Slashdot Mirror
Secondhand Games Stifle Innovation?
Via GameSetWatch, an article at the Guardian relaying a message from publishers. They say that, though you may be enjoying those second-hand games, they may be forcing you to choke down the sequels that plague the industry. From the article: "'We recognise the secondhand games market is part of the revenue mix, for retailers at least,' said a spokesman. 'However, if it continues to grow, it could potentially starve us of the funds necessary for research and development, and therefore, developers will be less willing to take a risk on new and genre-diversifying titles. It's this creative diversity that makes the games industry so popular, and without sustained funding from new software sales, this could be at risk.'"
So, publishers are bent out of shape that games last for years, and we all trade them back and forth in the same way used CDs, tapes, and records have been for decades? They're afraid we're going to stop buying new games because we're buying used ones? They want more money (that goes without saying)?
Yeah. Cry me a river. Here are my thoughts:
1. The game industry is making money hand over fist. They may WANT a license to print money, they may feel that all of us gamers should spend all our income on their brand new stuff and never look for a bargain, but tough luck -- the world doesn't work that way. If we all got whatever we wanted, whenever I got lonely or horny I'd clap my hands, yell "Doughnut!" and a gorgeous hottie with an oral fixation would appear. See -- I just clapped. NOTHING! So why should they get whatever fool thing THEY want?
2. Used games COME FROM SOMEWHERE. They don't just suddenly appear, the Used Game Fairy doesn't bring them around in her "naughty nurse" uniform, and they're not gifts from aliens. Every used game was purchased by someone, brand new, at some point. So, the game publishers DID get paid for them! Their problem is, they're not getting paid for them ANY MORE. Again, too fucking bad. That's life. I'd love it if my ex girlfriend had to come over three times a week and do me, but she doesn't (too damn stubborn).
3. A PURCHASE IS A PURCHASE. Once we buy our games fair and square, we can sell them to anybody we want to. We can trade them for cigarettes and beer if we feel like it. We can give them to homeless people to use as ninja stars when fratboys annoy them. We can do whatever we like with them. BECAUSE WE BOUGHT THEM, for much more than they're conceivably worth, by the way. All the pissing and moaning in the world won't convince me that once I buy a game, I shouldn't sell it or trade it in for a new one. It's mine, I'll do whatever I want with it.
4. FINALLY, seriously now, isn't it ridiculous that they're now trying to pretend that it's the used game market that causes game companies to put out derivative dreck? YEAH, I see how that works. It's not that game companies are pushing their developers to exhaustion, outsourcing a lot of their activities, making UNBELIEVABLY shitty movie tie-in games (if you can call them games), and in general, treating the public like they'll buy anything if they put the right face on the package. Oh, no, if sales slow down it must be because all the customers are EVIL! Yeah, we're all just penny-pinching Meanies. I see...
Well, that's my rant for now. I'll leave you with this thought:
Do I buy a lot of used games? Yes, I do.
Do I buy a lot of new games? Well, actually, yes on that one also.
Am I a freeloader? NO. I spend more money on this crap than most people.
Do I feel like anyone appreciates my business? NO.
You know, this stuff isn't that complicated. It's about treating me like a customer, appreciating my business, and giving me good value. If you can't do that, there's nothing you can sell me.
There isn't any context, attribution, or even a direct quote - so it is hard to guess exactly what was really said and under what circumstances. What I gather is that some publishers are upset about the fact that retailers are selling second hand copies right next to the new copies. If that is the case I can see their point - who is gonna pay $60 for generic sports game 2006 when a used copy is available for $30 right next to it, but that is an issue they need to take up with retailers and hardly the responsibility of consumers.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
What the hell does that mean????
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
To compete with the used game channel for older titles, why not just make their back catalogues available for cheaper prices? If a title is selling for $20 used, drop the new price to $20-$25. The negligible price difference will probably prompt all but the most frugal (cheap?) customers to buy the new copy instead of the used one.
Besides that, the paltry cost of producing a box, disc, and manual is nothing compared to the $x that they could make from selling another new (reduced-price) copy. Yes, they spent a lot of money on development, and they need to earn it back somehow. So do they choose to not compete with used copies -- and earn $0 in the process -- or instead choose to make money by giving people an incentive to buy a new copy?
Nintendo, Sony, and MS already do this for a lot of their older titles. Any publisher that doesn't is either stupid, stubborn, or both.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal
You have two options. First is requiring activation, thus making the secondary copy useless. Other posters have pointed this out. This is terrible.
Or you could take another route. Nintendo is doing this in some ways. Sell the games to people cheaper than used. Sell electronic copies. Make it in my interest to go buy a game for $30 from you, instead of $25 from the game retailer. Most games, after an initial period, sell next to nothing. So why leave the game on the shelves at $50 and let retails sell 'em used for $25 when you could sell them on-demand for $25. Basically, Live Arcade for more recent (and bigger) games. This is where the future is. We all know it. It is just a question of when we get there.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Yes, I see how poorly Half Life 2 did. Sure there was some complaining, but the reality is that the consumer rolled over. Purchase a CD, install on PC and wait for the executable bits to download so you can play. I got my karma handed to me on a platter for suggesting that Steam was anything but a orgasmic experience here on Slashdot.
Sig under construction since 1998.
I just wish to reference one of my recent posts. This summarizes the wreck that is the video game industry today.
Deja Vu
n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
Some games are tremendously valuable, but of course this varies for different people.
My friends and I play Halo 2 and even the original Halo a lot (multiplayer, LAN and online). I've often thought how much value, in the form of thousands of hours of fun, we've received from these games. I wouldn't even think of selling some titles, even one that's four years old, because they're so enjoyable.
I'm no MS fan, but I've given them full price for an Xbox, Live, and many copies of Halo/Halo 2 (some as gifts) over the years because, to me, these games have been worth it, and that's not even for the campaign mode. Games that are less valuable, I will buy "pre-owned" or not at all. I gladly gave Firaxis/2K full price for Civilization IV and Valve top dollar for HL2 because I had such great experiences with their predecessors. The list can go on and you have your own favorites.
If the business plan is to make really fun games (admittedly subjective, although that only serves to make room for more games and developers) or to extend older games with new ideas, then I will gladly pre-order, paying full price months in advance. If the business model is to churn out another "upgrade" or sequel with new stats, a few complicated "enhancements" and graphics that let me count every blade of grass -- well, I'm keepin' my money.
Dedicated gamers know that the newest and flashiest is not necessarily the most fun. The more marketing hype the publishers throw at us, the more disappointed we are if the fun doesn't live up to the fanfare -- and we don't forget. Gaming is about fun. Graphics and features and stats and seven layers of option menus may be impressive, but they don't automatically create fun (although they do automatically increase development cost).
So developers and publishers: I will pay you for fun. I will not pay to "support" you. (PS: You can set the price, but I decide what's fun.)
Well, the books I buy second hand (or my own I re-read) tends to have the same quality, never noticed any change in the plot and so on. I even have books that are over 100 years old, again, no problem reading, no change in quality of the story and so on either.....