Any excuse to dust this picture off…
In what can only be described as the worst idea ever, Epic Games’ Michael Capps let slip one of the many ideas developers are passing around to try and curb people from buying used games:
The secondary market is a huge issue in the United States. Our primary retailer makes the majority of its money off of secondary sales, and so you’re starting to see games taking proactive steps toward that by… if you buy the retail version you get the unlock code.
I’ve talked to some developers who are saying ‘If you want to fight the final boss you go online and pay USD 20, but if you bought the retail version you got it for free’. We don’t make any money when someone rents it, and we don’t make any money when someone buys it used – way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it.
…if this happens I will shut this site down and never buy another game again. Seriously, this is akin to renting Star Wars: Episode III and being told you need to input a purchase code to view the Mustafar lightsaber fight. It’s absolute bullshit and, frankly, unfair to the consumer. With this idea you’re asking people to pay $60 for what is, in essence, a broken game.
Oh, and then there is the possibility that somebody (I’m looking at EA) decided to milk the consumer out of a few more dollars and make them pay another $5-10 to basically fix their game.
…and then there are those who don’t have internet…
Popularity: unranked [?]
Loading ...
I see that this is bad for consumers, but game developers are squeezed from both sides. First there is increasing cost of videogame development and the reduced sale of games as retailers like gamestop make a secondary market that the original developers don’t receive profit from. To me GameStop is just a leech in the gaming industry. To bad, too many people shop there.
On the other hand, it would suck for me to get a game on disc only to find out I couldn’t finish the game cause I didn’t buy it at retail.
I say, Gears of War 2 did an excellent job giving additional content to first time buyers, free map maps for the multiplayer portion.
All I can say is, I thought EA handled things right with the 20 Free Tracks code that only came with new copies of the game. You can still buy the game used, but you don’t get the perk of a fuller title (a perk that is much better than the crap that they include with “Special Edition”s of pre-ordered games).
Grats, you’re happy that you paid for a non-complete game. You are the type of consumer that would happily roll over and take it because you either have no memory or you’re a child and don’t remember the fact that games didn’t always take millions of dollars to produce, hell, good games STILL don’t have to take that much. So much inflated non-content is added these days that development takes so amazingly long and costs so horribly much for a subpar game. I’m not saying that Asteroids is the height of entertainment and that anything more advanced sucks, but there is NO reason things should be this absolutely expensive, while at the same time they try to squeeze even more cash out of the consumer because they are no longer game companies, they are entertainment companies who don’t give a shit about their customers, don’t give a shit about the games, and only give a shit about their bottom line.
@kronchev
They’re COMPANIES. Not charities. They only should care about their bottom line — otherwise, why are they in business? Certainly not for their health. If you don’t like their business practices, then shop elsewhere. Wouldn’t be the first time that someone went under for trying to manhandle their customers.
I also agree with you. Some of the best games were coffee-shop affairs with a budget of less than a good new car. Innovative FUN gameplay is something truly lacking. But people don’t buy for innovative, they buy the PS3s and the xBox360s because of the whizz-bang-gee-wilikers BETTER GRAPHICS bullshit. Let’s make the game more like real life….why again? Plus, all the titles I’ve seen are just rehashes of the same half dozen genres/game styles with just a little twist.
The Wii is pushing the limit, but it still is rather terrible due to most developers trying to port their old worn out ideas to an interaction method not designed for it.
While I don’t think something like the 20 free songs should catch on, it’s fine for Rock Band 2 since there’s already 84 songs on the disc (way more than Rock Band 1), and anyone getting a used copy isn’t missing much.
The same thing is happening with the print industry. Authors don’t get a cut when someone goes to the library or buys a book used from Amazon. It also happens with movies and music. Heck, it happens with EVERYTHING. The original manufacturer doesn’t get a cut when things are sold at second-had stores, yardsales, etc.
This is bullshit. I agree with you, James. I won’t buy a game that makes your pay to unlock the ending if you get it used. Perks to buying the new copy are fine, but essentially killing the used market is unfair, and might even spark some court battles. Trust me, the vast majority of developers/publishers are making millions upon millions of dollars with every title. Corporate greed much?
If they really want to curb the problem, they should make retailers pay for resell rights licenses – ie, a percentage back to the original publisher for the right to sell used copies. That would make much more sense than penalizing the gamer.
How can you mention court battles and suggest infringing on the right to sell second-hand goods in the same post?
I’ve decided to only buy new games in order to make sure the people who actually make the games get a cut and they can continue to create games. I don’t feel there is anything wrong with someone buying and selling used items, you can do it with almost anything. But I do not like the way that Gamestop, the largest specialty game retailer promotes used games as much as they do.
I’m not opposed to the idea of offering some incentive for customers if they purchased a new copy of the game. The Throwback Map pack in Gears 2 was a nice try, but what does that do for the people who never play online? Im sure after some trial and error, and solution will be found.
Heh, I wish I saw a cut every time a game I worked on sold. It doesn’t work that way anymore, it all goes to the publisher.
I’m not against this.
Gamers that are aware of DLC tend to be fairly informed. At purchase of a secondary sale they’ll more than likely be aware of the additional cost required to finish the game.
If they are so informed it will drive down the prices of secondary sales to something that matches (price) + (dlc cost) < (first sale).
This is a boon for gamers who purchase games solely to play online with friends, and the gamers like myself that hardly ever finish games.
So, provided gamers are informed all I foresee happening is lower prices for the consumer and increased revenue for developers. Am I wrong?
I think you’re post hits the mark..and I’m also not against this. I think in the long run, this will work itself out such that end users, as well as game developers both benefit. A little lower cost (not much, but something) for the 2nd sale end user, as well as a little back in the developers pocket so they don’t lose out completely.
It’s funny because video game rentals and second-hand sales were never a problem until these large corporations took over
What kind of moron are you that buys a game to play it half assed and not even finish it?
No, I’m serious. You’re retarded, possibly a corporate shill and I’d love to know the exact name to your condition.
Are are either a fanboy or work for Epic. Pathetic either way, and with the advent of web-based and casual games you’ll find more and more people washing their hands from this console madness. I’m sorry but Gears of War 2 is NOT that important.
What is this dillhole Mike Capp’s email so I can ream his sorry ass.
There are developers other than Epic Games. The used game market will live without them.
Video game publishers need to realize that the duty to save the industry isn’t placed in the hands of the populace that purchases the games. If stuff like this goes into play then you probably won’t have any games to buy used because no one will buy the new product.
If epic wants to go with this strategy, then I say they should go for it, because once they go bankrupt another developer will surface who wants to make games based on the joy of creating. Then we’ll start seeing some truly inspiring games.
P.S. Epic, you haven’t made any decent since unreal tournament
.
Maybe the game industry needs to wake up and smell the burning economy? if someone prefers to expend $10 to $20 dollars less and wait MONTHS for a used and probably scratched game disc, heres a hint: THEY CANT AFFORD A $60- $70 game! those days are long gone!
1.-If you are really that worried about people buying USED games, why dont you make the price more attractive for people who prefer used games? Per example $30-$40 seems a completely reasonable price for a new game. And for those $20 less you get millions of extra sales instead. Is basic economics!
If that is too expensive for you, What about economic versions? with just the original DVD in a basic plastic case. No manual, no fancy box print, nothing, just the game in black and white print. To be honest I wouldnt mind.
Also, you are probably forgetting a small detail you can sell those as Downloadable games! theres no way to sell those used, no distribution or packaking. And Although theres a size limit now. Is not actually written on stone you know. Specially for PC’s.
Also theres a problem, DLC is NOT trade proof I was a sucker and bought Darth Vader for SC IV, (which I KNOW was in the game disc when I bought it, since I could fight online against vader before getting the dlc). Will that stop me from trading the game? absolutely NOT, I got tired of SCIV two weeks after I bought it, you bet I want something else instead. I dont even care if they release the Jedi Pack if I have the chance to trade it for a used Gears 2 or Fable 2 I will. No questions asked. No regrets either. You developers wont get your bucks? well thats just too bad. Maybe If I could afford those games NEW I wouldnt need to trade anything.
Simply put, if the games cost half what they do now, gamestop would still make about half of what they do now on used. The profit on the new version won’t change. It’s less than $5. Sometimes as low as $1 profit per copy. (I know some mom and pop gamestores that have a $0 markup on games and still have to sell them for more money than gamestop does because they’re hot titles and the distributor knows they’ll pay so people looking for it won’t go to other stores, which means potentially lost business on other things)
Used games, you can do the math. Buy the game for 10-15 and sell it for 55. It’s a $5 discount for the buyer and a massive profit for the store. Do the math on a $30 game… No matter what the price is, they’re always going to buy from the consumer very low and sell very high, but just low enough to make it attractive to the consumer. If the going price is $30, they’ll probably buy it from the consumer at $5, the same as taking in used copies of older games now. They’ll still resell it for $25.
The only way to curb this is some preventative measure making used games unattractive. Lowering the price of the game is a completely different subject.
OK so I can see this happening, but a better idea would be to make the FULL game on the disk, with the ending, because there are people who dont have internet, and then maybe release an alternative ending to it via DLC. Maybe something very basic and predictive happens on the disk ending. but the alternate ending would be something totally awesome and dripping with greatness.
@dave172
This is exactly what they are purposing to do, but why should we pay extra for what should already be on the disc. Silent Hill is a prime example of a great way to get replayablity out of your game by making it so when you did different things in the game it gave you a different ending. The only problem there was which was the true ending? Speaking of that for those of us concened about story it would suck if they charged for multiple endings because which would be the true ending?
Plus I pay for enough things I’m tired of paying for all this stuff. They already raised the price of games $10 from $50 to $60 and the games have only gotten shorter and bugger as we have now become the Q&A for the games. Blu-ray was supposed give the PS3 an advantage but with the 360 out there developers aren’t going to work any harder for the PS3 if they don’t get extra money. I personally want to see developers try and use the PS3 to it’s fullest by adding more content to the PS3 games.
like i said over on fidgit… really…? well you know here’s a bit of logic… if the games were slightly cheaper (say $10 -$20 cheaper) ALOT more would be inclined to buy them… hence the fact that people buy used games because… (drum roll) THEY ARE CHEAPER… FTW?!!?!
Wait. Used games… cheaper than new?! People want to buy them for… for CHEAPER?! *hissing noises, smoke leaves ears* OVERLOAD. DOES NOT COMPUTE.