Another Used Game Whiner: Eidos Boss

Eidos president Ian Livingstone (left) is the latest game industry exec to complain about used game sales.

The BBC spoke to Livingstone about the issue. Here are the Eidos exec’s comments:

The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers…

A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action.

GP: "No slice of the action," of course, is the operative phrase in Livingstone’s mini-rant.

Frankly, I have no sympathy for the industry’s used game whiners and even less when I remember that digital distribution is inching ever closer. When that happens, the publishers will be in the driver’s seat.

Enjoy your used game savings while you can.

Via: gi.biz

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

82 comments

  1. rdeegvainl says:

    "used-version of a recently released game and so you know it to be poor"

    used-version =/= poor

    maybe that will help you understand. In the end, if I am interested in the game, im gonna buy the used one. It’s the developers responsibility to make the games good enough that people don’t want to get rid of them within a week.

    It’s not my fault they hype their game into oblivion just to see the top of the charts based not on the quality of the game.

    I hold no loyalty to a developer, because no developer holds a loyalty to me, they only see the bottom line, I treat them in kind.

  2. questionmark1987 says:

    Gamestop would never agree to something like this, their whole business model is based on used games, even if the trade in is used to pay for a new game, their pocket money comes from being able to resell the used game they bought at a high value to offset the cost of the used game they buy back that don’t sell.

  3. SticKboy says:

    Ah… a voice of reason in a sea of crap. Tbh, six months is unnecessarily long – three or four months would have the desired effect, I reckon.

  4. lumi says:

    "Why is a used version of the game available for sale a mere week after it was released? A $60 game should be able to keep you busy for at least that long. That is the real problem."

    Everyone loves to jump on this point.  Let me reiterate something that was said earlier in the thread: a significant majority of game purchases are gifts.  I don’t know about you, but I know I’ve bought at least one game as a gift for someone that was, plain and simple, not the sort of thing the gift recipient was into.  Guess what happened?  The game was returned, and the money spent on something else.

    Not the developer’s fault in the slightest.  But still, there was a used game on the shelf right next to the new ones.

  5. lumi says:

    You know, I’m a big Dennis supporter, but I really have to disagree with you here, Andrew.  State is dead on; that "one line" that was apparently omitted seems extremely relevant here, especially when he’s making such heavy-handed commentary on the tone of Livingstone’s statement.

    I hate to say it, but this seems like horribly selective reporting.  I don’t think it sounds like whining, but then again, I don’t necessarily agree with the omitted statement, either.  I think by the time it’s feasible to move to an entirely DD-based industrial model, we’ll probably be able to rely solely on digital advertising as well.

  6. Chaltab says:

    I wonder if they could strike an agreement with Gamestop, et al, so that there’s a six-month moratorium on used game sales. Stuff that I’m willing to buy within the first six months of the game’s release, I’m happy to buy new. Developers should be rewarded for making outstanding games and publishers should be rewarded for chosing to fund and distribute them.

  7. Arimer says:

    There’s very few situations that this can lead to and most have a bad end for the consumer.

    A.  Digital distribution becomes the norm.  Producers set price rates. Internet companies raise prices for bandwidth usage which will go up.  STores get cut out of the equation.

    B. You have more deals like Dragon Age where they include parts of the game as downloadable and charge you to get it if its used.

    C.  They have a resurgence of a cd key system or something along those lines. Where your key may only be registered once to an account then the game is useless.

  8. State says:

    I don’t understand the logic, you see a used-version of a recently released game and so you know it to be poor, but decide to buy it anyway, but buy the second hand version so the games company doesn’t get an money from it. Wouldn’t it be best if you didn’t waste your money in the first place?

  9. questionmark1987 says:

    Because more then a week after it’s release and the game is only worth $2 instead of it’s real value at that store chain.

  10. questionmark1987 says:

    And yet gamers whine incessently about the price of a new game when it offers them much higher entertainment value then a movie at a theatre or a dvd or VHS tape. Where’s your rightous indignation about those industries, oh wait you’re either pirating or you just rent? Hmm. Or maybe you actually go out and only buy movies that you think you’ll watch a bunch of times. Or maybe like most people you have gotten used to the price point.

     

  11. rdeegvainl says:

    What’s really hurting them is that they are churning out crap and selling it at 60 bucks a pop. Games with little to no replay value. That’s why they have games being sold as used within days of release, cause the game only has a couple days play time worth of content.

    My thought being that they got paid for a copy. If they didn’t make a product that a consumer felt had value enough to keep, that is their problem. If I see a game that is new, but there is a used copy right next to it, even if it’s only 5 dollars cheaper, I’m gonna buy the used copy first. The previous user obviously felt like the game didn’t have lasting value, so why should the company get both his money and mine?

  12. Andrew Eisen says:

    Man, you certainly are reading a lot into a single sentence (and I’m not saying I disagree with your conclusion).  Still, that one comment I feel is not necessary to include in a short article about another publisher going on about used games and I certainly don’t feel it was omitted due to any particular bias or attempt to paint Livingstone in a bad light.

     

    Andrew Eisen

  13. sqlrob says:

    Then why don’t the game companies do this? They can give a better deal on prices to sellers than GS, cutting GS market out from under it.

     

  14. State says:

    No he’s saying that the used-game market could be completely destroyed by avoiding retail all together, but games companies need retail to help promote games, thusly destroying the used-game market by way of complete digital distribution is not in their interests. Completely relevant comment.

  15. rma2110 says:

    You know, if they made video games that people wanted to hang on to for a month or  two, then this would not be a problem. I hate places like gamestop that try to push used versions of new realses on you, but I have to wonder:

    Why is a used version of the game available for sale a mere week after it was released? A $60 game should be able to keep you busy for at least that long. That is the real problem.

    Maybe digital distribution will give smaller publishers like Telltale games and 2D Boy more or a chance, and maybe the big boys will realize that games have become too expensive to make this gen. Cut back on the presentation and give us more gameplay, innovation, and depth to the story.

    More games like ‘Little King’s Story’ and ‘World of Goo’ wouldn’t be such a bad thing.

  16. Zero Beat says:

    To be fair, Ford’s in a much better position than GM.  Ford didn’t get bailout money.  GM did.

    I could go on a tirade now, but the Daily Show’s on.

     

    "That’s not ironic. That’s justice."

  17. Zero Beat says:

    So long as the game doesn’t have install limits.  It very effectively killed the used PC game market.

     

    "That’s not ironic. That’s justice."

  18. Xveers says:

    Yeah, he’s whining. I don’t recall hearing Ikea complain about how the "used furniture market" is wiping them out, or even Ford or GM saying the same for cars, and they’re standing at the entrance to their own tombs! And yet he’s sitting at the helm of one of the largest companies in his industry, an industry that’s weathering the financial situation quite well compared to many other segments, and bemoaning the fact that he dosen’t get a cut of a market that no-one else in ANY industry gets a cut of.

    Yeah, it -is- whining. Sad, pathetic whining that I’d more expect out of a 12 year old or a first year business student. Not from a company president.

     

    Best keep your wits about you: The gears of life are always spinning, and ignorance eventually means you’ll get caught in them.

  19. Craig R. says:

    Kill the used game market, and people will turn in even greater numbers to download their games online… and not legally.

  20. CyberSkull says:

    Whine, whine, whine.

    Just shut up already. You have NO RIGHT to any sales made after you sell the game for the first time. Period. So shut the hell up RIGHT NOW!

    </angry>

    I am so damn tired of hearing these grumblings about used game sales. If you don’t want people to sell the games, make better games!

  21. questionmark1987 says:

    Lol I always find it funny how somehow people twist it around to make it seem like the developers making money is bad for the consumer. If anything we should be upset that retailers are getting the majority of profits out of the market.

    After all, if GS goes out of business we’ll just buy our games from BB or some other store. IF Eidos goes out of business, bye bye games period.

    EDIT: In this post Eidos was used as an example for developers. Stuff like this is why indie games are taking over a large portion of the market and less and less AAA games are coming out. Companies don’t want to bother risking spending money on something that might not sell well as a first sale when they can just put out cheap crap that will sell as a gimmick and make them more of a profit. After all if they only spend $100,000 developing instead of $1,000,000 it’s a lot easier to make that back and make a profit.

  22. Andrew Eisen says:

    "It’s completely relevant to the report."

    Eh, I disagree.  This is just another in a long line of publishers complaining (whining, discussing, however you want to phrase it) that they’re not seeing dime one from used game sales.  Livingstone’s one comment that retail stores are a good place to advertise games doesn’t strike me as necessary for inclusion.

    "He makes one (or technically two) comments about the negative impact on used games and one on the need for retail.  That seems balanced to me, hardly a tirade on the used games market."

    I wouldn’t categorize his comments as a tirade either.  And neither did GP.

     

    Andrew Eisen

  23. State says:

    the fact that that’s not what this GP story is reporting on

    It’s completely relevant to the report. The editorial believes used games are payback for digital distribution, the comments made by the Eidos President show that he doesn’t believe DD to be the answer and that there is a need for a physical format and for shops to sell it. He says that whilst retailers are not good for his business due to used games market they are need for advertising. The comments are entirely relevant to the report and change the tone of the Eidos President’s comments.

    Really?  Where?  With the exception of "These aren’t just shops, they are a marketing tool, a window into our world where software houses can display their wares," every, single other comment from Livingstone is about used games.

    He makes one (or technically two) comments about the negative impact on used games and one on the need for retail (basically saying that cutting shops out of the picture isn’t good and that they need to work together). That seems balanced to me, hardly a tirade on the used games market.

  24. State says:

    I doubt it’s the sales of second-hand 4 year old games that’s hurting them. It’s the shops selling second-hand recently released games instead of the new copies that is damaging. Many companies stop producing a title after about a year, so then they don’t expect profits to come from that any more, so second hand sales of that title won’t do harm. The harm comes from when a new copy is available but the consumer plumps for the used copy..

    What annoys me now in shops like GAME (in the UK) is that more space is devoted to used games than it is to new games, and now they do the same on their website. In many cases I can buy the new version cheaper than the used version, although now the used games market is used to keep the new game market prices high. It does seem as though these companies are actually forcing the consumer to buy used instead of new.

  25. Andrew Eisen says:

    "The Eidos president also said in the article (omitted from this site for biased reasons) that retail is important as it helps to promote games…"

    I didn’t write this one but I imagine the one line you’re talking about was omitted, not due to bias but for space reasons and the fact that that’s not what this GP story is reporting on.

    "He actually gave a balanced interview (something that is not being reported here) stating the pros and cons of the business."

    Really?  Where?  With the exception of "These aren’t just shops, they are a marketing tool, a window into our world where software houses can display their wares," every, single other comment from Livingstone is about used games.

     

    Andrew Eisen

  26. State says:

    Frankly, I have no sympathy for the industry’s used game whiners and even less when I remember that digital distribution is inching ever closer. When that happens, the publishers will be in the driver’s seat.

    You do know what’s causing the push for digital distribution don’t you? The used-game market. Because the used game market is being abused (much more than any other industry) publishers can stop that all together by shifting everything over to downloads only. It’s a circular effect, people using the used-games market to make a statement against digital distribution, whilst digital distribution expands due to the pressures of the ever-growing used-games market. In the end it doesn’t benefit the consumer.

    The Eidos president also said in the article (omitted from this site for biased reasons) that retail is important as it helps to promote games, so full digital distribution isn’t the solution to the problem. He actually gave a balanced interview (something that is not being reported here) stating the pros and cons of the business. So quit the whining about the supposed (but non-existent) whining and actually read and report on all of the comments which do actually offer more than many games execs have said in the past and what some people have posted here.

  27. MichaelPaladin says:

    I’m going to keep it easy and to the point.

    Most retail stores only devote so much space for games. So most games that were released, say last year are no longer on those shelves because of having to make room for new releases.

    And most times trying to find and buy a game that was released 3-4 years ago isn’t that easy. So a lot of times you have to rely on the pre-owned market to find and buy these games.

  28. gamegod25 says:

    Funny I never got a letter from Subaru complaining that they didn’t get a "slice of the action" when I sold my car.

  29. 1AgainstTheWorld says:

    Look at his picture, he looks kind of red-faced and mad.  Settle down, guy, you’ll give yourself a coronary.

  30. Neeneko says:

    *sigh* another CEO who’s knowledge of economics is limited to direct effects only.

    Seriously, how do people like this manage to become CEOs with economic backgrounds that stop at high school?   I have trouble even considering this high school level knowledge since I know my economics teacher would have slapped me if I made these kinda of claims.

  31. Karsten Aaen says:

    -ehm-

     

    That is not quite true, I find. Many are the times I have seen or read on different gaming fora that players have picked up a used copy of this or that game and then have thought ‘hey, let’s get the new game that’s coming out in the series’.

    The Eidos boss fails to understand that hype building can also come from the re-selling of old games, not just from used games.

    The used book market have existed for a very long; how’s the market for used games any different.
    As long as you un-install the game before you sell it, you have a right to do so…

     

     

     

  32. questionmark1987 says:

    Like I said before you don’t get to ignore all other consoles besides the Xbox just because it gives you wood. Xbox =/= the videogame industry, at best right now it represents 25% of the industry, and I highly doubt even that number is correct because besides the three major consoles you also have to factor in PCs and handhelds which account for much larger percentages of the market then consoles.

    The top game on the Xbox console sold less then the 5th game on the gameboy color console. That’s copies sold. Obviously the AAA titles aren’t running the major market share.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games#Top_20_console_games_of_all_time

    Only 1 game on that list would be dubbed not suitable for anyone under 13. The other 19 are probably E for all or lower.

  33. questionmark1987 says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

    I’m sorry, you don’t get to say "except wii" in that statement. Fact of the matter is the Wii is the industry leader at this point (unless you start tallying previous generation consoles or handhelds). If you’re going to start eliminating contestants based on platform I can jsut as easily say that the 360 and PS3 don’t count because their game libraries are primarily gauged to older audiences.

    Here is a list of games and their sale rates, pick your fav and compare to games like pokemon etc.

    One example: Nintendogs: 22.27 mil. versus say FFVII one of the most sought after games since it’s release, at a mere 9.8 million. Or pokemon yellow (since the red blue are lumped together) rivaling it at 8.6 mil.

    Kids games sell better because of the same factors that make sports games sell. Large audience, small selection. FPS, Action, etc. games sell well when they are well done, but they have a lot more competition in the market and more niche audiences.

    And yes wiki’s are terrible sources but the numbers won’t be that far off.

  34. Austin_Lewis says:

    Really?  Name me one kid’s game on any home console (except the Wii) that is in the top ten sellers for it.  Name me any kid’s game that is the number one seller.

  35. questionmark1987 says:

    Of course games aren’t just for kids anymore. But if you actually look at sales numbers kid’s games sell far and above almost every other type and genre (excluding possibly sports games). Real AAA titles, while more interesting and generally more impressive, don’t sell as well because consumers have more choice in what to buy. Publishers use kid’s games to keep a solid working base of money while they take higher risks for hopefully large payoffs on larger games.

    As for the comment on people caring about used games, the largest sector buying games are parents and grandparents buying gifts, and those people, while they will look for the best price, aren’t going to care much one way or the other if they can buy used or not.

    Your points on the way used games work are spot on, but they also prove another point, that the majority of gamers will buy used before new if they are able because it’s cheaper. Once again showing that while the used game market isn’t killing the industry, it’s not helping it either. Personally I cannot wait for full DD/DLC/etc. use to drive out the used game market, because that’s when we’re finally going to see companies be able to start pumping out more games that are actually impressive.

    And frankly that won’t kill the game industry, because at that point they will be getting more money then now because people will actually be paying them rather then the retailors.

  36. State says:

    This practice drives down the retail price

    From my experience the used games market helps keep game prices high as shops are less willing to reduce the price on new versions as the used version offers an (apparently) cheaper alternative.

  37. Skillz817 says:

    "The games companies could easily stop all of the used-games market very quickly (the PSP GO is aimed at doing this). So it’s ignorant to believe that they can’t do anything about it, because they can and they will."

     

    In that case I hope the psp go fails, I still plan on getting a psp(the 3000 to be exact)

  38. SlyFox says:

    You’re kidding, right?  the majority or the industry’s income comes from kids buying kiddie games?  The portion of the gaming populace that cares about buying used games is very small?  What?

    No offense but what are you on about?  Firstly, games aren’t just for kids anymore, and, with the exception of Nintendo churning out hum-drum casual games and even non-game applications for the DS and WII, it would seem that most games out there are of a more mature nature and are aimed at an older audience.  I can walk into any random EB or GAME and find the racks decked with games that are obviously not aimed at kiddies.

    With the US going into recession and other countries (such as Australia, where I am) begining to feel the effects, I’d think that gamers are starting to care more and more about used games.  Especially when considering that there are gamers who will buy a single game from EB, return it less than a week later and exchange it for the full price in store credit, then use that to buy another new game, and then repeat the process, putting the returned but relatively new game on the used game rack.  This practice drives down the retail price and, since many gamers know about this, it also makes gamers more inclined to meander a while longer in the used game sections.

  39. questionmark1987 says:

    It might kill a section of gaming, but honestly the portion of the gaming population that actually cares about things like this is very small. The majority of the money in the game industry still comes from kiddies buying things like my little pony and whatever other games they have out right now. I would almost be surprised by this, but then I look at how gamers behave and I’m really not.

  40. Ratros says:

    And it shall kill gaming.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  41. sheppy says:

    First, I want to say YES, this coverage is VERY agenda driven.  So much so that it resembles a Jack Thompson tirade or a "death panel" editorial.  You can cover an issue without everytime you covering it, showing just how closeminded you are towards the other side.  Time after time, Dennis has shown he’s physically incapable of discussing this issue.  But onto the list!

    Let’s see what other industries have to deal with used sales:
    Furniture -Have you PRICED furniture, sir?  I ask because it’s apparent to me that you haven’t.  What was Furniture’s solution to the used market?  Making it pretty f’ing expensive.  $1500 for a new loveseat compared to $50 from Salvation Army isn’t competing on the same market no matter how much people like to draw parallels.

    Vehicles (boats/bikes/cars/planes/etc)- 85% of new car purchases come with a vehicle trade-in.  These vehicles trade-ins are often given below Blue Book value and often sold a couple thousand over Blue Book value.  This is actually a vast majority of the vehicle industry so much to the point that the dealerships and manufacturers depend on it to move vehicles.  Take, as an example, the Cash for Clunkers deal.  Same trade in program that’s been on TV for the past 15 years in my area, however now it’s Government funded to drive up new car sales.  The USED vehicle market has been designed specifically to trick consumers into thinking they are getting a deal.

    Movies- Used movie market is directly tied into rental chains.  There are no used movie stores.  It’s all bins [riced at what new movies would cost.  And if you knew ANYTHING about movies in general, you’d punch yourself in the face for trying to draw parallels.  The home market is actually one of the least profitable stops for a movie to make, thus used sales in their least important avenue, means NOTHING to them.

    Books (and manuals/comics/mangas/etc)- You’re kidding with this, right?  Publishers drop so many books the plan is to use 20% to make up for the money loss on the 80%.  They all hope to have the next runaway hit, but after a certain amount of time, they pull hardback editions can go directly after paperback.  When a paperback run is done, they destroy left over copies to control the number of copies out there.  Books then enter availability cycles.  Comics make a vast majority of their money by overpricing the initial release on the sales pitch that "Used" copy will GAIN value.  Their business plan, essentially, is as a giant nerdy investment program.  So once again, NOTHING like the games industry.

    Music- Used music stores have all but died.  Because the format in which we buy our music is changing, obviously used is no longer part of the equation.  I cannot transfer ownership of my iTunes library to you for a discount.

    Consoles- You’re killing me, smalls.  Consoles are RARELY part of the profit plan.  It’s all software.  Has been all about the software ever since the US government busted up Nintendo for price fixing during the NES era.  Someone buying a USED console is someone going to buy games.  Someone buying a USED game, isn’t going to buy a new game to enhance that USED game experience.  Of course there is DLC…. you mean THAT’S what that’s for?!?  Uh duh.

    Peripherals (controllers/monitors/keyboards/etc)-
    You BUY used controllers and keyboards when the new option IS an option?  For most people, the option isn’t even there.  Take a look at a keyboard YOU’VE used for two years.  Now apply that to someone elses hair, skin, finger ick, etc… and you’ll PAY for that?  Peripherals aren’t a market, man.  And besides, to counter yours.. you don’t see Walmart, Best Buy, etc selling USED computer monitors right next to their new ones, do you?  They haven’t built their empire off being a flea market, Gamestop on the other hand…

    Instruments- Once again, have you PRICED that which you are talking about?  A quality acoustic quitar STARTS at $600.  Some guitars range all the way up to $10,000 (that I’ve seen).  They are NOT comparable markets because the profit margin on the initial purchase is soooooooo high.  So your solution for the games industry is race the price of games so high that they could make mountains of cash off the first purchase.

    I could go on but I’ll put it this way instead.  The video game industry, in it’s current state, has six months to profit off a game.  That’s it, six months.  If they DON’T reach a sales quota (read: Greatest Hits eligibility), they cannot license more copies to be made.  Likewise, retail partners will not carry the more copies they would’ve made if they could.  Direct sales are not viable since players could NOT see a 2 year old game for $40 without screaming "ripoff" at the top of their lungs.

    What these companies have is six months, total, to make back the investment.  After six months, you’ll find most companies don’t give a damn about used game sales.  But before that time, they are competing directly with someone who’s smiling at the publisher, while trying to convince their customers to buy used with blatant falsehoods (One Game Crazy employee told me a used copy of Rock Band 2 is better than a new copy in every way).  Of course the problem is also tied in with publishers themselves.  The digital distrobution revolution that Dennis decides to go all emo and luddite about as a horrifying vision of the future negates certain facts.

    The first and most obvious one being the fact that, when most of what a publisher DOES is rendered no longer viable, why would a eveloper NEED a publisher?  Why not self publish, pay royalties to the console makers themselves, and roll in the profits?  Developers get so screwed by publishers, WHY NOT?  And when devs get to keep more of their money, they’ll drop the prices accordingly.  This is that counter point nobody talks about when this comes around.  Wonder why Publishers find this such a huge threat?  Because in the near future, Activision, EA, Ubisoft won’t have the power they once had.

    Wall of Text Simulation- Insert coin to continue.

  42. Ratros says:

    NO!  That is wrong on so many levels, and will start us down a slippery slope that will crush the consumer.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  43. FlakAttack says:

    Everyone knows that games companies don’t make any money for the second-hand market, it’s a fact.

    Let’s see what other industries have to deal with used sales:
    Furniture
    Vehicles (boats/bikes/cars/planes/etc)
    Movies
    Books (and manuals/comics/mangas/etc)
    Music
    Consoles
    Peripherals (controllers/monitors/keyboards/etc)
    Instruments
    Appliances
    Home Electronics
    Tools

    This list goes on and on… and these industries have found ways to cope with not getting a DIME on used sales… so why should actual game designers be any different?

  44. Vake Xeacons says:

    Wait. Is that all we’ve been arguing about? The definition of "Whining"?

    Is it whining or isn’t it? And if so, is that okay or not? Why or why not?

    Let’s get back to the root of the issue, people: What to do about used games?

    Personally, I do think publishers should get at least a percentage of the profit off used game sales; that aughta shut them up. Because we CANNOT allow them to stop used game sales. Try to come to some common ground.

  45. State says:

    Note that they have to pay for the game and then there’s no gurrantee that it’ll sell after they repurchase it

    The price at which they buy the games is minimal and the price that they sell the games for isn’t much less than that of the new versions, so the potential for profits is much higher. A lot of people buy a new game and then trade it in after a week or two, they’ve probably wasted about 50% of the original game price, renting would’ve been cheaper. People are better renting than going down the trading-in route.

  46. Ratros says:

    The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers…
     

     

    He’s saying that a market based off the reselling of games to help afford newer ones and make old ones is a problem because the publishers don’t make any money off of it.  Not that they didn’t make money when the game first sold, but I guess that’s beside the point.  To say that there is no benefit and call it a serious problem is whining, since it is nothing of the sort. 

     

    A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action.

     

    Note that they have to pay for the game and then there’s no gurrantee that it’ll sell after they repurchase it, nor is there any proof that once it is purchased the second time, that that person will come back in and trade it in for money.  They’re taking a risk to gain capatial, and this guy is blowing it out of proportion to make it look like it’s hurting them.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  47. State says:

    I can’t see the whining. Everyone knows that games companies don’t make any money for the second-hand market, it’s a fact. Everyone dies, that’s a fact, but am I whining about by simply pointing it out? No. Just because a representative at a games company states this it become whining? That ridiculous.

    The used game market is a big issue in the industry now and everyone in the industry is being asked about it. So as soon as they answer a question about they instantly get called whiners, aren’t we whining about their comments believing them to be whiners?

  48. Ratros says:

    That is whining of the worst type.  He’s whining he doesn’t get money for something that he sold to somebody else that is being resold.  If he doesn’t want that to happen, then he needs to make it where they don’t want to sale said product.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  49. lordlundar says:

    Yes whining. Publishers only look at their first week of sales and ignore the rest. The reason why they’re whining about it now is because most publishers haven’t put out a game that a large number of people want to keep beyond a few days. If they want to avoid this issue of newly released games going on the used shelf within a week, they need to make more enduring games.

  50. beemoh says:

    >>"The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers…"

    >Whining. How serious can a problem be if all physical goods producers have to deal with the exact same issue?

    Not whining. It’s a serious problem for everybody else, because it’s a market they’re not in. Simple identification of a phenomenon that exists.

    >>A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action."

    >Whining. He is complaining that the games industry gets no part of the profits from used games sales. Guess what. No other industry gets a slice of the profits from the sales of their used products. What makes the games industry entitled?

    Not whining. He’s pointing out that the games industry gets no part of the profits of products they’re not selling. The same way they get no profits from the sales of DVDs, Books, Cars, Fruit or anything else you might buy that isn’t a game. All that is is the explanation of why something is an issue- he isn’t saying "retail should give us a royalty on used", he’s saying "we don’t get a royalty on used", in case somebody believed that they did. No mention of any kind of entitlement.

    /b

  51. sqlrob says:

    Even if you increase the margin on new games, the margin on used games is huge, at the prices GS pays. What do they gain from this – absolutely nothing.

     

  52. ZippyDSMlee says:

    …… this is not about enforcing anything tis a mutual deal were new game prices are cut to raise sales and publisher specific used game titles they get a cut of.

    Say you sale 100K of new titles in a 3-6 month period you take a 20% loss on it but you are losing new game sales anyway due to high prices and used game sales, you then have 200K of older games sold in the same time frame. Its called deversefing, you are bringing in a profit no matter which is sold.

     


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  53. sqlrob says:

    The increase in profit from 20% cut on new isn’t going to cover what they’d get on used. Why bother?

    If you try to enforce it, it’s a violation of the Doctrine. I would say GS has enough of the used market that the FTC would be looking into collusion as well.

     

  54. ZippyDSMlee says:

    How?

    Say activision made the deal with EB/GS and they lowered new games prices and got a cut from all of activacation used game price without prices going up.

     

    Everyone wins from this situation.


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  55. State says:

    Yes you own the right to use the media, something that DRM limits. iTunes for example limits a download to five hard drives (I am likely to own more than five HDDs in my lifetime), CDs don’t limit my usage, didn’t Spore try to pull off a similar trick?

    DRM unfairly limits your usage of the media.

  56. ZippyDSMlee says:

    I own the right to use it for priavte viewing no matter the device or item in question, the DMCA removes my right to rip it and cross convert it myself.

     


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  57. State says:

    If you don’t like it, tough.

    It’s not "tough", they have a solution to end it all, digital distribution, which will end up with the consumer being even worse off than now.

    The games companies could easily stop all of the used-games market very quickly (the PSP GO is aimed at doing this). So it’s ignorant to believe that they can’t do anything about it, because they can and they will.

  58. Zero Beat says:

    Yes, we realize you want to make a buck whenever a good you made changes hands, but here’s the thing – After it’s sold to the first end-user, it’s no longer your disc.  It’s theirs, and they have a right to sell it to whoever they wish and keep all the money for themselves.  If I sold all my Eidos games (won’t happen, btw), I wouldn’t cut Eidos a check.  If I ran a store that only sold used stuff, I wouldn’t track down the companies that originally made all the stuff and cut them checks.

    It’s like this in every industry with a used market.  Get used to it.  If you don’t like it, tough.

     

    "That’s not ironic. That’s justice."

  59. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Padding,driveing, funnleing tis all teh same to make the enw game look better than the used but theres no real way to do it unless you have a key and account based system.


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  60. Moriarty70 says:

    This doesn’t seem like padding sales though. It seems more like incentive to buy new instead of rent or wait and buy used.

  61. ZippyDSMlee says:

    DLC=incomplete game, at least thats the rule more than the excepstion….

    They can try and pad sales buy adding one time stuff when you buy a game new but half of the people that will sell it off wont use the "new game only" content. So its haphazard at best…..


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  62. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Zippy getting a first post?….scary……

    Anyway its simple the publishers will have to wheel and deal with the retailers, how about lowering new game prices by 20% and get 20% off each used title sale?

    Currently I see a lot of whining and wishing but no real thinking on how to do it where everyone wins!


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  63. Bennett Beeny says:

    I never buy digital downloads anymore.  If it’s not in a box I’ll end up losing it somehow.  I end up losing the game through the usual data corruption or just by uninstalling it.  Then when I want to try it again I’ve gone and lost the passcode.  Even with  those games I’ve ordered a backup disc for, I end up losing the disc because it doesn’t come in a slipcase or a box and it’s so darned small compared to all my other games.  Plus, I enjoy getting a paper manual with my game.  Screw that PDF bullshit!

    With that and the issue of DRM (by which I mean the scam whereby I can’t resell a game I bought), I prefer a solid game with a box that has the old style requirement of keeping the disc in the drive.  If it has anything more annoying than that, or if it doesn’t come in a box, I ain’t buying.  Not anymore.

  64. thefremen says:

    Ya know, digital downloads will be horrible for some people. Personally I only buy games on steam/d2d/etc when I know for a fact that it will literally rock my socks off. 

  65. Wormdundee says:

    It’s definitely the smart way to do it. And tons of people will be wanting everything, even if it is just a little part. I have to applaud them for coming up with a way around people buying used.

    I would have bought it new anyway though 🙂

  66. Arell says:

    Bioware is trying an interesting tactic with thier upcoming Dragon Age: Origins game.  They have a DLC pack that’s going to be ready at launch, called The Stone Guardian.  Now, this packet isn’t integral to the main storyline, and if you don’t have it, you won’t even notice its abscence.  What it gives you is access to a new party member (a golem) and their associated questlines.

    Here’s why I find it interesting.  Everyone who boys the game new (boxed or digital, regular or CE) will get The Stone Guardian FREE.  No cost.  If you have an internet connection, it’s yours.  However, if you buy a pre-owned copy, with the code already used up and the game registered, then you have to pay $15 to get this DLC.  You don’t HAVE to download it, and like I said, it’s not integral to the primary game.

    Here’s what they’re hoping:

    1.  In the first few months, when pre-owned games are priced comparatively to new games (like only $5-10 less), the high price of this DLC will convince many buyers to just select new copies.

    2.  Later on, when the pre-owned prices drop dramatically, then Bioware can still make a little extra profit off those sales by anyone who downloads the DLC.

    They’re not denouncing the pre-owned market, but are instead trying to find ways to coexist with it.  I think this, as I said, interesting.  If it is successful, I think many companies will use DLC in this way to incourage more buyers to purchase new.  The choice to buy used is still there, and the choice not the buy DLC is still there, so I have no problems with this strategy.

  67. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Technically you don;t own the physical medium these days…and with the DMCA you can;t do anything other than put in it a approved licensed player and play it…


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  68. Skillz817 says:

    I may stop being a gamer if digital distribution happens where the publishers have control and I no longer have the right do as I please with what I spend My money on and I’m given the illusion of owning a game by downloading it to My HDD.

  69. Moriarty70 says:

    Problem with that is the consumer then whines about the incentive. I’m thinking Bioware/EA deal for Dragon Age’s relase. If you buy it new, you get free content that costs anyone who buys it used $15 if they want it.

     

    The first thing I saw when it was listed online was outrage over being given an "incompete game". I saw it right away as a trick to cut down on used sales.

  70. Vake Xeacons says:

    Well, if publishers want "a slice of that action," they need to give more incentives to buy new games, not make threats.

    Reward zones for registering new games, a feature a lot of major publishers are investing in (like Club Nintendo, for example), give the gamer a reason to buy a new game. Since new games at Gamestop & EB are practically used anyway, why bother?

    But you can find new games on eBay & Amazon for practically a used price anyway.

  71. E. Zachary Knight says:

    >"The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers…"

    Whining. How serious can a problem be if all physical goods producers have to deal with the exact same issue?

    >A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action."

    Whining. He is complaining that the games industry gets no part of the profits from used games sales. Guess what. No other industry gets a slice of the profits from the sales of their used products. What makes the games industry entitled?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  72. beemoh says:

    Except: Not whining. Merely identifying a phenomeon that exists and explaining why iot needs to be taken into account when formulating a business plan.

    >"The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers…"

    Simply saying that there’s an issue that exists. "Here is a competing product that is, for whatever reason, having a detrimental effect on our market."

    >A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action."

    This identifies how the competing market competes (bigger margin), and the effect it has on the games industry’s market (no incentive to reorder).

    Simple economics, no different to if Livingstone made the same comments about DVD sales.

    I notice no mention of the more interesting and important comment about an uncompetitive UK retail market- The agenda’s getting tedious, Dennis.

    /b

Comments are closed.