It's worth pointing out that for the last few years EA has been pulling the plug on most of their titles after only a year or two.

Pay near full price for an old used game and then have EA pull the plug on it and make it worthless right after you buy it ? I don't think so.

Online activation is garbage. Remember companies like Trygames/Trymedia ? All those people who payed for online activation are now completely out of luck now that Real Networks bought them out and stopped supporting most of their titles. They are by no means alone and even more will follow.

The only way I'd even buy a non-resalable game is if the purchase price was 10-20% of a normal game.

Jebus... you people are so eager to bash that you don't even bother to read. First, he's absolutely right that game stores reselling games is a direct rip off from the game's developers as the stores bank every penny and don't have to give a cent to any suppliers that would trickle down to the publisher and developer.

Second, he never once... NOT ONCE... I'll repeat, just so MAYBE you'll read it, NOT FREAKING ONCE EVER... did he say he was going to make games that are unable to be sold second hand. What he said was that they were trying to build games that are more online supported with additional services and additional content that you get online so people will see the value in buying the game. They're trying to give more advantages to people who bought the game responsibly rather than those who tried to save five or ten bucks by buying it in a way that gives the developer nothing.

People can bitch and moan all they like, but frankly people who buy used games and claim to be gamers or people who care about the video game industry disgust me. Spend the extra $5 and support the development companies, not just the vendors.

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.

I wonder ... why do publisher not tap into this market, if companies like Gamestop are so "evil" in making lots of profit from used game sales. Just start selling and buying used games too, make an alliance with other publishers or simply buy Gamestop.

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.

Gamestop offers something customers want that you can provide but refuse to. A return policy. It's a shitty return policy that takes a big chunk out of the consumers wallet but it's the only way for most consumers to return a game they don't like.

Not sure why you're saying "you", I can't offer anyone a return policy, I'm not even in the industry. I think you have a valid point but it's impossible for EA to compete with them. What GameStop really offers is convenience, you can drive down to a local one and trade in your crap for bling. You can't drive down to EA and do that.

Offer a return policy on your games or stop selling to gamestop. Can't have your cake and eat it too, sorry.

Sure I can, you do it all the time in here

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 19:34.

Exactly. GameStop gets to make out like a bandit and everyone else involved gets screwed. Big businesses entering the resale market is the problem, they don't care if Joe Bob sells Mike a copy of Mass Effect on Ebay. User to user stuff isn't the concern here and that's the point some of you are missing. They aren't looking to remove your right to sell your game, they don't want Gamestop going out to buy 20 copies and reselling them 2000 times. That screws you and EA both, the only person smiling is GameStop.

You don't have to sell your game to gamestop. You can refuse to do business with them if this is such a problem. But there is no way in hell you'd do that because you'd lose too much money.

Gamestop offers something customers want that you can provide but refuse to. A return policy. It's a shitty return policy that takes a big chunk out of the consumers wallet but it's the only way for most consumers to return a game they don't like.

Offer a return policy on your games or stop selling to gamestop. Can't have your cake and eat it too, sorry.

The only people who get money in this scenario are the GameStop rapists.

I wonder ... why do publisher not tap into this market, if companies like Gamestop are so "evil" in making lots of profit from used game sales. Just start selling and buying used games too, make an alliance with other publishers or simply buy Gamestop.

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

He points out that games have a unique problem compared to most other goods sold on secondary markets because they do not degrade with use.

hmmm - are game discs made of some indestructible material that never scratches or wears down?? no - no theyre not

also, they want us to believe that a game made 10 years ago is just as good as a game made yesterday?

w t f are these assholes smoking - i think they want people to pirate more, they are just asking for retaliation at this point

Seriously - You are like EA. In fact, I would be amazed if You WASNT EA.

Is this even English? Wow.

And yes, your analogue is amazingly stupid. In what way is selling ANYTHING second hand NOT also selling intellectual property? Used books? Used designer furniture? Used... Art?

Well I'll tell you how it's unlike those things - you can't copy a book easily without access to a machine to bind it. You can't rebuild furniture without being skilled at wood handling and lading. You can't reproduce art without being an artist.

And Yet - You still want to SELL something.
Well. If I cant sell somehting, then I do not own it. If I do not own it, I lease or rent it. If I lease or rent anything, I pay at the most 1/10 of the resale price.

That works in a physical commodity market, it isn't so successful in an intellectual property market. Which is the whole point of this discussion, let me know I'm going too fast for you here champ.

So fair is fair. I would be willing to relinquish my right to sell second hand, if I can rent a new release from You for 6$ and play it to completion.

This has nothing to do with my post at all. In fact, I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make.

Good point.

Consider GameStop and their used games. Sometimes it's only 5 bucks cheaper than a full retail version, but people buy it anyway.

Lets say its a recent title, so its used value is high. $54.99 retail, $44.99 used. Someone buys it used to save 10 bucks, but the publisher "loses" $55. Steep cost, and the person might as well have just pirated the thing. The only people who get money in this scenario are the GameStop rapists.

Exactly. GameStop gets to make out like a bandit and everyone else involved gets screwed. Big businesses entering the resale market is the problem, they don't care if Joe Bob sells Mike a copy of Mass Effect on Ebay. User to user stuff isn't the concern here and that's the point some of you are missing. They aren't looking to remove your right to sell your game, they don't want Gamestop going out to buy 20 copies and reselling them 2000 times. That screws you and EA both, the only person smiling is GameStop. GameStop and companies like it screw you on trade-in value, they screw you on the cash value and then turn it around after you walk out - jacking the price up 50-75% what they paid you for it.

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

I'd argue that second-hand sales are actually worse than piracy. With second-hand sales, you at least have a proof that somebody was actually willing to pay for a copy. That's much closer to being a lost sale than some copy casually downloaded off the net.

Good point.

Consider GameStop and their used games. Sometimes it's only 5 bucks cheaper than a full retail version, but people buy it anyway.

Lets say its a recent title, so its used value is high. $54.99 retail, $44.99 used. Someone buys it used to save 10 bucks, but the publisher "loses" $55. Steep cost, and the person might as well have just pirated the thing. The only people who get money in this scenario are the GameStop rapists.

If I owned any stock in EA, I'd be selling it right about now.

If anyone out there is watching, I want to say something very important:

I have money. I would like to spend it on video games. Good video games. Games that don't have DRM. Games that don't require me to log on to some online service to play. Games that aren't just Generic Sports Game #9. Please, would someone make a good game like this so that I can willingly and cheerfully give you my money in exchange for it? I certainly won't give my money to companies like EA, so don't be like that ok? I'm not a criminal, I'm your customer. Hello? Is this thing on??

I've always felt that the game resale market was a bigger potential problem for publishers than piracy could ever be. True that piracy possibly has bigger numbers but you cannot equate every pirated copy as a lost sale. But you CAN equate every resale transaction as a lost sale for the publisher since the retailer collects 100% of that transaction. Plus factor in that every game sold as resale may be sold MULTIPLE TIMES. The person who pays money for a resale game obviously was willing to buy the game but not at the price it originally retailed for. I think that says a lot more about the state of game sales than possibly made-up piracy numbers.

How does a story like this get out... so utterly ridiculous to even say out loud, let alone have the public (paying customers hear).

What next, EA is going to remove all it's console titles from movie rental shops next?

The only way I'd even buy a non-resalable game is if the purchase price was 10-20% of a normal game.
This comment was edited on Aug 28, 19:09.

> With second-hand sales, you at least have a proof that somebody was actually willing to pay for a copy.

Except that they weren't willing to pay the price offered. You might even argue that for some people the ability to resell the game is going to affect how much they're willing to pay. If they can't resell their games then they won't buy them either.

Of course then there's additional markets that spring up around games that will have a smaller number of customers: websites, strategy guides, peripheral makers, etc.

In the end adapting these restrictive business models will hurt the industry.

I'd argue that second-hand sales are actually worse than piracy. With second-hand sales, you at least have a proof that somebody was actually willing to pay for a copy. That's much closer to being a lost sale than some copy casually downloaded off the net.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

You could make an argument that if you believe piracy is wrong, then you must too believe that buying a second hand game is wrong. They both have the same outcome, only different motivations and means.

I'd argue that second-hand sales are actually worse than piracy. With second-hand sales, you at least have a proof that somebody was actually willing to pay for a copy. That's much closer to being a lost sale than some copy casually downloaded off the net.

I'm not selling the software or even the rights to the software. I'm selling the physical disc(s), manual(s) and packaging. What the purchaser of those physical products does with them after they leave my hands is NOT my responsibility.

Your move EA.

________________________________________________
Have a nice day
|
|
V

Well that just sums up all the reasons why EA sucks. There's another one!

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

if I can rent a new release from You for 6$ and play it to completion.

This is why I spend more on console gaming these days. I can rent a full game for about $6 and play it to completion.

I'd love it PC game companies offered something similar. Until they do the $20+ dollars a month I spend on gamefly will keep going to someone else when it could go to them.

Seriously - You are like EA. In fact, I would be amazed if You WASNT EA.

And yes, your analogue is amazingly stupid. In what way is selling ANYTHING second hand NOT also selling intellectual property? Used books? Used designer furniture? Used... Art?

And Yet - You still want to SELL something.
Well. If I cant sell somehting, then I do not own it. If I do not own it, I lease or rent it. If I lease or rent anything, I pay at the most 1/10 of the resale price.

So fair is fair. I would be willing to relinquish my right to sell second hand, if I can rent a new release from You for 6$ and play it to completion.

Deal?

Thought not.

Fool.

This comment was edited on Aug 28, 17:58.

Seriously EA is not the bad guy here for a change

No, of course not ... silly us. How could we ...

So buying a second hand game is equal to pirating huh? That does actually sound about right.

This is sarcasm right? How would this be considered piracy?

When you buy something, it's yours. You can do what you like with it, including sell it to someone else. Don't throw some bullshit contract in front of me that says anything otherwise because unless I sign it there isn't shit you can do to enforce that contract.

Developers are free to set the most ridiculous rules imaginable for their games and the ONLY thing they can do legally is refuse to support you if you don't abide by it. Without a signature they have NO say in how you use that software. It's a generic license designed for anyone. If they want to make people sign contracts when they buy games, go for it. I'll be sitting there with popcorn watching.