Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

HotHardware - If You Resell Your Used Games, The Terrorists Win. Thanks Ant via Slashdot.
Both Browne and Braben conflate hating GameStop (a thoroughly reasonable life choice) with the supposed evils of the used games market. Braben goes so far as to claim that used games are actually responsible for high game prices and that "prices would have come down long ago if the industry was getting a share of the resells." Amazingly, no game publishers have stepped forward to publicly pledge themselves to lower game prices in exchange for a cut of used game sales.

42. Re: Op Ed Apr 24, 2012, 01:56 Kabuto
Jerykk wrote on Apr 24, 2012, 00:12:

So you're saying that people wouldn't buy new games if there was no ability to resell them? The tremendous growth of digital distribution says otherwise. The notion that the industry would collapse were it not for used sales is fairly absurd. If used sales were abolished, life would go on as usual. There was a time when you could buy used PC games. Did PC gaming die when CD-keys and activations effectively killed the used PC game market? Nope. Do you really think that the console market would fare any differently? People can complain about consumer rights and entitlements all they want but at the end of the day, they'll still buy the games they want to play.

Talk about a straw man....
We are specifically talking about the subset of buyers who choose to resell their games, which considering the amount of business GameStop does, is quite significant.
Those buyers absolutely factor in the ability to resell into their purchasing decisions.

I don't remember making any argument regarding the collapse of the industry.
Personally, I think consoles could transition to an all digital market place if they learn from the pc side and copy the steam model of aggressive pricing. Unfortunately though, I bet they will simply try to use their closed marketplaces to price gouge consumers by offering less value for the same dollar amount. To be fair though, I was pessimistic about steam as well, and I have to admit that turned out great for consumers.

I already covered this one. Publishers and developers don't exist as one single conglomerate with shared profits. Buying a used copy of Psychonauts so you can afford to buy a new copy of CoD2012 does not help Double-Fine. It helps Activision and Infinity Ward/Treyarch. Different developers, different publishers. Even if you bought two games from the same developer and publisher, the used sale would negate the new one (provided the games had the same value at the same of purchase).

Again, you're are focusing on a single transaction. In a future transaction someone may end up trading in CoD2012 and purchasing a new copy of double fine adventure when it is released. Things balance out, the money stays in circulation within the industry. Piracy simply creates a new copy that otherwise wouldn't exist, no value is added, no revenue will be derived past, present or future.

This ability exists with new copies of games as well. However, when someone buys a new copy and DLC, the publisher/developer sees revenue from both the sale of the game AND the sale of the DLC

I thought we were discussing the difference between used games and piracy, the fact that you can buy dlc with a new game is irrelevent.

Ironically, many of your arguments can be applied to piracy as well. If you pirate a copy of Psychonauts, you'll save even more money which makes it even easier to buy a new copy of CoD2012. If you pirate a game and enjoy it, but can't get access to the DLC, you might be compelled to buy the full game. I know that having Steam automatically download patches and DLC is a lot more convenient than having to hunt down cracked patches and DLC. And if you're really concerned about saving money, piracy offers a means to try games that you'd otherwise never buy or at most wait until they hit the bargain bin (at which point neither the publisher nor developer sees negligible revenue). Who knows, if a pirate really likes a game, he might just buy it

See, it's very easy to make a broad argument full of convenient assumptions. Unfortunately, those assumptions can't really be supported by enough facts to provide the foundation of a strong argument. You need to focus in things that can be supported by facts. Like the fact that publishers and developers see no revenue from used or pirated games

I've presented numerous facts, that I doubt any fair minded person would dispute.
The one Incontrovertible fact still remains that every copy of a game in circulation new or used has provided its publisher/developer compensation. Whereas no compensation has been received past, present or future for a pirated copy.
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
    Date Subject Author
  1. Apr 21, 16:35 Re: Op Ed CommunistHamster
  4. Apr 21, 19:19  Re: Op Ed Draugr
  2. Apr 21, 16:58 Re: Op Ed space captain
  3. Apr 21, 19:13 Re: Op Ed Dev
  5. Apr 21, 19:31  Re: Op Ed Draugr
  6. Apr 21, 20:06   Re: Op Ed NKD
  9. Apr 21, 23:04    Re: Op Ed Draugr
  10. Apr 21, 23:49    Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  14. Apr 22, 04:18     Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  17. Apr 22, 07:59      Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  25. Apr 23, 00:47       Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  26. Apr 23, 01:28        Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  27. Apr 23, 01:49         Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  28. Apr 23, 02:57          Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  30. Apr 23, 03:35           Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  32. Apr 23, 04:20            Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  33. Apr 23, 04:54             Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  34. Apr 23, 07:08              Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  37. Apr 23, 12:30               Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  38. Apr 23, 18:23                Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  39. Apr 23, 20:29                 Re: Op Ed Sepharo
  40. Apr 23, 23:15                  Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  41. Apr 24, 00:12                 Re: Op Ed Jerykk
>> 42. Apr 24, 01:56                  Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  44. Apr 24, 03:14                   Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  47. Apr 24, 03:35                    Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  49. Apr 24, 17:17                     Re: Op Ed Dev
  48. Apr 24, 05:28                    Re: Op Ed Kabuto
  51. Apr 25, 03:27                     Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  43. Apr 24, 03:08                Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  45. Apr 24, 03:21                 Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  46. Apr 24, 03:32                  Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  50. Apr 25, 03:09                   Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  52. Apr 25, 13:42                    Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  53. Apr 26, 01:27                     Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  35. Apr 23, 07:36              Re: Op Ed NKD
  36. Apr 23, 10:00               Re: Op Ed Beamer
  29. Apr 23, 03:07          Re: Op Ed PHJF
  23. Apr 22, 22:40      Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  24. Apr 23, 00:12       Re: Op Ed NKD
  31. Apr 23, 04:12        Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  13. Apr 22, 02:19    Re: Op Ed StingingVelvet
  15. Apr 22, 05:15    Re: Op Ed Kajetan
  18. Apr 22, 09:24    Re: Op Ed psulli
  19. Apr 22, 11:46     Re: Op Ed StingingVelvet
  21. Apr 22, 12:14     Re: Op Ed NKD
  22. Apr 22, 15:40     impressive! space captain
  7. Apr 21, 21:01 Re: Op Ed Ruffiana
  8. Apr 21, 22:11  ear against the wall space captain
  11. Apr 21, 23:51 letter to control about the big brother space captain
  12. Apr 22, 00:44  Re: letter to control about the big brother Agent.X7
  20. Apr 22, 11:55   Re: letter to control about the big brother Parallax Abstraction
  16. Apr 22, 06:27  Re: letter to control about the big brother Ruffiana


Blue's News logo