Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
The used game market is way overvalued, margins are huge. Maybe this will make things a bit more reasonable. And the developers have nothing to complain about, reselling something you bought is very clearly defined as fair use in every copyright law ever.
--The universe will not be altered by forum threads, even those which are very wry. --Tycho Brahe (Penny Arcade)
To have them resell the games, with developers having no participation, that's just wrong. That's just fleecing us.
You already made money on the sale the first time. Regardless of your personal feelings about the issue you have absolutely no rights to money made on subsequent sales. I'm sure your opinion would change drastically if you were charged extra, on top of the sale price, for a used car.
Granted, you probably aren't buying used cars but you get the idea.
What about selling used cars or selling houses? Should the original manufacturer/builder get a percentage of the sale? Of course not. Of course those License Agreements we accept might have some small print stuff in them... Over here in the UK GAME and Gamestation stores have been selling used console games for years. My understanding was that used PC Games were much more legally ambiguous/completely illegal which is why GAME doesn't sell them. However, the Gamestation in my city does which would be pretty good except their whole PC range is about 1/12 of their stock.
'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".
Great! Now I can choose between pay $10 off the price of a new game for a scratched CD, ripped or missing manual, and no box from EBGames, OR paying $10 off the price of a new game for a scratched CD, ripped or missing manual, and no box from Best Buy!
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
That's just fleecing us
And annual rehashes of pre-existing content at full retail price isn't fleecing the consumers? Oh dear. I suppose you'd rather we consider ourselves as not taking ownership of the CD/DVD when we buy it from the store? Would you rather we saw your game not as an item we purchase, but as an experience that one can indulge in for a nominal fee just like those found on darkened street corners? After all, once we're finished with your underwhelming offerings, we would be stuck with something we can't get rid of.
This comment was formatted for readability, but I forgot the line break tags
Buying used cars is unethical as well. How are autoworkers expected to feed their families if you're out there buying cars that were manufactured years ago?
I propose a levy for every car sale, so that the rightful creators of automobiles get their just reward.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK