Slashdot Mirror


Xbox One Used Game Policy Leaks: Publishers Get a Cut of Sale

Chewbacon writes "Details about the used-game policy on Microsoft's newly-announced Xbox One console have been leaked. The policy explains how used-game retailers can survive Xbox One destroying the used-game market as we know it: they have to agree to Microsoft's terms and conditions to do so. In summary, the used game retailer can still buy the game from the consumer, but they must report the consumer relinquishing their license to play the game to a Microsoft database. They must also sell it at a market price (35£ in the UK), but the publisher will get a cut of the price. The article goes on to explain how Xbox One will phone home periodically to verify a player hasn't sold the game according to the aforementioned database." A big downside is that we're likely going to see the end of cheap, used games. A potential upside pointed out by Ben Kuchera at the Penny Arcade Report is that this would unquestionably boost revenue for game publishers, giving the smart ones an opportunity to step away from the $60 business model and adopt pricing practices seen on Steam and iTunes (neither of which allow the purchase of "used" games/media). Also, it's worth noting that even if the policy leak is 100% correct, it could change before the console actually launches.

34 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. Where's the profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If game stores have to sell used games back at market price, why wouldn't they just sell the new game? Why would they buy back the old game at any price?

    1. Re:Where's the profit by Holi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except Gamestop has admitted that their main profit driver is New Games, not used games. Kinda blows a hole in your theory.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:Where's the profit by Merk42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's their console, which also doesn't have a majority marketshare (since it's not even available yet). Antitrust isn't just "Microsoft thing I don't like"

    3. Re:Where's the profit by adamstew · · Score: 4, Informative

      The summary got it wrong. According to TFA: "The retailer can then sell the pre-owned game at whatever price they like, although as part of the system the publisher of the title in question will automatically receive a percentage cut of the sale. As will Microsoft. The retailer will pocket the rest."

      It looks like the customer's cost is going to be £35. According to the article: "Many readers are asking whether the £35 will be additional cost on top of the price of buying the game. No, we believe that the £35 figure – which is not our number, incidentally – would cover the entire transaction. If correct this would leave retail with a cut per sale of around £3.50." So, to me, it sounds like the retail cost of used games to the buyer will be £35...of which the retailer would get a 10% slice of. The person trading in the game would also get some amount of that money, and then microsoft would get the rest and split it with the publisher.

    4. Re:Where's the profit by Kielistic · · Score: 4, Informative

      Antitrust isn't just majority market share either.

  2. Used Games? by Vanderhoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can't sell used games for a console, if no one buys the console. Anyone foolish enough to fall into this trap and buy one deserves what they get.

    1. Re:Used Games? by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is that it could turn out to be a thousand times less bad than it sounds, but by being cowards and refusing to lay out the system at the event itself, leaving the explanation of the service to a confused mass of PR statements, Phil Harrison interviews, and FAQ entries, they've made sure it looks absolutely as bad as possible.

      Perfect.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:Used Games? by afidel · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's coming, the July 2012 EU Court of Justice of the European Union ruling around the right to sell used digital assets will ensure it does (at least for people with EU country accounts).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  3. Fuck you, MS by realmolo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously.

    I won't be buying ANY console that doesn't allow me to sell/trade/lend my games to WHOMEVER I want, for WHATEVER PRICE I want.

    And frankly, I fully expect MS to get sued by various states, and possibly the feds. This is exactly the kind of "screw you" that consumers HATE. Maybe, possibly, this whole mess could finally get the Supreme Court to clarify what "first sale" rights are, and to do away with this whole bullshit of "we didn't sell you software, we just sold you a LICENSE TO USE our software".

    1. Re:Fuck you, MS by Scutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're not buying anything. You're temporarily renting a license. The whole idea of "buying" any form of media has been bullshit for at least the last 15 years.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    2. Re:Fuck you, MS by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Especially since Sony announced the PS4 will play used games. If I were Sony, I would blast the airwaves with ads on how their competitor will not allow you to play used games without a feee. Sony has burned a lot of bridges in the past; they could use some good PR.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Fuck you, MS by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is what they WANT you to think

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    4. Re:Fuck you, MS by redemtionboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know if I'm convinced Sony isn't doing this either. Sony said they won't "block" used games. Technically Microsoft isn't either. Both companies were holding secret meetings about a year ago. I doubt both companies having similar architecture and other features is a coincidence. Sony has also said that you would install games to the drive like Microsoft claims. I'm betting they're just playing quiet.

    5. Re:Fuck you, MS by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Funny

      Absolutely, because if there's one company you can trust, it's Sony.

    6. Re:Fuck you, MS by tankbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually you are buying it in Europe... The European Court of Justice ruled on July 3, 2012, that it is indeed permissible to resell software licenses even if the digital good has been downloaded directly from the Internet, and that the first-sale doctrine applied whenever software was originally sold to a customer for an unlimited amount of time, as such sale involves a transfer of ownership, thus prohibiting any software maker from preventing the resale of their software by any of their legitimate owners.

    7. Re:Fuck you, MS by stewsters · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Playing used games probably will be a nice feature that they decide will remove in 2014.

      Sent from YellowDog on PS3... Oh wait, no it wasn't.

    8. Re:Fuck you, MS by firex726 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Tell it to the European court where they ruled last year that you were buying a full copy, not a license; and first sale doctrine did apply.

    9. Re:Fuck you, MS by malkavian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except you can sell on a car, and it'll run on the fuel you put into it.
      What's actually happening is that companies are attempting to make sure that after the initial sale, if your logic worked as you were intimating with that analogy, the car wouldn't work by putting the correct fuel in it, unless you'd paid to have the car unlocked by the original company that manufactured it. And this company enforced a set of rules that ensured it got a massive share of the original price of the car just to perform an administrative function of saying "Yes, you now own the car".
      Now, none of your friends would be able to drive it unless you paid the fee to this company, so there'd be no lending it to someone for the weekend while you didn't need it, and it covered their car being in for repairs or something. You couldn't give it away, without the authority of this company (who you'd have to pay for the privilege of giving it away, even though you'd purchased it and now were the owner by law).
      So, in effect, you'd not be buying a "car", as that describes a vehicle that moves when you put fuel in it. You'd be buying an expensive heap of junk that you'd need to pay a third party (who has no legal right to be involved in the resale of the car, apart from them putting a 'tracking' system of owner in there that won't let the heap of metal do anything, even open the doors, unless you pay them this money).
      Unless you can play this game, as is, on the console, you can't describe it as a game for the console, because it isn't. It's a medium with data on it. That data is not a game, and can't be described as one, because if you put it in the console with the expectation that it'd work, you'd find it didn't. That doesn't meet the criteria for being described as a workable game.

      It'd be a very interesting fight if people took it up en masse; I don't think it's as cut and dried as you make out.

  4. EU law? by Viewsonic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This sounds like it might run counter to the new EU law that mandates all software can be resold, regardless of licensing, agreements, and dongles. Didn't they make it specifically clear that when you buy software, it is yours, and yours alone, and you are free to resell it, and it then becomes theirs, and theirs alone. The actual publishers have no say in what you want to do with it.

    1. Re:EU law? by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This sounds like it might run counter to the new EU law that mandates all software can be resold, regardless of licensing, agreements, and dongles. Didn't they make it specifically clear that when you buy software, it is yours, and yours alone, and you are free to resell it, and it then becomes theirs, and theirs alone. The actual publishers have no say in what you want to do with it.

      ms didn't think of eu one bit with xbox one.
      if ms wanted to turn their new console into a steam box, they have succeeded.

      I suspect there was one big company, namely EA, who lobbied for MS to do this so it wouldn't be their fault. they knew what was coming when they made an empty announcement about dropping the online pass.. which was fucking stupid shit pr - ONLY people who care about it are the people who are now angry at both EA and MS. just shit poor PR.

      "hey let's make a reveal about the new console.. what shall we tell about it? I KNOW, let's tell only the crap they'll be getting! and let's not show them one bit of cool gameplay or tell about the hw! ". it really seems they were fucked by the PS4 release and someone just decided that they had to announce something.. but what do they announce? that you can watch TV! live TV! and that you might just as well buy all your games from steam, you're not going to be reselling or loaning them anyways.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:EU law? by Xest · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of the guys at the top of EA, Peter Moore, was at the top of Microsoft's XBox program for years too, so it's no surprise really to see the level of collaboration.

      I don't think there would've had to have been much lobbying in all honesty, I think the MS-EA relationship is extremely cosy.

  5. Legal? by fermion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't normally assume that major companies do not have competent lawyers, but as far as I know price fixing is illegal in the US. There are ways to keep prices set for new products, but for the most part we have "suggested retail price". This also would seem to violate the first sale doctrine, which has been upheld in many court cases.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  6. They removed a statement from my submission by Chewbacon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyway, I wanted to spell it out for you all, but it was removed. This proves to us that this plan for used games has nothing to do with countering piracy, but only feeding greed.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  7. People don't complain at Steam by earlzdotnet · · Score: 5, Informative

    I already see the trolls coming to say "So what if Microsoft does it, Steam's been doing it for years". Well, look at Steam's prices and sales. I saw a game that came out a few months ago for $20 on Steam in a sale. The best "sale" of new-ish games on the Xbox (online) market is a $60 game being sold at $50. Steam's prices are competitive, Microsoft's isn't.

    In fact, if they are making used game activations fixed at ~$35, this is basically price fixing. Here's to hope that some publishers will see that they can offer new copies for $35 or $40, instead of the typical $60. If they allowed distribution across the internet, this would *completely* destroy the used games market, which I wouldn't say is a super terrible thing if the pricing will be fixed. This would lead to a chain reaction of the used game market fighting to have non-fixed prices.

    1. Re:People don't complain at Steam by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And at least with Steam, you get back a few of the advantages of media-less game distribution. Like immedeate delivery (download), free replacement delivery (try that with a broken physically DVD) and no need to jam the DVD in just for the useless copyprotection check.

      --
      bickerdyke
  8. PC Gaming by puddingebola · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you find this onerous, being tied to a console and the policies of the manufacturer, why not vote with your dollars and return to PC gaming? Crazy first person shooting, online RPG playing, live-action strategy obsessing gamers have never had more options to choose from in terms of platforms and services to supplement their addiction.

  9. YRO by multimediavt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A big downside is that we're likely going to see the end of cheap, used games.

    Ummm, no. The big downside here is the death of the First Sale Doctrine in the United States and the ridiculous court proceedings that will ensue to try to defend it and revise copyright law that has gone completely off the rails from its original intent.

  10. market research? by Zimluura · · Score: 5, Interesting

    some anon yesterday(i think) suggested that all the info info we're getting about the drm sheme is just ms doing clandestine market research.

    they leak news that makes it sound bearable - people respond positively.
    then they leak news that gives them more control - people respond negatively.
    through enough iterations they may find out the approach that will be most accepted.

    who knows if that's what's really going on; but it sounds plausible.

    1. Re:market research? by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not at all. MS have already said games are going to be locked to a single account and using a disc elsewhere will require paying an installation fee. Resellers are going to have to pay to have access to MS's disc/key system to be able to reset the disc within the system. We know all the details and how it will work, what we don't know is the price for each part.

      Negative.

      The installation fee applies if you don't do the license transfer - the disc is basically a medium to convey the gigs of game, because the games are so big it's not practical for most people to download them.

      What happens is this - you own the game, and once you install it, the disc is useless. The game is in your account and like Steam, you can redownload it all the time. Or reinstall from disc.

      Now, you can pass the disc onto a friend - and this is where the magic happens. If you don't give your friend the license, then your friend has to pay for a copy of the game (at whatever the digital download price is), and both you and your friend own the game.

      Or, you can pass on the license, in which case you can't play the game anymore, but your friend can. Now, supposedly these license transfers incur a fee. Possibly, who knows?

      The thing is, Microsoft by doing this has eliminated the need for disc based DRM, and in theory, one could download a game from Bittorrent and burn their own disc. Or one could bring in a thumb drive and have a new release downloaded to it for playing, so stores never run out of inventory, either.

      And in theory, rare or low-print games will be available indefinitely as well since new license can be bought (the "installation fee").

  11. Collusion? by mrjatsun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Excuse my ignorance of the law, wouldn't this be considered collusion between Microsoft and the game companies to fix game prices?

  12. So much for right of first sale ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This largely wipes out your right of first sale, and it props up the business model for the buggy whip makers.

    Why should a video game company get a cut of used sales? Oh, right, because it's software, you licensed it, and have no rights.

    This pretty much cements the fact that XBox One is something I will definitely not be interested in.

    Right now I can buy used games, take a game over to a friends place, and sell my games -- and it's none of Microsoft or the game publisher's business. This basically says we will need their permission to do anything, and entrenches their own revenue stream.

    There's no way in hell this leads to companies charging less for games, they'll just take their cut on both ends and expand their profits.

    Sorry Microsoft, but I'll pass thanks. There's nothing about this that's good for consumers.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  13. Only stores can sell 3rd party games by CimmerianX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, this effectively kills my ability to ebay off an old game I don't play anymore. Only 'big' stores will be able to sell used games after they remove the original buyer from the database? I can easily forsee many many people unable to play games because some minumum wage gamestop employee typoed a game's serial number or something. Plus, you might as well paint a big bullseye on that database for hackers. Can you imagine all of xbox losing all it's user/game data at once.... lol

  14. Game price reduction? Don`t make me laugh! by CmdrEdem · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here in Brazil we saw comparable situation. Our import taxes pretty much doubled the price of the games. So a few business started to print discs here while the game industry lobby worked on a tax reduction. They got the reduction and guess what? Most games are still the same price as before, with exceptions like Ubisoft that at first reduced the price by 25% (From 200R$ to 150R$), but since then already increased the prices again from 150R$ to 180R$ at launch. They will just increase profit margin per unit and hope people are dumb enough to buy a console that takes away your right as owner of the product.

    I don`t but used games, but I respect the right of a user to do to his game as he pleases. Games should not be different from any other physical property. If I pay for someone to build a house, I don`t have to pay the contractor a part of the rent or part of my money if I sell the house. That`s absurd! The difference is that since games still have market value when the original owner is done with them they are trying to milk us once again for our money.

    --
    This combination doesn`t exist: ETIs that know about humanity and want to see us dead. Otherwise we wouldn't exist.
  15. Re:Steam looks better by comparison by earlzdotnet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally I like both models when done completely seperately, but what Microsoft is doing here is taking worst of both worlds.

    As someone else said, Steam is nice and convenient. They have more aggressive pricing, immediate downloads(that can go faster than 500Kbyte/s, unlike Xbox Live), and no need for annoying disks that you'll eventually end up losing

    Microsoft appears to be combining the physical aspect with the virtual aspect. Sure, being able to sell your game is nice, but if you take that ability away you damn well better keep me content with your service in other ways. Steam does that, Xbox doesn't.