It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Buying Used Games = Evil Pirate?(40 posts)(40 posts)
(40 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted September 30, 2010
The big difference between second hand games and second hand anything, is that the only old part you get is the disc the game comes in. If the disc doesn't have a scratch, your experience will be exactly the same as getting a new one. Buying an old car or an old gadget usually means your product will last less than a new one. Also, when you're selling an old product it's usually because you've got your hands on a newer, better product, but how long does it take before you sell your old car, your old microwave or your old anything? Usually a long time.

Games are different that way. The experience is the same with a new disc or with an old one, but the time it takes you to play it and then sell it is usually shorter, though I agree with the "make a better game" statement. People just don't sell their favorites so easily.
Posted September 30, 2010
I've read a lot of comments by people over the years that treat the second hand market as an extended rental type of thing. They buy a new but second hand game, play it till they finish it and then trade it for the next one. The only way they'll beat that mentality is with some sort of subscription thing that brings about all the threats of software as a service.

Frankly I don't think the publishers are that annoyed at customers buying second hand because they're pragmatists at heart and know full well that money is a finite resource. What I think they ARE pissed at is the fact that places like gamestop & EB are actively undercutting them with what is effectively their own merchandise by selling for 5 bucks off the retail price, getting record profits and leeching off the industry whilst contributing the minimum possible.
Posted September 30, 2010
I never understood the point of buying a used copy when I could get a new one for $5 more. I'd rather have a nice shrinkwrapped copy (although you aren't even promised that if you buy one at Gamestop) then one that's been mangled with stickers and handled by who knows what.

The people around here treat their games like shit, and whenever I find myself looking for an older, out-of-print console game, it usually takes me four or five copies to find one that has the manual and insert, and isn't stained, torn, smashed, dented, etc.Also, the idea of making someone pay $20 for the multiplayer portion of the game they just bought (even if the price was reduced) is one of the dumbest suggestions I've yet heard.
Post edited September 30, 2010 by T.A.P.
Posted September 30, 2010
avatar
Delixe: There is one difference with games compared to movies, books and music. Those don't have the likes of Gamestop and Electronics Boutique actively competing with new sales. If second-hand sales were only on Amazon or eBay then it wouldn't be a problem but with games you go into a store and the second-hand games are right there next to the new titles. Second-hand game stores make an absolute fortune on games and they are actually harming new game sales.

When I used to work for CEX in London this wasn't a real problem as stores like CEX were rare and TBH frequented more by collectors than bargain hunters but now the big chains are in on the action it's seriously starting to bite into profits for publishers. Stores like Gamestop actively tell their staff to promote second-hand over new because of the larger mark up they make on them. One of the worst practices I was privy to was packbreaking where in this example CEX were stuck with x amount of copies of a new game and they broke the seals and sold them as pre-owned because what they lost on the initial cost they made up on the sales.
Are you freaking kidding? Used books and used music shops are huge and those industries have been moaning for years about it. It's not been that long since the revenues from the gaming industry have beaten either one.
avatar
T.A.P.: I never understood the point of buying a used copy when I could get a new one for $5 more. I'd rather have a nice shrinkwrapped copy (although you aren't even promised that if you buy one at Gamestop) then one that's been mangled with stickers and handled by who knows what.

The people around here treat their games like shit, and whenever I find myself looking for an older, out-of-print console game, it usually takes me four or five copies to find one that has the manual and insert, and isn't stained, torn, smashed, dented, etc.Also, the idea of making someone pay $20 for the multiplayer portion of the game they just bought (even if the price was reduced) is one of the dumbest suggestions I've yet heard.
But it's not always a 5 dollar difference, it might be just swapping games with friends, or on a swap site that charges a buck per transaction. You can't really beat that, imo.

The thing that drives me nuts about this whole argument is the fact that no one acknowledges that the angelic new gamer buyer is also a, presumably evil, used game seller. That would be both idolizing and demonizing the same person, so they don't, they demonize the used game buyer instead, or middleman. Well, it takes two to tango, baby, fess up.
Post edited September 30, 2010 by orcishgamer
Posted September 30, 2010
avatar
T.A.P.: I never understood the point of buying a used copy when I could get a new one for $5 more. I'd rather have a nice shrinkwrapped copy (although you aren't even promised that if you buy one at Gamestop) then one that's been mangled with stickers and handled by who knows what.
I bought two used games from Gamestop, and that's the extent of my entire purchasing history with the company.

Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem

Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth
Posted September 30, 2010
I wonder what other horrid things deprive the gaming industry of their much deserved revenue... let me make a list. Folks who engage in these practices should definitely burn in hell!

1) Lend a game to a friend or relative after they are done with it.
2) Trade games permanently between two owners.
3) Let folks play their games when they visit their house
4) Sell or give away games
5) Play free games
6) Let their kids play their games.
7) Tell people not to buy a bad game without recommending a full price, retail alternative.
8) Sell a game after they are done with it (whether they bought it new or not)
9) Rent games in lieu of buying

Yep, these kinds of folks are dirtbags, it's clear to me.
Posted September 30, 2010
Getting sick of this sorta crap , I've bought the game so by law it's mine to sell to anyone I see fit , DEAL WITH IT.
Whats next buying a copy per resident of the household , god forbid my GF takes a look at the screen without paying for a copy.

Reading BS like that makes me wanna hack my 360 and PS3...
Posted September 30, 2010
avatar
orcishgamer: I wonder what other horrid things deprive the gaming industry of their much deserved revenue... let me make a list. Folks who engage in these practices should definitely burn in hell!

1) Lend a game to a friend or relative after they are done with it.
3) Let folks play their games when they visit their house
4) Sell or give away games
5) Play free games
8) Sell a game after they are done with it (whether they bought it new or not)
9) Rent games in lieu of buying

Yep, these kinds of folks are dirtbags, it's clear to me.
I do all of those. Sue me.
Posted October 01, 2010
avatar
orcishgamer: I wonder what other horrid things deprive the gaming industry of their much deserved revenue... let me make a list. Folks who engage in these practices should definitely burn in hell!

1) Lend a game to a friend or relative after they are done with it.
3) Let folks play their games when they visit their house
4) Sell or give away games
5) Play free games
8) Sell a game after they are done with it (whether they bought it new or not)
9) Rent games in lieu of buying

Yep, these kinds of folks are dirtbags, it's clear to me.
avatar
Rohan15: I do all of those. Sue me.
I do hope you know I was being facetious. I hate the gaming industry's pissing and moaning about this subject.
Posted October 01, 2010
To be honest i don't really care a lot. I have a budget that i need to keep, and as my computer is almost half my age, my only current-gen media is a ps3. Ps3 games are immensely expensive where i live (500kr = 91$). So till the price goes down i just cant afford to care about flawed mechanics in a economic system.
Posted October 01, 2010
avatar
Aliasalpha: I've read a lot of comments by people over the years that treat the second hand market as an extended rental type of thing. They buy a new but second hand game, play it till they finish it and then trade it for the next one. The only way they'll beat that mentality is with some sort of subscription thing that brings about all the threats of software as a service.

Frankly I don't think the publishers are that annoyed at customers buying second hand because they're pragmatists at heart and know full well that money is a finite resource. What I think they ARE pissed at is the fact that places like gamestop & EB are actively undercutting them with what is effectively their own merchandise by selling for 5 bucks off the retail price, getting record profits and leeching off the industry whilst contributing the minimum possible.
That is a good idea. I don't know anyone who buys used games, but it seems to me that anyone buying-and-selling used games is effectively doing a roundabout simulation of a game subscription service. If publishers had a physical store where you could pay a monthly fee and borrow x games at a time whenever you want then they could compete quite strongly against Gamestop's methods.
Posted October 01, 2010
In my opinion:

The original reason and justification for the second-hand-market was, that its much more efficient to not produce things anew everytime, but use them again, therefore kind of increasing their usage time. Also people had another view upon the term property. Owning something means, you can sell it as you like.

For pratical reasons the second-hand market on physical goods will hopefully be unharmed for a long time to come.

However, with digital products like movies, books, music, video games, its different. They cost nearly nothing to reproduce. So renting instead of owning is a possible business model. I see no legal objections against renting.

I would see it as a task for the customer to stop buying consumer unfriendly deals. You don't really need these products for everyday life, so only buy if you think, the price is worth the value.

However there are two bad things, which make me think:

- Public libraries have an important function in delivering these products to everyone who cannot afford buying for themselves. This possibility must remain.

- Some products could be artificially be limited and even not be available anymore at all, if the second-hand-market would not be exist.

Therefore I would call for some kind of regulation and limiting the possibilities to restrict usage.

My proposal:

- from 2 years on after a release, any digital product can be sold on the second-hand-market
- public libraries are allowed to break the copyright of products to some extent for their specific purpose
- consumers continue buying only where they think they are getting their money's worth

How does that sound?
Post edited October 01, 2010 by Trilarion
Posted October 01, 2010
avatar
Trilarion: - consumers continue buying only where they think they are getting their money's worth

How does that sound?
Sounds like a lot of developers / publishers going out of business real quick.

What's the main reason to buy second-hand / on sales? Not having the money to buy all full-prize or not thinking of all you bought to be worth full-prize.
Post edited October 01, 2010 by Siannah
Posted October 01, 2010
avatar
Trilarion: In my opinion:

The original reason and justification for the second-hand-market was, that its much more efficient to not produce things anew everytime, but use them again, therefore kind of increasing their usage time. Also people had another view upon the term property. Owning something means, you can sell it as you like.

For pratical reasons the second-hand market on physical goods will hopefully be unharmed for a long time to come.

However, with digital products like movies, books, music, video games, its different. They cost nearly nothing to reproduce. So renting instead of owning is a possible business model. I see no legal objections against renting.

I would see it as a task for the customer to stop buying consumer unfriendly deals. You don't really need these products for everyday life, so only buy if you think, the price is worth the value.

However there are two bad things, which make me think:

- Public libraries have an important function in delivering these products to everyone who cannot afford buying for themselves. This possibility must remain.

- Some products could be artificially be limited and even not be available anymore at all, if the second-hand-market would not be exist.

Therefore I would call for some kind of regulation and limiting the possibilities to restrict usage.

My proposal:

- from 2 years on after a release, any digital product can be sold on the second-hand-market
- public libraries are allowed to break the copyright of products to some extent for their specific purpose
- consumers continue buying only where they think they are getting their money's worth

How does that sound?
You're problem is you're trying to meet these guys halfway. Half the time they want their stuff treated as real property (when it's most convenient for them) and the other half they want it treated as a special class of "intellectual property" (again, when it's most convenient for them). They don't get to have it both ways, screw that, it's anti-consumer in the extreme. There isn't any limit to reproducing this stuff and we better figure out how to deal with it now, 3D printers are coming and pretty soon real property will be able to be reproduced nearly as easily (though it will take some minimal raw materials).
Posted October 01, 2010
The whole point is, they're acting as if we have an unlimited budget but decided to go cheapskate.
Who can claim that, every game he or she bought this year (on sales, discounted through club membership like Big Fish, bargain bin, etc.), they could have afforded buying it full-prize? I certainly can't.
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Buying Used Games = Evil Pirate?(40 posts)(40 posts)
(40 posts)