

The Real Cost of Used Games - hythloday
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-04-12-the-real-cost-of-used-games

======
Paul_S
Articles that start with "I've been in the industry for x years" usually end
with "waahhh, I don't like changing my business model". Don't want a second
hand market? Use digital distribution. Oh, I forgot, you've been in the
industry for x years and they didn't have digital distribution back then
(except of course for BBSs and programs broadcast by terrestrial TV and even
satellites).

I like the changes the industry is going through now - like crowd-sourcing.
Gamers taking back the market from non-gamers or at least cutting out a
substantial niche for themselves again.

Speaking of wasting money and developer time. Do you know what's a complete
and counterproductive waste of money? DRM. And you want more of it.

------
tomgallard
The author makes the point that consumers purchasing used games deprives the
studios of revenues that can be put towards future titles.

But the same could be said of used books, used furniture, used anything!

The only difference is that, with games, it is now technically feasible (I'm
sure IKEA would love it if you couldn't resell their furniture second-hand, so
everyone had to buy directly from them).

It really angers me that this approach is even legal.

~~~
ssdsa
While we clearly see that there is a huge market for used games (see
GameStop), there isn't any comparable market for used books and used
furniture, at least not here in Germany. Every avid reader I know likes to
read new books and cannot stand to read used books coming from some unknown
pre-owner, because you never know how dirty his hands were when he was reading
the book. Ever tried to sell used books on eBay? Don't bother, even if you put
them up for 1 EUR starting price, you end up having more work to do
(communication, check payment, shipping) than you'll earn. And don't get me
started on used furniture. While new furniture can be really expensive, when
you try to sell your previously expensive furniture, nobody wants to buy it.

~~~
dazzawazza
I frequently buy used book from Amazon here in the UK. They are cheaper and
it's good to recycle.

I have a large collection of electronics books which are often expensive and
electronics is only a hobby for me so it's hard to justify the cost. Sometimes
you have to buy second hand books, many of the definitive Z80 books are out of
print.

I started buying second hand books as a child. I wanted books on philosophy
and this was the only way I could own works about Descarte, Locke et al
without begging my parents for tens of pounds (my income way about £1 a week
back then). I've even come to like seeing other peoples notes in the margins.
I often wonder "What are they thinking?" when they highlight different
sections of the text.

------
angusiguess
I'm getting a pretty sensationalist vibe off of this article, it's got the
feeling of something written by a lobbyist.

Used games don't strike me as the cause of game variety disappearing, but
instead the increasingly large amount invested in each individual project,
discouraging all but the safest options.

Playing the violin on behalf of the indies seems disingenuous too, many of
them publish via Steam or online stores of some description, where a used
market can only exist if explicitly enabled.

------
DanBC
The author makes some odd conclusions.

Second hand games allow a user to buy a new game with the safety net of
selling it if they hate it. Preventing me from selling a game I hate means I'm
less likely to risk buying new games.

Surely that means experimental games are less likely?

~~~
josyw
I don't think that the author has concluded that experimental games are less
likely; rather, games without a multiplayer component, such as those pushed by
Tim Schafer, will not be picked up due to the churn.

------
Tichy
There are not even any numbers in the article. What percentage of games bought
are used? In theory one copy could serve all gamers, given infinite time. But
the reality is most people want the latest and greatest and are not gong to
wait for used game to become available.

Also, dear publishers, if you prevent me selling the game, it's price for me
has just increased by the resale value. So don't be surprised if I buy less
games.

------
agentultra
This article seems rather sensationalist -- lack of numbers, doesn't explain
what "churn," is, and draws a strong conclusion from all of it.

Personally I don't see any creativity lacking in the AAA market. They've been
delivering some of the best games they have ever delivered in the last couple
of years. They're not known for "risky," games. Risk to them is a new title
without a number on the end of its name. The kinds of games they're interested
in developing are action-oriented experiences with long story arcs and mascot
characters. I still buy plenty of these games and enjoy them quite a bit.

The only thing that the strong presence of a second-hand market indicates to
me is that price is an issue with consumers. New AAA titles are walking into
the $100 range which will limit the number of games I'll buy in a year
drastically... which if I'm not the only one with a limited budget that thinks
this way... could only mean that the industry will see more "hit" and "miss"
behavior... but without any real _numbers_ it's just speculation, isn't it?

I just hope the console makers aren't using this same speculation to drive the
decision to include new anti-used-games features in the next generation of
consoles.

------
kapowaz
Richard doesn't do himself any favours in how he goes about persuading the
reader of his point. Judging by a lot of the comments here on HN a most people
read the opening couple of paragraphs then drew their own conclusions, which
may or may not have been on the money.

The important take-away point for me (which I've never seen expressed before)
is that so long as publishers are fearful of the pre-owned market, they will
spend (waste?) development resources on features whose sole purpose is to
further retention and disincentivise reselling games. Some of those features
will be fun, but they will potentially alienate some gamers who feel they're
no longer getting good value in their game. Witness how the First-Person
Shooter genre has transitioned from story-based campaigns with a small
multiplayer component into a far more multiplayer-centric experience, with a
short single-player campaign which a lot of gamers simply ignore. Similar
things have happened in other genres too.

Where I find myself disagreeing with Richard is that because GameStop have
‘used the nuclear option’ already, publishers and console manufacturers should
do the same; when your customers are the collateral in this exchange, they
won't thank you for it. We're also in a period of upheaval with videogame
retail (I don't know how well GameStop is doing, but certainly in the UK high
street videogame retailers are dying). Maybe in a few more years’ time the
problem will solve itself, with the majority of customers choosing to buy
direct from online retailers; the tactics that GameStop employs that have such
a dramatic effect can't be employed when you're selling second-hand games
through Amazon.

I can't think of a good interim solution off the top of my head, maybe there
ought to be more stringent laws to prevent retailers from pushing used stock
over new stock, or that they're prohibited from selling used stock at more
than a certain percentage of the cost of new. These ideas probably have holes,
but I'd rather see something along these lines pushed than see consumers be
punished for somebody else's war.

------
Synaesthesia
Physical distribution will soon be dead. $50-60 games at a store is giving way
to $1-20 games online, I don't mind that they're DRM'ed - I'm happy knowing
the developers get a bigger cut and they're affordable.

"The variety of games out there is shrinking" - that's not true! There are
more and more varied games out there than ever before, thanks to the App
Store, Steam, XBOX Live and Wii Shop.

------
celticninja
This guys issue is with gamestop and their retail practices, not with used
games. I buy new games, then when I no longer want them I sell them on ebay or
amazon to fund the purchase of my next games (whether new or used). My used
games I buy from ebay, usually from sellers like me who dont want to get
ripped off trading in my copy for the store to give me pittance and put it
back on the shelf with a £15 mark up on what they paid me for it.

Any system that implements a "no used games" hardware option will see a
resultant drop in sales. When we hear that MS and Sony are looking at less
powerful next gen consoles and selling at cost rather than loss then they are
not going to want to risk taking a hit on sales, especially if only one or the
other does it. If they both do it then that is dangerosuly close to collusion.

------
aw3c2
Another market that goes to
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence> ?

There is a great documentary (from Arte I think) about this, cannot find links
right now.

------
MarkPNeyer
the "cost" this guy attributes to used games has nothing to do with used
games, and everything to do with a culture so controlled by money that making
games fun isn't the point - making money is.

i watched a talk by the head of analytics at zynga, talking about how awesome
their analytics system is, and how much they learned from it. for example,
after a lot of research, they found out that people don't like clicking for no
reason. thanks to that promethian leap of insight, there is now at least a
little bit of attention being paid to how to get people to want to click
things.

most of the internet is funded by advertisement. we use the massive computing
resources at our disposal to learn everything we can about people, not to help
them out, but to find out the best way of convincing them they'll be happier
if they had the New Thing - which is clearly superior to the Old Thing, and
(unlike Old Thing, Older Thing, and Thing Beta) will make them happy.

of course, this is a better use of computing resources than, say, wall street,
which is computing, to fractions of a cent, just how much of other people's
money a room full of wildly shouting cocaine-fueled neanderthals will become
convinced that other rooms of testosterone-addled meatheads will be convinced
that the entire assortment of powerful computers, suit-wearing sociopaths, and
useful idiot politicians that control the world economy will become convinced
about its collective conviction about the upper limit any of its members is
willing exchange for an agreement to exchange three thousand pounds of pork
for $2.25 a pound, in three months time.

oh yeah, and all of them make about 100 times as much as the guy who actually
grows the pigs for a living, who is almost as naive as the guy who wants to
make the game fun, regardless of how much money it makes him.

~~~
CJefferson
> the "cost" this guy attributes to used games has nothing to do with used
> games, and everything to do with a culture so controlled by money that
> making games fun isn't the point - making money is.

Unfortunately making good games is a full-time job, and people who don't make
money don't eat. Your viewpoint seems too simplistic.

~~~
astrodust
There's "making money" as in making a decent living on a respectable game, and
there's "making money" like pulling down $500M in sales in the first month.

Too many game studios are looking for one thing and one thing only:
Blockbusters. They don't care about things that are merely profitable.

This criticism of the used game overlooks a lot of other factors. One is that
games have a vanishingly short shelf-life because the producers want to clear
the deck for another title. If the studios don't value the games three months
out, why should the consumers? It's stale. Either sell it or throw it out,
that's what they're telegraphing here.

------
lucian1900
That's stupid, and fuck you for having this attitude towards your customers.

Used games spread the very high cost of games across several people. Do you
think anyone would buy £60 games if they knew they don't have the option of
selling them after they've finished them? It also lets people sell games they
end up hating.

Make games cheaper, bring back demos and used games will be less popular.

------
ajuc
He skipped over the real problem - the middle man. GameStop is making it
harder to sell new games, than game developers would like. Is the answer
forbidding people to play used games?

Because my answer is selling your game on the sites that allow people to buy a
new game as easily, or easier than used one. Preferably add value and sell it
with soundtrack, making-of, sth like this, and without DRM. Just like CD
Projekt RED did with Witcher 2. Somehow they've sold over million copies of
single player, then-PC-only game.

They even got sued by their box publisher over disabling DRM in every version
of Witcher 2, when DRM prevented people to play the damn game.

This shows whose interest it is to prevent people from playing games they buy.

------
mgcross
I've purchased more than my fair share from GameStop and have never
encountered such pressure to buy used. What I have encountered is pressure to
pre-order new titles and a subscription to 'Game Informer', a magazine that
promotes new titles in the form of previews, teasers and reviews.

I simply wouldn't buy games at a $59 price point if it didn't include the
ability to trade or even just let friends borrow.

I really, really love games, but my preference has shifted toward indie and
2D. There are exceptions (Fallout 3), but most AAA console titles impart too
much of a 'Michael Bay' experience and aesthetic for my tastes.

------
Confusion

      The real cost of used games is the damage that is being 
      wrought on the creativity and variety of games available 
      to the consumer
    

Yeah, because it's a well known fact that being able to resell your used book
has for ages 'damaged the creativity and variety of books available to the
consumer'. Our writers have been severely creatively impaired and there are
hardly any books available... oh wait, that's actually not how it is.

Any measure to prevent the ability to play 'used games' will be reverse
engineered and circumvented. Combined with the first-sale doctrine, this will
always allow the reselling and playing of used games. If you don't like it,
why don't you, you know, think of a _creative_ solution?

~~~
liquid_x
Yes, but how many bookstores sell both new and used books?

On the other hand most of the PC gamers buy games that are activated on Steam,
Origin or Battle.Net and that causes the resell value of the plastic disc to
fall to Zero

~~~
Tloewald
Powells. Many college bookstores. Amazon.

The bookstores that don't are in many cases going bankrupt.

I agree DRMed electronic copies cannot be resold, which is good insofar as it
may represent a disintermediation of the sales process and cost saving to the
customer -- but if EA wants $60 from me for what it used to get for selling me
a disk I could sell, lend, or give away, then that's not right.

I have no objection with EA wholesaling games to me.

------
thalur
"The rebuttal of course is usually the same. Used games fuel new game sales;
this is GameStop's response and some buy into it. Of course, in reality it's
pure conjecture without any evidence."

...just like most of this article then. I doubt many dispute the outcome
(decline in game quality, trend towards multiplayer or DLC), but the author
hasn't even shown a correlation let alone cause.

FWIW I don't agree with the rebuttal quoted here. I would simply point to the
same trend in Hollywood movies. Greed and risk aversion have done the damage,
not piracy or second hand sales.

------
kghose
Wait: margins on used games are higher than on new games?

~~~
chollida1
I wouldn't be surprised at all.

If a store buys back a used game at $5 and sells it for $20 they make $15.

I forget the exact break down now, but I remember a new blockbuster brought in
something like $5 a copy to the store, as the publisher, studio, console
manufacturer, etc all need to be paid out of the new title's sale.

