/3 the price at the highest. By that rule a used copy of the game should cost far less then the $5 discount you see in GameStop.
Only one other solution presents itself outside of the solution developers are presenting. We as a public need to get off our collective couches and take action. If we stop buying used games, developers won't need to switch to making vital parts of our games downloads only. Boycott the used games, and GameStop just might get the message.
Don't just be passive either. Make it known. Buy the new game, reject their always offered offer to 'buy the used one instead' and let them know you won't be buying used anymore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)