Buy Second-Hand Games, Stifle Creativity?

Thanks to GameSpot for its 'GameSpotting' editorial discussing why buying second-hand games could have a negative effect on videogame creators. The author points out: "You know, Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft must have a real love/hate relationship with stores that stock used games alongside their new games [since buying used games doesn't give] the game developers, or the game publishers a thin, red cent. Instead, the retailer is enjoying a nice, fat profit margin, where the markup is in the neighborhood of 200 to 1000 percent." He goes on to argue: "Buying used is equivalent to the game not selling at all in the eyes of developers and publishers, and when games don't sell, they don't get sequels and excellent concepts and, therefore, opportunities are lost."

Comments

Maybe they should take a hint.

[Mark_MF-WN]

Maybe game developers and publishers should take a hint about what the sweet spot for pricing is.

Why are business-types so colossaly stupid? The success of used games should indicate that selling games for two thirds of what they cost now would dramatically increase their sales. Instead of complaining, they could just take advantage of that trend. Losing 33% of your per-game revenue is irrelevant if you double total sales -- and since per-unit production costs are negligble, that's a pretty reasonable scenario.

Re:Maybe they should take a hint.

[Tuvai]

If they sold the games for two-thirds of their original price, the price of second hand software would simply fall to even lower levels, and the cycle would repeat.

True, more games will be bought brand new, but these will be purchases from the usual suspects, the ones with either the loyalty, lack of patience, or high amounts of cash to be able to go out and purchase software at release. The large numbers of those who hawk second hand software will simply shrug their shoulders and wait for the even cheaper castoffs to arrive. I severely doubt we shall see a sharp enough spike to cover the massive developmental costs of games these days.

There is little the developers can do to stop this in this valued free market, except go for the big launch, as it is the sleeper hits that tend to be screwed over the most.

Re:Maybe they should take a hint.

[Fizzl]

If they sold the games for two-thirds of their original price, the price of second hand software would simply fall to even lower levels, and the cycle would repeat.

I disagree. There is just a spot where it is worthwhile to sell your used game instead of keeping it 'just for collection'. If the prices would dramatically drop, it would be much rarer ocassion that someone would want to part from their original game for miniscule payback. Also, the demand for second-hand games would decline if the games would be reasonably priced. Say, 20 euros for the latest hit game would make me buy games just for the heck of it.

Currently I only play EverQuest and Americas Army. They have decent value for money (I buy EverQuest expansions when they hit the cheapo-bin at my local store). I'm not going to cough up 50 euros for yet-another-FPS.

Re:Maybe they should take a hint.

[Delphiki]

Wow, I always wonder all the greatest minds in business decide to spend all of their time reading slashdot. And you don't even work in business! What a horrible waste. You could revolutionize the gaming industry.

Oh wait, maybe not. Maybe you just over simplified the situation and assumed everyone else is an idiot. Hey, you think if they dropped the price for games, then maybe people would start selling used games cheaper so it really wouldn't help their sales that much? No... that's crazy talk. Or gee, maybe they've done a little marketing research that suggests they wouldn't be able to double sales by cutting the price in half. Nah, "business-types" are colossoly stupid as you so aptly put it. They must have just not thought of it because they aren't smart like you.

This is stupid.

[togofspookware]

Yeah, and when I buy a used couch, the couch manufacturing companies don't get my money either. So what? I wanted a couch, and the guy selling it didn't, so I bought it. That's how a free market works. Of *course* they'd rather I bought a new one!

You're problem is what exactly?

[Torgo's Pizza]

This was settled in court ages ago. What are you going to do? Put Ebay, Blockbuster, flea markets, Goodwill and used car lots out of business as well? It's pretty much a consumer's right to sell, trade in or do whatever he wants to his purchase. It's not like game publishers also don't get into this as well. How else do you explain the collector's editions, multiple covers, numbered boxes and special editions? Sorry, but the crying towel for this subject was used long, long ago.

I buy used games...

[wheresdrew]

...because they're cheaper.

That's the bottom line. Ebay, Gamestop, EB Games or local independent game shops, it's all good. Saves me money and allows me to buy more games. If they want to sell more copies of newer titles, I see two options:

1. Make the game worth $50

2. Make the game cost less than $50

Greased Up Jesus On A Pogo Stick!

[limekiller4]

When the fuck did it become the gamer's duty to subsidize a skewed pricing tier? This reeks of "if we don't rape you for $16 for every CD, you won't get to listen to the inspired strains of the Backstreet Boys, oh hell!" RIAA shill.

First, creativity will always exist. If it flounders, an opportunity will emerge. There will always be people for whom the "work" is more akin to "love" and will do it not only cheaper but better than the competition. Linux*cough*linux.

Second, if old games were $15 and new games were $25, would this problem exist?

Believe it or not, I'm fairly tolerant of self-indulgent Slashdot posts. But this one takes the cake.