Is the blocking of used games really that bad ?

My issue with blocking used games is that it limits the freedom of the consumer to do with as they please with the product they buy. Can you imagine car companies blocking you from selling your old car ? Book publishers blocking you from selling your book ? Why do so many allow game publishers to strip their freedom from them then ? 

It doesn't stop me from being a die hard fan PC fan because consoles don't allow me to game the way I want to game but it is still sad nonetheless.

I think Jim Sterling of The Escapist and Destructiod sums it up pretty well (if not a bit heavy handed):

http://www.destructoid.com/jimquisition-when-the-starscreams-kill-used-games-254633.phtml#I3u2vIjPZHg13lFW.01

He points out that the used market came out of necessity, due to the fact that retailers make next to nothing selling new games and hardware.  That publishers "want all of the power, and none of the responsibility" by not treating retailers or consumers with any semblance of respect.  He shoots down the idealistic notion that killing used games will lower the prices of new games saying "When companies get a monopoly on something, they rarely end up becoming altruistic.  There's no evidence to support the theory that publishers won't charge more for games if they don't have to."  Citing that It's very likely that services like Steam have such steep price discounts due to the fact that they have direct competition on an open platform.

I think Jim Sterling of The Escapist and Destructiod sums it up pretty well (if not a bit heavy handed):

 

http://www.destructoid.com/jimquisition-when-the-starscreams-kill-used-games-254633.phtml#I3u2vIjPZHg13lFW.01

 

He points out that the used market came out of necessity, due to the fact that retailers make next to nothing selling new games and hardware.  That publishers "want all of the power, and none of the responsibility" by not treating retailers or consumers with any semblance of respect.  He shoots down the idealistic notion that killing used games will lower the prices of new games saying "When companies get a monopoly on something, they rarely end up becoming altruistic.  There's no evidence to support the theory that publishers won't charge more for games if they don't have to."  Citing that It's very likely that services like Steam have such steep price discounts due to the fact that they have direct competition on an open platform.

keech

Yeah Jim Sterling often shares my viewpoint. I enjoy his show.

Some people actually complain that there are too many choices on PC of where to buy your game but they don't realize that it is that chocie that makes so many great deals.

Steam has 55 games on sale right now, Green Man Gaming has at least 26 on sale, Gamersgate has 201 games on sale, GOG has 35 games on sale, Get Games has 13 games on sale. I haven't paid more than $15 for a game in so long I actually don't remember. Too much choice is a problem I will gladly deal with.

[QUOTE="keech"]

I think Jim Sterling of The Escapist and Destructiod sums it up pretty well (if not a bit heavy handed):

 

http://www.destructoid.com/jimquisition-when-the-starscreams-kill-used-games-254633.phtml#I3u2vIjPZHg13lFW.01

 

He points out that the used market came out of necessity, due to the fact that retailers make next to nothing selling new games and hardware.  That publishers "want all of the power, and none of the responsibility" by not treating retailers or consumers with any semblance of respect.  He shoots down the idealistic notion that killing used games will lower the prices of new games saying "When companies get a monopoly on something, they rarely end up becoming altruistic.  There's no evidence to support the theory that publishers won't charge more for games if they don't have to."  Citing that It's very likely that services like Steam have such steep price discounts due to the fact that they have direct competition on an open platform.

PublicNuisance

Yeah Jim Sterling often shares my viewpoint. I enjoy his show.

Some people actually complain that there are too many choices on PC of where to buy your game but they don't realize that it is that chocie that makes so many great deals.

Steam has 55 games on sale right now, Green Man Gaming has at least 26 on sale, Gamersgate has 201 games on sale, GOG has 35 games on sale, Get Games has 13 games on sale. I haven't paid more than $15 for a game in so long I actually don't remember. Too much choice is a problem I will gladly deal with.

Exactly, also worth noting by compairison Xbox Live only has 4 games on sale (NBA 2K13, Dark Souls, Darkstalkers Reserrection, Ghost Recon: Future Soldier) and 4 DLC packs on sale (3 for Ghost Recon and 1 for Dark Souls).  Up until about 6 months ago they rarely had more than 1 or 2 games and/or DLC on sale at any one time.  The discounts on them were usually pretty pathetic, $5-$10 was pretty standard, and they were almost always games that were at least 6-12 months old.

Why is there such a huge rift between digital game sales on PC and consoles?  Console players don't have much of a choice, they either take the discounts they are given or they simply don't get to play the game on that console.  Most people don't own multiple video game consoles, but pretty much everyone interested in video game owns a computer.

EDIT: Oh I also forgot to mention, these game sales I mentioned on Xbox Live are only available to Xbox Live Gold members.  So people who aren't already paying MS money for the service, can't even take advantage of said discounts.

Even though it is anti-consumer, I do not consider there to be anything wrong with blocking pre-use video games; the problem is the choice of methods companies choose to enforce the idea like always-online digital rights management and online passes. Steam and systems like it work well, but most computer gaming is digital while console gaming continues to mostly be utilizing disc format to sell video game merchandise.

I never buy used because I fully support all the games I decide to buy, but hell if I'm going to put a single cent of support behind any measures that will restrict or get rid of the market altogether.  Publishers can go stuff it.  Maybe if they didn't spend more than the GNP of small countries in developing these games and rethought their business model they wouldn't b!tch and moan and try to fvck over the consumer instead when they fail to sell 10 million simply to break even.  The business model of this industry is broken, and we're getting fvcked.  Maybe another crash would be the best thing that could happen.

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

gamingqueen

This is a good point that often gets glossed right over.  Places like Gamestop are BUYING the games from the publishers, then Gamestop has to sell it to us to turn a profit.  Every single new copy of every game you see at retailers has already made money for the publishers and developers.

Retailers are only going to order as many copies as they think they can sell.  If they don't sell them all, they obviously aren't going to order more, and the first 8 weeks of a games release is when the vast majority of new sales are made.

[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

keech

This is a good point that often gets glossed right over.  Places like Gamestop are BUYING the games from the publishers, then Gamestop has to sell it to us to turn a profit.  Every single new copy of every game you see at retailers has already made money for the publishers and developers.

Retailers are only going to order as many copies as they think they can sell.  If they don't sell them all, they obviously aren't going to order more, and the first 8 weeks of a games release is when the vast majority of new sales are made.

I'd like to see video game journalists (collective of big websites as this one) taking a stand against this. A statement condemning this step would be good. 

[QUOTE="keech"]

[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

gamingqueen

This is a good point that often gets glossed right over.  Places like Gamestop are BUYING the games from the publishers, then Gamestop has to sell it to us to turn a profit.  Every single new copy of every game you see at retailers has already made money for the publishers and developers.

Retailers are only going to order as many copies as they think they can sell.  If they don't sell them all, they obviously aren't going to order more, and the first 8 weeks of a games release is when the vast majority of new sales are made.

I'd like to see video game journalists (collective of big websites as this one) taking a stand against this. A statement condemning this step would be good. 

At the end of the day, it are retailers like gamestop who are activly pushing for second hand sales and try drive as mutch customers away from first hand sales, and as mutch as we might think the big publishers are greedy and want max profit, this current system is really hurting them financiallydemondogx

Bull-pucky. People wouldn't be so quick to trade in games that Gamestop sells as used if...

(1) Developers made better games

and

(2) If they did not absolutely HAVE to trade in existing games to make new games affordable.

Most games today are of poor quality and are a poor value at sixty dollars. The blame for the huge second hand market rests squarely on the shoulders of developers and publishers, not Gamestop. They're just taking advantage of the situation the industry created.  If you think minimizing or eleminating used games and physical media will mean MS will have steam like sales for the digital versions of their games, then you just don't know Microsoft very well at all.  Their intentions are not, in any fashion, purehearted.  Nor will the end result benefit us.

I guess you need to be a collector to understand why it's badBlack_Knight_00

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]I guess you need to be a collector to understand why it's badDarkCatalyst

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]I guess you need to be a collector to understand why it's badDarkCatalyst

[QUOTE="DarkCatalyst"][QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]I guess you need to be a collector to understand why it's badLJS9502_basic

um yea its bad. not everyone can shell out 60 bucks a pop for a new game wich is worth less since no game nowadays is worth 60 bucks

i got a steal when i bought ac-ac bh used wich ended up costing me the same amount as one new game together

do the math

[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

keech

This is a good point that often gets glossed right over.  Places like Gamestop are BUYING the games from the publishers, then Gamestop has to sell it to us to turn a profit.  Every single new copy of every game you see at retailers has already made money for the publishers and developers.

Retailers are only going to order as many copies as they think they can sell.  If they don't sell them all, they obviously aren't going to order more, and the first 8 weeks of a games release is when the vast majority of new sales are made.

While you as a consumer have a right to do what you want with a product you bought (just the game disk, not it's contents), you can resell it, but stores do not have the right to resell a product that they previously sold. First Sale Doctrine allows you to sell it, but not the store you sold it to. Said stores reap approximately a 50% profit on the sale of used games off the backs of publishers (and yeah, I know they already were paid for said games once) and developers.

Gamers are ripped off by places like GameStop and reap massive profits because of it. Both gamers and publishers should do what they need to stop it as both are the reasons why it has gotten so bad that console makers are wanting to put controls against used games in place. Who do you think is behind it all to begin with?

[QUOTE="keech"]

[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]

Yes it's very bad. It's like having a right taken from you. You had a right to do whatever you wish with your property but not anymore. Who said we're not supporting developers when buying from authroized distributors? They're the ones who allowed Gamestop and Amazon to sell used stuff not us. Developers got their share of money when they sold wholesale copies of games to those distributors. We did our part and bought them of those licensed stores. It's a matter of principle. 

WhiteKnight77

This is a good point that often gets glossed right over.  Places like Gamestop are BUYING the games from the publishers, then Gamestop has to sell it to us to turn a profit.  Every single new copy of every game you see at retailers has already made money for the publishers and developers.

Retailers are only going to order as many copies as they think they can sell.  If they don't sell them all, they obviously aren't going to order more, and the first 8 weeks of a games release is when the vast majority of new sales are made.

While you as a consumer have a right to do what you want with a product you bought (just the game disk, not it's contents), you can resell it, but stores do not have the right to resell a product that they previously sold. First Sale Doctrine allows you to sell it, but not the store you sold it to. Said stores reap approximately a 50% profit on the sale of used games off the backs of publishers (and yeah, I know they already were paid for said games once) and developers.

Gamers are ripped off by places like GameStop and reap massive profits because of it. Both gamers and publishers should do what they need to stop it as both are the reasons why it has gotten so bad that console makers are wanting to put controls against used games in place. Who do you think is behind it all to begin with?

Don't get me wrong, Gamestop are just as big of scumbags as the companies trying to demonize them.  I entirely agree Gamestop rips off customers with trade-in values.  The fact that I can buy a game for $60, open it in the store in front of the guy who just sold it to me, and if I traded it back right there I would only get $30 store credit, then they turn around and sell it for $55 is a testament to that fact.

But fact is the industry created this problem in the first place.  I have as little sympathy for them as I do Gamestop.  If both second hand retailers and the industry could see past their own dollar signs and come to some kind of compromise (say publishers allow retailers to take more profit from sales of new games and hardware in exchange for getting a cut of used game sales) then both sides could walk away with incentive to want both new and used games to sell.  Instead they both want to grab up as much money as they can and damn if the other side of the issue has a problem with it.  In the end, the gamers are the ones who suffer the most because of it.

Yes