Let's pretend for a moment that Valve or Blizzard decides to get big into console sales and says it's a big issue. Put it into an objective light and see what you come up with. I'm genuinely interested in people's opinions and seeing if that changes their thoughts at all. Ignore the usual "EA is the evil empire" type stuff for a moment and pretend it's your favorite publisher. What would people say if this were Stardock? I'm serious, I'm interested if that changes people's perspective at all on this.

OK cool, let's do that then. Alrighty, let's say I have a copy of Blizzard's Diablo II + LoD that they updated for PS3 support for some strange reason. So Blizzard made money from me on that copy of D2. I finish the game and decide I have no desire to play it again. I take it to EB and they give me $20 for it. I see that Diablo 3 is on the shelf (again on the PS3 for some reason) and it's $60. As much as I like Blizzard and Diablo, I'm not going to pay $60 out of pocket for a game. BUT WAIT! I just got $20 for selling my copy of D2...$40 is a much more reasonable expense. I walk out of the store with a copy of D3.

So:

I am happy because I got a new game at a discount.

EB is happy because they not only made a sale for a new game, but also can resell the used one.

Blizzard is happy because, even though they lost a sale of an old game, they made a sale of a brand new one. While they don't get the opportunity to make the sale of 3 brand new games...they wouldn't have anyway had I not gotten a "discount" on D3 by selling D2.


No one loses

________________________________________________
Have a nice day
|
|
V

I officially declare this thread unfit for consumption

-----
http://www.gamemusicjukebox.com/
Game p/reviewer for http://www.gameindustry.com/

Let's pretend for a moment that Valve or Blizzard decides to get big into console sales and says it's a big issue. Put it into an objective light and see what you come up with. I'm genuinely interested in people's opinions and seeing if that changes their thoughts at all. Ignore the usual "EA is the evil empire" type stuff for a moment and pretend it's your favorite publisher. What would people say if this were Stardock? I'm serious, I'm interested if that changes people's perspective at all on this.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:43.

Waaaaah, Congress, people are taking a product they bought and are reselling it without paying us a big fat share. Waaaaah.

So yeah, EA, you need to go more online and offer more "services." Which in your case means : half the levels, a save feature, and actual keyboard support. All for the low price of $19,99 each!

Come on Creston, I've read your previous posts and I know you're smarter than that my friend. It's not about getting a big share, they're getting no share at all. Zero, zip, nadda. Not just EA but the developer too. Fine people hate EA but the developer is on the same totem pole too.

I hope someone will legally challenge the strange notion that buying something online doesn't result in your owning it.

Game publishers have already tried that shit with physical media, claiming that customers aren't really buying "a game" but rather non-transferable permission to play the game. . . which they don't own. . . in spite of having payed for it. But the courts would have none of that flawed logic. Why should non-physical media be any different?

Few people remember this, but there was also a legal battle over game rental when video stores first cough on to the idea. At the time game companies claimed that no one would have any reason to ever buy games if they could just go out and rent them. And that game rental would certainly mean the death of their industry, and the loss of thousands of jobs. Again, courts had to reaffirm the rights of the consumer to actually own what they have purchased.

I do remember what you're talking about and I definitely agree that there needs to be a legal clarification either way here to put the whole issue to bed.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:33.

Waaaaah, Congress, people are taking a product they bought and are reselling it without paying us a big fat share. Waaaaah.

So yeah, EA, you need to go more online and offer more "services." Which in your case means : half the levels, a save feature, and actual keyboard support. All for the low price of $19,99 each!

Creston

I hope someone will legally challenge the strange notion that buying something online doesn't result in your owning it.

Game publishers have already tried that shit with physical media, claiming that customers aren't really buying "a game" but rather non-transferable permission to play the game. . . which they don't own. . . in spite of having payed for it. But the courts would have none of that flawed logic. Why should non-physical media be any different?

Few people remember this, but there was also a legal battle over game rental when video stores first cough on to the idea. At the time game companies claimed that no one would have any reason to ever buy games if they could just go out and rent them. And that game rental would certainly mean the death of their industry, and the loss of thousands of jobs. Again, courts had to reaffirm the rights of the consumer to actually own what they have purchased.

So we've got two so far, certainly a far cry from the "record profits" he was talking about

Ahh, we 're going into semantics now, are we?

Ativision and Konami are certainly in the black...as were Vivendi/Blizzard before the merger.

Activision did indeed make $52mil, so theres one. Konami made $5mil if I'm reading this Japanese income statement correctly. Vivendi traditionally loses money and Blizzard is what keeps them solvent. Of course Activision/Blizzard are the same company now anyways.

So we've got two so far, certainly a far cry from the "record profits" he was talking about

Now, what publishers are recording these record profits?

Hmmm, let's see ... Nintendo looks happy. And Activision looks happy. Even Ubisoft looks happy. They are all making good profits, despite of the evil of used game sales. How does used game sales screw them? Ohhh, perhaps it's all about potential losses, if only everyone had bought new games instead of used games? Yes, if only ... i would be Overlord of Earth!

I don't see Ubisoft financials for 2007 anywhere, going back previously years they lost money by the way. Obviously you're inferring what you want to here. It doesn't really matter what EA said, you'd twist it somehow. You seem more interested in making sure EA looks bad as opposed to the ramifications this stuff has on the industry.

The difference between you and me is that I don't care about EA at all, so I don't let it affect my judgement. I don't see EA in the news and automatically leap to troll them. You apparently have some stake in bashing on them, I have no clue why. They're just a faceless company man.

As for Gamestop not being the issue, they are exactly the issue. Gamestop and big resellers like it are the entire reason this discussion is taking place.
This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:28.

Now, what publishers are recording these record profits?

Hmmm, let's see ... Nintendo looks happy. And Activision looks happy. Even Ubisoft looks happy. They are all making good profits, despite of the evil of used game sales. How does used game sales screw them? Ohhh, perhaps it's all about potential losses, if only everyone had bought new games instead of used games? Yes, if only ... i would be Overlord of Earth!

I'm sure you're happy getting any money but you'd get a lot more just selling it directly to other people.

I am not talking especially about Gamestop. I am talking about used game sales in general. EA is not talking about Gamestop, they are talking about used games sales in general. Bashing Gamestop is only a distraction.

[... and now i have to go to bed. You have to wait til morning in my timezone, if you want my answer to your answer )
This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:22.

Now, what publishers are recording these record profits? Name them or provide links. I certainly haven't heard of many beyond Valve and their financials are closed, they're a privately held company so we can't know for certain.

Ativision and Konami are certainly in the black...as were Vivendi/Blizzard before the merger.



________________________________________________
Have a nice day
|
|
V

Because of used sales? Why is it, that other publisher are making huge profits? Strange indeed ... does Gamestop only trade in used EA games?

There's no one thing you can blame it on. It's always a variety of things. Did you read the article? He's not blaming second hand sales for the industries woes. He's saying it's harmful and growing rapidly, which it is.

Now, what publishers are recording these record profits? Name them or provide links. I certainly haven't heard of many beyond Valve and their financials are closed, they're a privately held company so we can't know for certain. I guess there's Epic but most of their money comes from licensing their engine, not publishing. In fact the only one that comes to mind readily is Blizzard.

How exactly does this screw publishers, devs and me as a customer, if i could trade in my old games to buy new ones? If i can't sell/trade in my old games, i surely will buy a LOT less new (!) games. And THAT does hurt publishers and devs. Only them, not me. I can live without games. It's just luxury, not necessity.

People have already mentioned how it screws devs and publisher so I'm not going to retread that. It screws you because they severely undervalue your property and flip it for a large profit. I'm sure you're happy getting any money but you'd get a lot more just selling it directly to other people. The only thing that Gamestop offers that's beneficial is convenience in selling your stuff.

EA publishes some of the best selling games in the world (sims, rockband, madden, NFS). They don't have a sales problem...they have a management problem.

Well that's easy to say, perhaps you have a solution to offer then. What exactly are they mismanaging? Walk right into EA HQ and straighten them out!

For the most part I don't even purchase EA games personally, they've really let me down in the past. But they have a valid point here that's applicable to the whole industry and some people here are apparently just too anti-EA to care. EA could keel over tomorrow and this issue would still be a problem for the industry as a whole.


This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:16.

EA publishes some of the best selling games in the world (sims, rockband, madden, NFS). They don't have a sales problem...they have a management problem.

They keep up their bullshit act though and they WILL have a sales problem.

________________________________________________
Have a nice day
|
|
V

EA lost money last year

Because of used sales? Why is it, that other publisher are making huge profits? Strange indeed ... does Gamestop only trade in used EA games?

screwing the following people: publishers, developers and consumers.

How exactly does this screw publishers, devs and me as a customer, if i could trade in my old games to buy new ones? If i can't sell/trade in my old games, i surely will buy a LOT less new (!) games. And THAT does hurt publishers and devs. Only them, not me. I can live without games. It's just luxury, not necessity.

This is NOT unique to this market. Books, Barbells, and Barbies do not degrade, either. In fact, Books, Barbells and Barbies probably degrade a lot less!

So the only critical situation is Mr. Uwe's lack of reasoning, and a press that is uncritical of such bizarre statements.

So how many development studios did EA buy out and subsequently run into the ground this year to post a losing statement?

I haven't looked at their 2008 quarterly statements so I have no idea. Often times companies write down those liabilities towards future years, I have no idea if they did that in 2007. Most of their big purchases were from 2004 to 2006, at least thats when I remember being really pissed at them for buying up my favorite devs

So how many development studios did EA buy out and subsequently run into the ground this year to post a losing statement?

________________________________________________
Have a nice day
|
|
V

So ... they're just angry, because Gamestop and others were smarter and faster?

No, they're just angry someone figured out a way to game the system, screwing the following people: publishers, developers and consumers. So you can bet they're going to change things, all of this press right now is saber rattling to let Gamestop now that they're not happy and probably going to do something about it.

I also wonder, if used game sales are so terrible, why do publishers make record profit after record profit?

EA lost money last year bud, their financial statements are available right here - http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&q=NASDAQ:ERTS

They're not alone either. Take-Two lost a lot of money. GTA4 will help for 2008 but investors don't love blips, they love consistency. I haven't looked up Ubisoft but I suspect they probably did too. In fact it's actually easier to list the publishers who made money because there were a lot less than those who lost large amounts

If you're not familiar with financial statements then you're looking for the "Net Income" which is your profits after deducting all of your operating expenses. A negative figure denotes a Net Loss, which means you lost money.

A market can grow and companies still lose money, market growth has nothing to do with whether or not you are profitable. Market growth denotes a potential for product growth and the potential for more profits as a result, it doesn't automatically mean the whole industry is making profits. There's a difference between the industry being worth $3 billion and people making $3 billion in profits. The whole industry could be worth $20bil and all companies involved could still manage to lose money in theory. Welcome to the shitty world of financial reality, it sucks!

They can cut their operating expenses to compensate but that will affect game quality, which many of you say is already unsatisfactory to begin with.


This comment was edited on Aug 28, 20:01.

Next you'll gogamer.com's 48 hr madness is a serious threat.

They'd have to establish brick and mortar stores across the various countries where companies like GameStop are well entrenched. You're talking hundreds of millions of dollars just to get setup to take them on. That's probably why they are hesitant I suspect.

So ... they're just angry, because Gamestop and others were smarter and faster?

I also wonder, if used game sales are so terrible, why do publishers make record profit after record profit? Why does the overall video game business grow with nearly two digit percent every fuckin year? Do used game sales really hurt the business? Or are they integral part of this business, because it enables customers to free the money, spend on already played games, to buy new ones?

Automobile companies have no problem with used car sales. They embrace them. Other industry businesses have no problem with used sales. They embrace them, they participate, they make more money in encouraging it.

But software publishers? Nooooo, it's EVIL!!! Beware, beware!

Stupid fucks ...

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 19:47.

By the way, comparing rentals to resales is beyond ignorant. Rental companies are required to pay extra for copies of media that they intend to rent out for commercial gains, thus the game companies get a cut. Games stores that bought a copy of a used game back off you and resell it to another person are not presently in the same situation, though they sure as hell should be.

Great post, this is totally true and I hope EA considers doing it. If Gamestop wants to resell copies, make them pay an extra licensing fee or something.