Prove Used Game Sales Hurt Developers

[QUOTE="spotofun"]Your reference makes me appreciate freedom. Was there something else you were pointing out that I missed? I wonder if these profits would as high if the world economy was not so poor? shinrabanshou

This is simply a reference for anyone making such false claims.

Measures publishers are taking at present really have no impact on the freedom of consumers to do with what they purchase as they please or buy what they desire. Although this fact is generally ignored.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]"fact" and "could've been" don't belong together in the same sentence.

spotofun

---------

Anyway some numbers for reference:

GameStop profits on used product sales:

2009: US $974.5 million

2010: US $1.12 billion

2011: US $1.14 billion

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Thing is, we don't know the inter-dealings between business's that sell used games and the developers. For all we know they do get compensated, but if not then that's just too bad for them because it's not the consumer's fault or problem (as you said).

StealthSting

But that's just the thing though, we don't know about a lot of things. Like you said to Animal Mother, in regards to fact and could've been not belonging in the same sentence.

For all we know, a huge number of pirates still buy an original copy if they feel like they've enjoyed the game. Pretty much like a lot of used game users do so, because they might fear that a 60 dollar product may not be worth it.

*shrugs* When it comes to these things, speculation is all we can do. The only exception is word from the developers--unless you don't trust their word: Which quite frankly, I have difficulty in doing so a lot of the time.

"I guess I can't respond or it will prove my feelings are hurt?"

Not really.

Who said it was lost? It may be recouped by future sales based upon the used game experience.

spotofun

It may, but then again, didn't you want to work with objective information?

I simply asked for proof that every used game sale would have been a new sale if the used market did not exist (i.e. prove they lost money). You did not address this in anyway. You made up your own point to argue. Again, not hurt :twisted:

spotofun

Yes I didn't address it, because I chose not to. That's why I told you to check google on what developers have to say.

By the way, please read all the posts to this point. lundy86_4, SUD123456 and LovePotionNo9 have answered this topic far better than I.

spotofun

Sure. Will do.

[QUOTE="StealthSting"]

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

No hurt feelings here. I have been a part of all of these threads and no one proved there used sales hurt devs any more than you just did.

spotofun

Yup, no hurt feelings.

What exact proof do you want or are you talking about? That developers don't get a dime from used game sales?--isn't that evident?

If that is what you want proven, you can always google the developers who have made efforts against the used market because of lost money to them--don't have the patience to look for them, and besides, I approached the posters argument, not your own.

It's a very easy process to follow by using logic. Unless you were to argue that lost money to the developers, from their work, is not hurting them in any way.

I guess I can't respond or it will prove my feelings are hurt? Logic?

Who said it was lost? It may be recouped by future sales based upon the used game experience. I simply asked for proof that every used game sale would have been a new sale if the used market did not exist (i.e. prove they lost money). You did not address this in anyway. You made up your own point to argue. Again, not hurt :twisted:

By the way, please read all the posts to this point. lundy86_4, SUD123456 and LovePotionNo9 have answered this topic far better than I.

Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

Bigboi500

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

"I guess I can't respond or it will prove my feelings are hurt?"

Not really.

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

It may, but then again, didn't you want to work with objective information?

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

I simply asked for proof that every used game sale would have been a new sale if the used market did not exist (i.e. prove they lost money). You did not address this in anyway. You made up your own point to argue. Again, not hurt :twisted:

StealthSting

Yes I didn't address it, because I chose not to. That's why I told you to check google on what developers have to say.

By the way, please read all the posts to this point. lundy86_4, SUD123456 and LovePotionNo9 have answered this topic far better than I.

spotofun

Sure. Will do.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

shinrabanshou

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

By the way, your post above is what I have been trying to point out. Not sure why we are discussing this when you posted the following above: "But that's just the thing though, we don't know about a lot of things. Like you said to Animal Mother, in regards to fact and could've been not belonging in the same sentence. For all we know, a huge number of pirates still buy an original copy if they feel like they've enjoyed the game. Pretty much like a lot of used game users do so, because they might fear that a 60 dollar product may not be worth it. *shrugs* When it comes to these things, speculation is all we can do. The only exception is word from the developers--unless you don't trust their word: Which quite frankly, I have difficulty in doing so a lot of the time." I agree although I have not formed an opinion on developers word.

spotofun

We're discussing it, because you approached my argument on the basis that I didn't offer any objective proof.

You've made a thread about the developers and I said that you should look into what developers have to say about the used games market. I think that makes sense, after all, who better than the developers would know this. Doesn't change the fact though, that I don't take everything they say as the gospel.

Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

Bigboi500

I actually have some sort of recollection of a developer saying something like that.

I totally agree with you. A pirate is someone who did not pay for the product, it's as simple as that.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

Bigboi500

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

shinrabanshou

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]To a video game publisher, someone who buys a particular game they publish used and someone who pirates it amount to the same thing for that particular game.

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

shinrabanshou

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

By the way, your post above is what I have been trying to point out. Not sure why we are discussing this when you posted the following above: "But that's just the thing though, we don't know about a lot of things. Like you said to Animal Mother, in regards to fact and could've been not belonging in the same sentence. For all we know, a huge number of pirates still buy an original copy if they feel like they've enjoyed the game. Pretty much like a lot of used game users do so, because they might fear that a 60 dollar product may not be worth it. *shrugs* When it comes to these things, speculation is all we can do. The only exception is word from the developers--unless you don't trust their word: Which quite frankly, I have difficulty in doing so a lot of the time." I agree although I have not formed an opinion on developers word.

StealthSting

We're discussing it, because you approached my argument on the basis that I didn't offer any objective proof.

You've made a thread about the developers and I said that you should look into what developers have to say about the used games market. I think that makes sense, after all, who better than the developers would know this. Doesn't change the fact though, that I don't take everything they say as the gospel.

Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

Bigboi500

I actually have some sort of recollection of a developer saying something like that.

I totally agree with you. A pirate is someone who did not pay for the product, it's as simple as that.

No because you're the one stating they get ZERO dollars from these business, yet you have no facts to prove it. The thread is about the finger-pointers bringing evidence, not regular people who buy used games who don't give a damn if they do or don't. It's the accusers who seem to have a problem, so they are the ones who need to bring the proof. The onus is on the accusers, not the other way around.

Bigboi500

Also, I personally don't have a problem with anyone doing what they want so long as it's legal. Buy and sell used as much as you want. I just also don't give a crap if publishers do things to impact those people.

Not sure anyone in this thread really knows how retail games sales work.

When a game is released, all the stores buy that game from the developer at bulk price, then sell it to the public for a profit.

So, when you buy a game from Walmart...you're not buying it from the developer...you're buying it from Walmart.

If you see a game in a retail game store, the developer has already made all the money they're going to make from the game sale.

So buying a used game doesn't hurt the developers, it hurts Walmart.

And I'm sorry, I'm not willing to let the local used game store go down in flames just so the developers can make some sort of imaginary profit that they're somehow missing.

Please stop perpetuating unnecessary greed people.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Me too. I just find it funny when I hear comments like "used game buyers and sellers are as bad as pirates", that accusation is unfounded and grid-locked in conjecture with no evidence. To me it suggests that some are being brainwashed by a company they love.

spotofun

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

There are obvious differences, namely concurrent multiplicity of distribution with piracy. And of course legality.

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]To a video game publisher, someone who buys a particular game they publish used and someone who pirates it amount to the same thing for that particular game.

This is not conjecture. It is statement of fact.

shinrabanshou

There are obvious differences, namely concurrent multiplicity of distribution with piracy. And of course legality.

Brand new game at retail: $60 --- $30 to retailer, Microsoft, Sony, etc + $30 to publisher (who then pays developer).

Used game at a retailer: $50 --- $50 to retailer.

Its simple really I don't understand what there is to not get?

Not sure anyone in this thread really knows how retail games sales work.

When a game is released, all the stores buy that game from the developer at bulk price, then sell it to the public for a profit.

So, when you buy a game from Walmart...you're not buying it from the developer...you're buying it from Walmart.

If you see a game in a retail game store, the developer has already made all the money they're going to make from the game sale.

So buying a used game doesn't hurt the developers, it hurts Walmart.

And I'm sorry, I'm not willing to let the local used game store go down in flames just so the developers can make some sort of imaginary profit that they're somehow missing.

Please stop perpetuating unnecessary greed people.

xxxLUGZxxx

Brand new game at retail: $60 --- $30 to retailer, Microsoft, Sony, etc + $30 to publisher (who then pays developer).

Used game at a retailer: $50 --- $50 to retailer.

Its simple really I don't understand what there is to not get?

Buttons1990

By the way, I have always wondered what would be going through the mind of an infantry man who was firing a nuclear artillery shell like your sig. Praying for enough distance?

[QUOTE="spotofun"][QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]Why? It is factual that possibilities exist.

---------

Anyway some numbers for reference:

GameStop profits on used product sales:

2009: US $974.5 million

2010: US $1.12 billion

2011: US $1.14 billion

navyguy21

If I sold my used game to my neighbor, how much money did the dev get? IF I bought all of my neighbors games and sold them to other neighborhoods for a profit, how much did the dev get? If I created a business to do this, how much does the dev get?

At which point in the scenario did it become hurtful?

I agree with you. I'm tired of these TC talking about how used game sales hurt the Market when it doesn't. These devs are already greedy enough with DLC and online passes so you're telling me I can't buy a crappy game on a discounted price. I just feel some games aren't worth buying full price.

[QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

Brand new game at retail: $60 --- $30 to retailer, Microsoft, Sony, etc + $30 to publisher (who then pays developer).

Used game at a retailer: $50 --- $50 to retailer.

Its simple really I don't understand what there is to not get?

spotofun

By the way, I have always wondered what would be going through the mind of an infantry man who was firing a nuclear artillery shell like your sig. Praying for enough distance?

What is there to read? That is how it works...

Here is a guide:

Retailer X, Developer X, Publisher X, Game X, Microsoft, Sony

-Publisher X gets money from investors and previous success.

-Publisher X pays Developer X to make Game X.

-Game X is finished, Publisher X publishes it.

-Publisher X takes initial release orders.

-Retailer X buys 4,000,000 copies from Publisher X for $45 each and resells them for $60 each.

-Publisher X takes the money, pays Microsoft and Sony royalties for being on their console ($15 per game for example), what remains is used for profit sharing among the company (ie: Executives get bonuses, developers get bonuses) as well as further investment in future games.

--------

People say "when you buy used you hurt the retailer not the developer"... Where do you think the retailers are getting the games? Walmart doesn't make them... When they run out, they buy more... So obviously, when someone buys a used game as opposed to the new game, that new copy isn't being moved and thus Walmart isn't buying anymore from the publisher.

That's an out of print game, not "NEW Games that have been reduced".

Hell, buy me a copy please, I tend to horde second hand out of print games, however a first probably wont see money go to the publisher or devs.

Likelihood is it's an unopened new copy, leftover stock someone has gotten hold of.

So an anomaly.

skrat_01

That's probably a Bad Example, but what I'm trying to say is that even if you buy a Reduced game or a Game New it doesn't mean it's going to the developer.

I don't know why you guys are so hard against Used Games, "It doesn't support the Developers!" and yet most you say "I'll wait till the Price drops."

Wouldn't that Hurt the Developer too? I mean the Revenue of the game would probably benefit the developers more if a Game was being sold $59.99 rather than $19.99.

That's probably a Bad Example, but what I'm trying to say is that even if you buy a Reduced game or a Game New it doesn't mean it's going to the developer.

I don't know why you guys are so hard against Used Games, "It doesn't support the Developers!" and yet most you say "I'll wait till the Price drops."

Wouldn't that Hurt the Developer too? I mean the Revenue of the game would probably benefit the developers more if a Game was being sold $59.99 rather than $19.99.

LegatoSkyheart

The used game benefits from their investment in advertising and marketing that's meant to promote their new game sales.

The used game sale lacks any significant investment in the creative process.

The used game competes with their new game at a cheaper pricepoint, from which they see no return.

Places like GameStop make a concerted effort to encourage the merrigoround of game resale, because they profit more from it.

One either assumes that $5 is the difference between a purchase or no purchase, which it may be, or that a used game sale for $5 less supplants a new game sale.

[QUOTE="spotofun"]

[QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

Brand new game at retail: $60 --- $30 to retailer, Microsoft, Sony, etc + $30 to publisher (who then pays developer).

Used game at a retailer: $50 --- $50 to retailer.

Its simple really I don't understand what there is to not get?

Buttons1990

By the way, I have always wondered what would be going through the mind of an infantry man who was firing a nuclear artillery shell like your sig. Praying for enough distance?

What is there to read? That is how it works...

Here is a guide:

Retailer X, Developer X, Publisher X, Game X, Microsoft, Sony

-Publisher X gets money from investors and previous success.

-Publisher X pays Developer X to make Game X.

-Game X is finished, Publisher X publishes it.

-Publisher X takes initial release orders.

-Retailer X buys 4,000,000 copies from Publisher X for $45 each and resells them for $60 each.

-Publisher X takes the money, pays Microsoft and Sony royalties for being on their console ($15 per game for example), what remains is used for profit sharing among the company (ie: Executives get bonuses, developers get bonuses) as well as further investment in future games.

--------

People say "when you buy used you hurt the retailer not the developer"... Where do you think the retailers are getting the games? Walmart doesn't make them... When they run out, they buy more... So obviously, when someone buys a used game as opposed to the new game, that new copy isn't being moved and thus Walmart isn't buying anymore from the publisher.

Simple question that has not been answered. Please provide factual evidence and not conjecture (a proposition that is unproven but is thought to be true and has not been disproven.) I have no dog in the fight. Just curious.

Please try to stay away from the usual thread tangents: xbl, on-line passes, graphics overlord, etc.

spotofun

lets say you want to buy Gears 3 and your friend happens to have Gears 3 and wants to sell it to gamstop and you say wait i'll give you $30 for gears3 and he says ok. So how much $ did Epic make from that 1 copy of Gears and how much $ could they make if both you and your friend bought each a copy of Gears?

How does it hurt the Dev??? What if the person wasnt going to buy the game new? Would that still be hurting the Dev?

RyanShazam

Same exact logic that can be applied to piracy, that you for some unknown reason mentioned in your first post ITT.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

That's probably a Bad Example, but what I'm trying to say is that even if you buy a Reduced game or a Game New it doesn't mean it's going to the developer.

I don't know why you guys are so hard against Used Games, "It doesn't support the Developers!" and yet most you say "I'll wait till the Price drops."

Wouldn't that Hurt the Developer too? I mean the Revenue of the game would probably benefit the developers more if a Game was being sold $59.99 rather than $19.99.

shinrabanshou

The used game benefits from their investment in advertising and marketing that's meant to promote their new game sales.

The used game sale lacks any significant investment in the creative process.

The used game competes with their new game at a cheaper pricepoint, from which they see no return.

Places like GameStop make a concerted effort to encourage the merrigoround of game resale, because they profit more from it.

One either assumes that $5 is the difference between a purchase or no purchase, which it may be, or that a used game sale for $5 less supplants a new game sale.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

That's probably a Bad Example, but what I'm trying to say is that even if you buy a Reduced game or a Game New it doesn't mean it's going to the developer.

I don't know why you guys are so hard against Used Games, "It doesn't support the Developers!" and yet most you say "I'll wait till the Price drops."

Wouldn't that Hurt the Developer too? I mean the Revenue of the game would probably benefit the developers more if a Game was being sold $59.99 rather than $19.99.

shinrabanshou

The used game benefits from their investment in advertising and marketing that's meant to promote their new game sales.

The used game sale lacks any significant investment in the creative process.

The used game competes with their new game at a cheaper pricepoint, from which they see no return.

Places like GameStop make a concerted effort to encourage the merrigoround of game resale, because they profit more from it.

One either assumes that $5 is the difference between a purchase or no purchase, which it may be, or that a used game sale for $5 less supplants a new game sale.

But none of that makes it bad.

I go to my Gamestop all the Time and They don't really hound me down on Buying Rage Used or whatever, the only thing they hound me down on is if I want to Pre-Order Batman Arkham City or Some Other Game that they have a poster of (and if it wasn't for them I wouldn't have bought Dark Souls NEW MIND YOU).

You guys make it seem as if Used Game Sales are the EVILS or something and Yeah I can totally see where it's coming from, but can you blame people? They just want to play games for cheap even if the Saving are just $5.

But none of that makes it bad.

I go to my Gamestop all the Time and They don't really hound me down on Buying Rage Used or whatever, the only thing they hound me down on is if I want to Pre-Order Batman Arkham City or Some Other Game that they have a poster of (and if it wasn't for them I wouldn't have bought Dark Souls NEW MIND YOU).

You guys make it seem as if Used Game Sales are the EVILS or something and Yeah I can totally see where it's coming from, but can you blame people? They just want to play games for cheap even if the Saving are just $5.

LegatoSkyheart

But again, I simply don't empathise with someone who chooses to buy a game used for a few dollars less than new, and then complains about things like online passes and corporate greed.

Again people are free to do what they like, buy what they like, used, new, whatever. None of these measures affect that. They simply shift the equilibrium slightly.

But none of that makes it bad.

I go to my Gamestop all the Time and They don't really hound me down on Buying Rage Used or whatever, the only thing they hound me down on is if I want to Pre-Order Batman Arkham City or Some Other Game that they have a poster of (and if it wasn't for them I wouldn't have bought Dark Souls NEW MIND YOU).

You guys make it seem as if Used Game Sales are the EVILS or something and Yeah I can totally see where it's coming from, but can you blame people? They just want to play games for cheap even if the Saving are just $5.

LegatoSkyheart

None is trying to show second hand is evil or that people are to blame.

In fact, I think it's a common thought in all of this debate that developers are the ones to blame for being unable to make a game that lasts enough to make second hand sales not as "damaging".

Only that it may have a bad effect on developers.

the fact that THE used game sale could've been a new one.

When a used game is bought 0 dollars go to the developer.

Animal-Mother

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"]

the fact that THE used game sale could've been a new one.

When a used game is bought 0 dollars go to the developer.

POPEYE1716

I dont have a problem with used game sales as a concept, but i do have a problem with the way that gamestop does used game sales. they give you absolutely nothing for your games and are just S***y to the customer in general.

Used game sales are excellent for consumers who dont have much income to spend on games but there really isnt much of a way to track how much used game sales translate into the sale of dlc or sequels. We do know that it can hurt the initial sales of a game. Those initial sales numbers tend to be what publishers care about (jsut look at the importance of preorders) the most and if games dont make those numbers studios get shut down.

i prefer Steams model. sure there is no way to re-sell a game but their are routine price drops after a few months (and large ones yearly) and the weekly and INCREDIBLE seasonal sales are great for people on a budget.

[QUOTE="navyguy21"][QUOTE="spotofun"] Your reference makes me appreciate freedom. Was there something else you were pointing out that I missed? I wonder if these profits would as high if the world economy was not so poor? spotofun

If I sold my used game to my neighbor, how much money did the dev get? IF I bought all of my neighbors games and sold them to other neighborhoods for a profit, how much did the dev get? If I created a business to do this, how much does the dev get?

At which point in the scenario did it become hurtful?

Sigh I will say this again used car,home and pretty much anything else you can think of has a new market and a used market, it will not go away and it does not drastically make the gaming industry lose money, the only way the industry loses money is if investors put lots of money into a gaming project and they don't get their money back. Conclusion DON'T SPEND MILLIONS ON MAKING A GAME!!! specially if you might not get that investment back.

Who cares? The game industry isn't special. I'm sorry, but there is a used market for almost everything. Cars, electronics, music, movies etc etc. If everyone has such a huge problem with it, I recommend you never buy anything used.Twoyen

Sigh I will say this again used car,home and pretty much anything else you can think of has a new market and a used market, it will not go away and it does not drastically make the gaming industry lose money, the only way the industry loses money is if investors put lots of money into a gaming project and they don't get their money back. Conclusion DON'T SPEND MILLIONS ON MAKING A GAME!!! specially if you might not get that investment back.

Ballroompirate

These threads always devolve into a litany of analogies, however invalid they may be. Comparing to property and land is a ludicrous proposition.

To begin with, a game to a publisher is not a tangible property, it is intangible intellectual property. As essentially a compilation of information it does not deteriorate in quality from creation as physical tangible properties do.

Notwithstanding that, if you go into a lot at the launch of a new BMW, you will not find a virtually identical BMW used, at the same time, for a fractionally lower price. If you go into a furniture store, there isn't a new couch next to an identical used couch for $5 less.

That is why the creative and investing side of the video game industry sees such threat to their potential revenue from used games. That is why they're trying to introduce a differentiating advantage to buying new.

Even with intangible properties, some of the parallels people draw wear thin. If you buy a ticket to a movie at a cinema, you cannot experience the movie and then onsell it to give a subsequent user entry.

The relevant potential analogies are those of intangible intellectual creative works on physical media that have the capacity for resale. BluRays and music CDs. And literature. Even then those products are not maintained in any way by the original publishers, like games may be. And they are moving towards digital distribution anyway, wherein it becomes difficult to (legally) redistribute a copy of an intellectual property.

On the consumer side everything is right about second hand sales.
You pay money for a game.
You sell a game.
The other person pays money for that game.

That is completely ok.
So they shouldn't hinder the consumer.

[QUOTE="RyanShazam"]

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"] it doesn't matter It still hurts the developer. But devs making money of the original purchase isn't the name of this thread it's prove used game sales hurt devs. And when that used sale is made it hurts the dev.Animal-Mother

How does it hurt the Dev??? What if the person wasnt going to buy the game new? Would that still be hurting the Dev?

It hurts the dev. They make 0 dollars on the sale of that game now. When even if its 20 new, they would make the profit.

Here read up.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10113636-17.html?tag=mncol;txt

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20022957-17.html

Im just the messanger.

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"]

[QUOTE="RyanShazam"]

How does it hurt the Dev??? What if the person wasnt going to buy the game new? Would that still be hurting the Dev?

delta3074

It hurts the dev. They make 0 dollars on the sale of that game now. When even if its 20 new, they would make the profit.

Here read up.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10113636-17.html?tag=mncol;txt

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20022957-17.html

Im just the messanger.

I have not read all 8 pages so this may have been posted before.A very simplified version of how retail works is: Developer sells game to publisher, publisher sells game to wholesalers, wholesalers sell game to retailers, retailers sell game to consumer. The developer will have been paid by the publisher regardless if the game sells at retail or not. If all the copies at retail sell out then the retailer will ask the wholesaler for more, should they not have more then the wholesaler will take more from the publisher, who may or may not need to have more pressed.

There should just be a sticky for all this used game nonsense that's hit system wars.

shinrabanshou

[QUOTE="Weenski"]Video game companies/developers are making MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PROFIT. PROVE that used game sales are 'hurting' them. PROVE that they're not greedy and maybe I'll care. Until then I'll continue to buy used games at will. Oh and the story about these companies needing the revenue to develop new titles doesn't wash. For example are EA really struggling with cashflow? They bought Bioware for $860. They bought Popcap Games for $1.3billion. The RIDICULOUSLY HIGH PRICE of new games is hurting the consumer much more than used game sales are 'hurting' developers.LOXO7

If second hand trade should stop existing to make things "fair", let's make things completely "fair" shall we? Retailers should be able to get a refund from publishers for every copy that doesn't sell.KungfuKitten