Best Buy vs. The Game Makers
An anonymous reader writes "CNN's excellent Game Over column brings word that Best Buy has begun selling used games in select locations as part of a test program. If successful, all of the store's 700 stores could begin doing so in the not-too-distant future. Not so happy about this are developers, including Epic's Mark Rein, who resurrects his 'no used game sales' argument, saying 'To have them resell the games, with developers having no participation, that's just wrong. That's just fleecing us.'"
'To have them resell the games, with developers having no participation, that's just wrong. That's just fleecing us.'"
Yes, the only fleecing that should be done is first-generation fleecing, where the game developers and distributors get a good chunk of the money before the buyer realizes the game is boring and unplayable.
So why would someone be selling a game? Perhaps because it is no longer interesting to them? Maybe because it became boring to play after a few weeks? Whose fault is that? If the buyer can't even resell the thing without some sort of permission from the game company it sounds like there is less incentive for them to make a "keeper".