I meant sure they wanted to get rid of the practice of buying/selling used games. The industry just didn't have the kind of power it would take to get anything done about it 10 years ago. It remains to be seen how much they'll be able to accomplish even now. They're making progress on the PC side, but not on the console side.

This comment was edited on Sep 1, 2009, 11:33.

Sure they did.

When? What?

Funny how they didn't want to stop it before Gamestop came along. People bought and sold used games happily for fifteen years and the industry didn't do anything about it.

Sure they did. They were just a fledgling industry then though. They didn't have the money and power to do anything about it.

The industry wants to put a stop to the entire practice, not just GameStop

Funny how they didn't want to stop it before Gamestop came along. People bought and sold used games happily for fifteen years and the industry didn't do anything about it.

The industry never cared before Gamestop got involved. I used to be able to actually sell my PC games too before Gamestop adopted the official policy of not accepting PC games for resale.

Like he said though, people want to buy and sell used games. Even if there was no GameStop, people would find other ways to buy and sell them. The industry wants to put a stop to the entire practice, not just GameStop. They just bitch louder about them because they're the easiest target to point to.

But they aren't pissing off the Industry. We are.

The industry never cared before Gamestop got involved. I used to be able to actually sell my PC games too before Gamestop adopted the official policy of not accepting PC games for resale.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 17:07.

They offer shitty consumer value while pissing off the industry.

But they aren't pissing off the Industry. We are. Consumers are the ones making these games available for resale. They don't care that consumers are getting probably the worst bang for their buck reselling these games via Gamspot. Consumers make their own personal choices, but they do have choices. You can buy used games from tons of places now. It's ridiculously easy.

They care about consumers selling their games. Gamespot is their target because it's the easiest way for consumers to do this. Once that is gone they will pick the next easiest target.

What I don't understand in your statement is that you keep pointing at Gamestop like this is a problem they are causing. They aren't. It's consumers causing this problem. Consumers have these items and they want to sell them. You take gamestop out of the equation and they still want to sell their games and someone is going to fill that niche.

It's like saying that movie kiosks at grocery stores are hurting the movie rental industry...they aren't. Consumers are choosing to spend less money on rentals... There is a demand for this service and the industry is hurting itself by not competing for those dollars. Same with video game sales. The industry is hurting itself by not competing for used game sale dollars. Offer rebates, or discounts, or come up with some way that people can qualify for lower purchase prices if they own older titles.

They aren't competing in any sense in this market. Yet they bitch about how that market is hurting them. They are hurting themselves by not doing something about it.

Personally. And this is just me speaking. Not like anyone cares. =P

But I think used game sales are fine. But if the developers want to have a better shot at at least "lowering" the sale of used games they should consider dropping there prices all together. It seems to me that Steam alone has proven quite successful in selling and even at times outselling there own games when they go on these crazy weekend blow out deals.

But, im no business man so what the hell do I know?

I don't see how they are messing anything up

I was pretty clear in my post so I'm not sure what else you want me to say other than to read it again. They offer shitty consumer value while pissing off the industry. They offer convenience, not good service or value. As a consumer I'd say that's pretty messed up considering they have no competition in many markets. Hopefully all of that will change with Bestbuy and Toys R Us entering the used games market.

Well the good news out of all of this is that PS3 owners can play God of War 1, God of War 2, and God of War 3 all on the PS3, no matter which one you own. The previous 2 are getting a touch up as well in some aspects.

http://kotaku.com/5349447/god-of-war-collection-smooths-gameplay-adds-trophies

That's pretty cool, 60fps and HD. I kinda wish they'd do something like Shadow of the Colossus instead though. GoW's gameplay is fairly replicated these days and the setting isn't terribly interesting anymore. SotC was really unique and deserves an HD remake on the PS3.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 14:58.

gamestop used game sales is bullshit.. i got like $10 for MGS4 after it had only been out for like 1 month, and it was in perfect mint condition, you could shrinkwrap it and not even know

fuck them, im doing ebay from now on

They offer a service, sure. It's just the easiest one. Doesn't make it a good one.

I don't see how they are messing anything up. Selling used games is easier than ever thanx to the rampant success everyone has seen at gamestop. Walmart has opened kiosks, amazon how sells used right along side new on almost every product, it's just one option that people have. I never use it, I can't stand shopping in those stores, but for most consumers that is the only solution they find any value in... I've tryed to point out other options to people who use these trade in programs, like ebay, craigslist, amazon, renting games instead of buying and trading in, I've had almost no success, a lot of people just like that system even with it's ridiculous prices of using it. Probably has a lot to do with how much using a PC is involved in all the other options. If all your gaming is done on a console you might not even own a computer...which is bizarre to me. A pc seems like the first thing I want to own, consoles are secondary. But judging by how sales have been going across platforms "gamers" seem to put the consoles first, and the PC is optional...

I'm definitely not a fan of Gamestop, I just don't see how anything they are doing is hurting consumers. Consumers have all these choices for buying used games because of gamestop's success. As much as they suck (and OMG just walking through the stores makes me want to scream) they improved the market for used game sales by making it so easy for everyone.

Companies like GameStop exist to serve a market that obviously values what they are offering. If it wasn't GameStop, then it would be some other similar service. I personally can't stand GameStop, since they take way too large a cut. I think they'll be supplanted by something more like CraigsList, but targeted towards games/movies/etc eventually.

GameStop sort of serves the same kind of purpose that the dollar serves for people. They make it so that you don't have to find someone who both has what you want, and also wants what you have in order to make the transaction. They do it for a fee. Nothing wrong with that, and it will continue to work as long as people are willing to pay their ridiculous rates for the convenience.

Well the good news out of all of this is that PS3 owners can play God of War 1, God of War 2, and God of War 3 all on the PS3, no matter which one you own. The previous 2 are getting a touch up as well in some aspects.

http://kotaku.com/5349447/god-of-war-collection-smooths-gameplay-adds-trophies

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 14:06.

Gamestop is not messing anything up for the consumer

I don't really agree with you Tumbler but I respect your opinion. Personally I think Gamestop offers horrible value and if you look at TIV charts you'll usually see they offer the least value. Gamestop was the first and simply the most successful at proliferating in North America. Their main offering is one of convenience, it's easy to find a Gamestop. Make no mistake though, that game you traded in for $20 at Gamestop would probably fetch $25-30 anywhere else and that copy of Batman they sold you for $35 would be $30 anywhere else.

They offer a service, sure. It's just the easiest one. Doesn't make it a good one.

Screw them if they don't like us selling/trading used games. They've spent the last few decades lobbying for more and more ways to screw people. Think I'll shed a tear for them now?

Well I mean, I agree with you man but in the end I do also want the people who make the games I love to be adequately compensated. I'm not saying we should be throwing monies at EA or something but I think there's a decent compromise in there somewhere for COMMERCIAL used games sales. Personal used games should be left alone as they were never the problem to begin with.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 14:00.

I can't really see an inbetween because corporations like Gamestop will get involved in any gray area and mess things up for both the consumer and publishers.

Gamestop is not messing anything up for the consumer. They are offering a service people want for a fee. (an absurd fee in my opinion but some people want to pay it...) Amazon offers it, ebay offers it, craigslist offers it, you neighbor offers it.

I hope people realize there is no gray area, it would break the basic ownership rules that go along with retail transactions if you somehow won a court case that said a EULA superseded a consumers ownership of a product purchased. And consumers would get ass-raped overnight by At&t and apple if that court case won. They'd seize every iphone they could that wasn't complying with their EULA (you can only use it on At&t's network for 8 years? something insane like that).

The reason that gray area doesn't exist is to protect consumers. If companies were allowed to put conditions on ownership of goods sold consumers would basically get robbed anytime the company felt like it. (assuming they wanted to continue to own that item legally)

Movie theaters don't technically sell anything other than a ticket stub, that stub is virtually worthless after you use it one time but you can sell that stub...but who would buy it? But that stub is YOUR PROPERTY. If someone were to try and take that from you, as ridiculous as it sounds, that is theft.

In regard to games the publishers has every right to stop people from duplicating the product and selling boot-leg copies. But they are the ones creating and packaging these stand alone games that function without any outside involvement. (mostly console games now) Once those items are sold there is no gray area. That plastic box, disc, manual, every physical item is the property of the buyer. There is no gray area. It belongs 100% to the buyer. He or she can use that, resell, it let friends play it, let friends borrow it, it's no different than a pencil sitting on the table. It's a physical item, it belongs to the buyer.

Support for the software is another matter. Patches, updates, online gameplay, all those things are not usually just part of the game as they've been in the past and continues to change. Online MMO's, online activation, etc.

Just to summarize. There is no gray area. There is only illusion and deception by publishers and developers in order to try and defraud the public. Any physical item you buy is yours. You can resell it legally in every case. You buy a Xbox live 12 month subscription card. That is your card. You can resell it. You use the code on the card, you can still resell the card. The physical property is not owner with conditions. There is physical property that is owned with condition, Real Estate can only be legally owned if you pay taxes to the government. Cars can only be legally owned if you pay registration fees to the government, but I'm not aware of any product that is illegal to own without paying funds back to the seller unless a contract is signed. Without a contract ownership is assumed 100% when a purchase happens. (In the case that ownership is not 100% you might refer to this as a rental, or a rental agreement? Either way the contract is there to protect the seller as much as the buyer, without a SIGNED contract it's assumed the buyer gets the item 100%.)

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 13:37.

Basically gaming exists in this strange gray area of intellectual IP and physical property. It's not quite the same as movies or music as there's the whole EULA/TOS aspect in every game manual. With movies and music, you're only forbidden from retail reproduction and even that's just the actual IP law, not any "contract" with a publisher or developer.

This is what infuriates me about the whole copyright debate and "intellectual property" in general. They get a virtually eternal monopoly on any work they create, with all sorts of rights and control over what people can and cannot do with it. Then they try to take it an extra few miles and include a 20-page EULA with every piece of software that you supposedly have to agree to on top of it all. Nevermind that you don't get to read it before you buy the thing, and even when you do get to read it, most software puts it in some ridiculous 4 to 8 line box that causes blindness before you get more than 3 paragraphs into the thing. They tell you that if you don't agree to the terms, then you have no rights to use the product, but then they generally won't give you your money back either. Fucking awesome racket they've got going, right?

Screw them if they don't like us selling/trading used games. They've spent the last few decades lobbying for more and more ways to screw people. Think I'll shed a tear for them now?

What is fair about me selling a game to my neighbor, a game I bought for $60, and the developer and publisher needing to be compensated for that sale?

Read the rest of my post bro

Basically gaming exists in this strange gray area of intellectual IP and physical property. It's not quite the same as movies or music as there's the whole EULA/TOS aspect in every game manual. With movies and music, you're only forbidden from retail reproduction and even that's just the actual IP law, not any "contract" with a publisher or developer.

I think the industry just needs to decide exactly what it is selling me. You're either selling me a piece of property I own and can resell or you're giving me a rental of the property. I can't really see an inbetween because corporations like Gamestop will get involved in any gray area and mess things up for both the consumer and publishers.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 12:39.

According to this "article"
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/49982/David-Jaffe-Promises-To-Go-Away-Again


He got in a "twitter fight" and decided to refrain from blogging and such for 6 months.

http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/seb/comments/in_which_i_get_into_a_twitter_fight_with_game_developer_david_jaffe/

Here's an article about the "fight".

It isn't fair because they don't get any compensation for it.

What is fair about me selling a game to my neighbor, a game I bought for $60, and the developer and publisher needing to be compensated for that sale?

Are you saying that it would only be fair for me to sell my game if I compensated the developer and publisher? And gaming doesn't exist in a gray area, it's perfectly clear, when I buy the game, it's mine. End of story. You lose all rights and privileges associated with that item when you sell it to me. (The physical game) That stupid EULA is not a contract that is legally enforceable. (Because I have to sign a contract for that to be the case)

What developers and publishers can do is make software that won't function without a link to the developer/publisher and that is what they are doing right now. They can't control me selling the game to my neighbor so they are trying to make the game a worthless item to anyone but me...

So far this has succeeded in me drastically cutting my pc gaming spending to almost nothing. (Actually this is across all PC software, I don't buy anything new anymore. I am still using old copies of office, I'm still on XP, I use programs from 1995 and I'm perfectly happy because I hate this internet activation shit. Constantly needing to verfiy with the "home office" that I'm legit.) I buy $5 games on steam...and I bought that Monkey Island package thing for $34.95. I'll probably buy an expansion for DoW2 if that comes around but every game on the PC that comes along the first thing I look for is DRM.

Fortunately consoles offer almost every game that the PC gets now, few expections but oh well, I'll play something else.

:-edit-:

After reading your comment again it appears we're in agreement, I misunderstood what your first sentence said.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2009, 12:08.

Doesn't matter if you're a national retailer, or just a random guy selling your game on ebay. You're costing them money...by competing with new game sales. And that isn't fair...because...uh...well that part isn't clear...

It isn't fair because they don't get any compensation for it. That's the nature of physical goods though so I'm not quite sure what they were expecting. If you want to sell me something I can't resell then properly label that as a Rental and not a product. Gaming exists in this strange gray area, it's infuriating. I'm fine with renting games but those prices better drop accordingly.