Who cares whether Mark is full of it if he thinks developers deserve a cut of used games sales? They certainly don't. The point is that used game sales, as they are being carried out right now, hurt the game industry (particularly the developers) and that having the retail chain expand this practice is only going to make it worse.

The idea that the profit margin for used games, to the retailer, is the same as for new (mentioned by someone) is ridiculous. It is vastly larger (the cost of aquisition and "repackaging" is minimal but not very reducable) and none of that money goes to publishers or developers.

People may get up in arms over how publishers make so much and rip off developers anyway, but how are developers supposed to survive if they get only a small fraction of their games sales to begin with then watch that erode as 'new' sales erode away? Digital distribution is a joke. Already everyone whines about Steam and play per play and that is supposed to be a solution? And what about the fact that roughly half the US market still doesn't have broadband or the fact that games are getting bigger and bigger? Please. A solution for one wealthy developer is not a solution for the whole industry.

The reason resale markets exist is because game prices are too high. No one complains about the DVD resale market or music resale markets because those items are priced fairly reasonable when new. Large sales mean that their is a huge potential supply of used copies but who is buying if everyone could afford them when new? Also the larger market means prices for used copies can't get too high since there is so much potential competition.

Even games after they have been out a few years fall into this category (i.e. discount bins and racks, etc.). The problem is that new releases are priced so exorbitantly compared to the value they deliver, that retailers have found a way to cash in. Back when VHS was new movies cost $80 and more, until movie studios realized that they were driving a rental/used trade and could instead profit if they sold to everyone at a much cheaper price.

If games were priced the same way DVDs were ($14-25) with titles spread out (instead of all new being $25) then you'd start to see the used market become less relevant. After all aquisition and repacking are costs not easily lowered for used, and the increase in supply of used copies (due to more new being purchased) means that prices for used can't be pushed all the way up to the limits of new as they currently are. There will always be used games, but the market will be healthier if sales are up and more of the inital revenue flows back to developers.

I have argued this with friends for the last few years as I watched the space devoted to new titles dry up at EB and watched them continously push used over new. The stores have gotten sloppier and uglier (used stuff all over) and from what I have seen Gamestop is even worse (started the trend I think). Ever wonder where they come up with all that money to merge?

Obviously retailers are in it to make money, but it is sad to see EB and Gamestop screw over the industry that helped to make them. BB is just trying to keep its fingers in the pie (having many other departments). Perhaps Walmart will ride in to the 'rescue' and demand huge cost cuts from publishers to stock their titles, but then again I wouldn't expect them to pass on the savings unless publishers pushed to lower MSRPs too.

Anyway, I think everyone should realize that the game industry could still stumble into a major downturn despite its size and be supportive by buying games new not used. Even if it is in the discount bin or cheapo rack, something gets back to developers, unlike used.


This comment was edited on Oct 1, 18:56.