129 réponses à ce sujet

[Empiro]

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote...
You obviously missed the part where in my example the company spent $1,000,000 but only sold enough games for a $750,000 return. Which, means there will not be a sequel because the example company can't afford to make any more games.

An incentive to buy new instead of used is not greed, it's good business sense.  If you choose to buy it used, you don't get the incentive, but if you want it, you have to pay for it.  It's simple, and it makes sure the company doesn't go bankrupt.

In your example, they still wouldn't make the sequel, because eliminating used games would only get the company at most 20% more money. It's still significant and I don't blame them for trying to get in on that money. However, I do think that it really hurts the quality of the game. All the Cerberus network stuff felt "tacked on", as opposed to smoothly integrated like the rest of the game.

In addition, people like myself were had trouble with the DLC, despite buying the game new, so in the end, it hurts paying customers.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

theSteeeeels wrote...

Saphara wrote...

They may get paid when the original perosn bought it, but they certainly dont when the next person buys it used. 2 people getting use out of a single game is a loss on profit for the developers. 3 people getting use out of a single game is an outright net loss. This is why i support what they do to support new game sales.

so i can expect dvd companies to start making me pay extra for pre-owned dvds now to huh?

If the DVD payer had a Hard Drive for downloading Deleted Scenes and such, and a way to have an account to tie a code to, sure.  It's not something they have at this time though.

[Empiro]

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote...

Well, part of that problem might be GameStop and companies like them.  Maybe your GameStop doesn't, or you didn't buy it at GameStop, but other than pre-orders I am reluctant to buy from GameStop because of their policy to open boxes and keep the discs and all insert materials behin the counter.  You take them the "New" box, and they give you the "New" contents.  It's been proven that in some cases, dishonest GameStop employees have stolen codes.  Most don't, but a few have, and that breaks it somewhat for me... New to me means FACTORY SEALED.  Also, I know of guy who bought City of Villains Collector's Edition.  He got the HeroClix figures and all that because they were left in the box.  Only the disc and the registration card were removed. So, he got home, installed the game, entered his code.   Then, when he reached level 20 he did the mission to unlock capes, then went to put on the special Arachnos Cape... only to find it wasn't there... he asked NCSoft and they told him his code was for the regular version, not the Collector's Edition.  He double-checked, and sure enough GameStop had charged him$80 for the Collector's Edition, but given him the $40 regular game.  He tried to fix it with them, but it was past 30 days, so he was just screwed.

I actually got mine from Amazon -- maybe someone there opened it up, or maybe there was a bug in how they generated the codes. However, the point is that bad stuff will happen no matter what, and adding more places where things can go wrong is not a good idea.

I also wonder what percentage of people purchased the game new, but didn't get the DLC because they didn't have internet, or because they weren't aware of the DLC. Those people are also hurt, because they missed content that could have just been easily packaged with the game.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

Empiro wrote...

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote...
You obviously missed the part where in my example the company spent $1,000,000 but only sold enough games for a $750,000 return. Which, means there will not be a sequel because the example company can't afford to make any more games.

An incentive to buy new instead of used is not greed, it's good business sense.  If you choose to buy it used, you don't get the incentive, but if you want it, you have to pay for it.  It's simple, and it makes sure the company doesn't go bankrupt.

In your example, they still wouldn't make the sequel, because eliminating used games would only get the company at most 20% more money. It's still significant and I don't blame them for trying to get in on that money. However, I do think that it really hurts the quality of the game. All the Cerberus network stuff felt "tacked on", as opposed to smoothly integrated like the rest of the game.

In addition, people like myself were had trouble with the DLC, despite buying the game new, so in the end, it hurts paying customers.

How does NOT having the DLC hurt you?   You bought it new, you paid $60. You got the game.  You had trouble with the DLC, ok. . It's "tacked on" ok fine. So leave it off.  So, you stil paid $60, even if the DLC didn't exist.  So, somone who bought your used copy CHOOSES to have the EXTRA content... they can buy it for $10.  You yourself said it was tacked on, so what are they missing?

Also, how do you know that eliminating used games would get at most 20%?  It's impossible to know what increase in sales would or would no occur if used games were eliminated.  Maybe they get NO profit because all the used game crowd would turn into pirates?    If you have this "at most 20% data" let's see it from a reputable source that has seen a possible future where the used game market is eliminated.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

Just thought of something.  Bioware's Jade Empire game had a Limited Edition.  With it you got an extra character and an extra weapon. No big deal, since a staff is a staff and all the characters are the same other than their LOOK.  So, if you did not get the game when it first came out, odds are you didn't get the Limited Edition, so no extras for you.  Well, what if they had allowed those that didn't get the Limited Edition to buy that extra character and weapon?  Would they be greedy bastards then? Sure, it would be better for them to have just included the extra character and weapon in the base game, but for whatever reason they didn't.

Point is, the game is all there, even without Cerberus Network  It's just extra fluff.  However, it's fun fluff. So, if you want it, you buy the game new or your pay an extra $10 for it.  Again, how are you harmed by NOT having it any more than you were harmed by not having the Limited Edition of Jade Empire, which was IMPOSSIBLE to buy later as extra?

[Homey C-Dawg]

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote...

You obviously missed the part where in my example the company spent $1,000,000 but only sold enough games for a $750,000 return. Which, means there will not be a sequel because the example company can't afford to make any more games.

I caught that part. Your example company sold 75,000 copies of the game, which was 25,000 short of what they needed to make their money back. When this happens the title is considered a bomb (ie. it didn't do well). A game that doesn't at least make back it's investment in sales probably doesn't deserve a sequel imo. Trying to inflate the costs by trying to get paid a little every time the game changes hands to compensate does count as greedy to me.

Fictional company aside, remember we're talking about a AAA EA title. If it cost 40 million to make and sold 1.6 million copies at $60 each (generous number imo), then using your same simple math the return would be $96,000,000. Minus production costs you end up with $56,000,000 leftover. I'd say thats a bit more than breaking even. In the real world there are more factors involved of course, but I really don't think anyones hurting for money here except the guy who wants to buy his game used.

An incentive to buy new instead of used is not greed, it's good business sense.  If you choose to buy it used, you don't get the incentive, but if you want it, you have to pay for it.  It's simple, and it makes sure the company doesn't go bankrupt.

I agree with publishers creating incentive, however I also believe the second hand market has a valid place in the industry and should not be "killed" or "combated" any more than any other industry's second hand market.

There are many things that are considered "good business sense" which are ethically questionable.For example, when a company does something bad which negatively affects customers, whats the first thing they do? Hide it. What if they can't hide it? Deny it or point the finger at someone else. Got to protect the company image by hiding the srew-up right? It's just good business sense. It's also unethical.

If you know EA then you know they have a strong and well established histroy of greedy/unethical business practices, mostly revolving around destroying anything they aren't making money from. I've been watching them for a few years now trying different methods to switch from sales to revenue. Project $10 is probably the least abusive method they've tried yet, but I still don't agree with it.

This thread has some good discussion. Thanks again for the response, and know I'm not intentionally trying to get under your skin or anything. 

Modifié par Homey C-Dawg, 26 avril 2011 - 08:42 .

[FDrage]

Personally, the the "used" game market is my own insurance police towards games I don't like. If I like a game and enjoy it I'll tend to keep it. However if I don't like it (usually I don't even finish the fame then) I can get some parts of my money back. Looking on all these "preview / reviews" and "pre-game reveals" they usually don't tell me enough on the most important aspect of any game "Will I actually like it personally".

Most often until I played the game I don't know if I really like a game or not. Also as there often aren't too many demos around so I have to make a leap of faith with a new completely untried game. Sometimes that works out well (more often then not) and sometimes I wish I would have spend my money on that game.

The used game market now gives me the opportunity to recuperate some of that "lost money" of games I didn't enjoy. For me the "used game market" offers the opportunity of treating a new game as a £35 expensive demo if a game company can be bothered to put out a demo.
Granted the used game market for the majority applies to console games, which aren't my mainstay (so I've got some) in terms of gaming.

Modifié par FDrage, 26 avril 2011 - 09:28 .

[Walker White]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Fictional company aside, remember we're talking about a AAA EA title. If it cost 40 million to make and sold 1.6 million copies at $60 each (generous number imo), then using your same simple math the return would be $96,000,000. Minus production costs you end up with $56,000,000 leftover. I'd say thats a bit more than breaking even. In the real world there are more factors involved of course, but I really don't think anyones hurting for money here except the guy who wants to buy his game used.

Developer return on a $60 title is $30.  We are talking $48 million in your example.  Still a 20% return on investment, but not the numbers you are giving.

[Kusy]

Here: this is pretty much a nice analysis of whatever seems to be a problem. 

Modifié par Mr.Kusy, 26 avril 2011 - 10:54 .

[Walker White]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Here: this is pretty much a nice analysis of whatever seems to be a problem. 

People who want free online play are moochers that hurt legitimate players by putting unbudgeted load on the servers.  I won't argue for day 1 single player DLC, but people like those in this video want magic ponies.  They are begging for all multiplayer games to go to subscription.

[Gre3nham]

Piracy: Game devs get no money.

Buying used games: Game devs get no money.

Now depending on how much you care about supporting the game store itself, (which I don't care about nearly as much as supporting the developers), there is a very slim difference between piracy and buying used games. In fact there really is no difference from the game developers point of view.

So, if you think piracy is bad, then by the same reasoning, buying used games is also equally as bad.

[Da_Lion_Man]

These codes and online passes are just low... Why do the developers make such a problem of it? Why were used games okay in previous generations but not now?
I guess this generation is all about the money.

Doesn't really stop me from buying used though. Things like the Cerberus Network is something you can easily live without. Online passes are more of a problem but I tend to not buy games with online passes because they don't interest me.

[Walker White]

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

These codes and online passes are just low... Why do the developers make such a problem of it? Why were used games okay in previous generations but not now?

In previous generations, most of the online play was in the PC market, which had no used aftermarket.  Used games + free multiplayer do not mix.  You have to charge for the multiplayer some how.

[xCirdanx]

atheelogos wrote...

Buying used is cheating the devs out of their hard earned money imo....

So buying a used dvd is cheating the studio? Buying a used book is cheating the author/puplisher? What about a car? Bull**** is this and nothing else, we are talking about an entertaining product here

You can easily buy a used Mass Effect, buy it from a privat person and get the account with the game. People who want to sell their games after some time make fake accounts for every game with an online authentication, problem solved and i absolutly support anyone who wants to do that.

However that doesn´t mean i do this myself. When i buy someting i want it to be new, unless there is no other way to buy it.

[xCirdanx]

Walker White wrote...

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

These codes and online passes are just low... Why do the developers make such a problem of it? Why were used games okay in previous generations but not now?

In previous generations, most of the online play was in the PC market, which had no used aftermarket.  Used games + free multiplayer do not mix.  You have to charge for the multiplayer some how.

Most online play is still in the PC market. Yes there was no used aftermarket with companies selling these games, but people already sold games in privat, including Multiplayer titles along with username/password. It was no problem.

"You have to charge for the multiplayer some how." i don´t know how you mean this, i have never payed anything for a MP title ever except MMOs.

[Homey C-Dawg]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Here: this is pretty much a nice analysis of whatever seems to be a problem. 

Nice. He sums up my opinion perfectly.

[Kusy]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Here: this is pretty much a nice analysis of whatever seems to be a problem. 

Nice. He sums up my opinion perfectly.

I like his vids in general. Also like his articles on Destructoid.
He's a reviews editor there.

Modifié par Mr.Kusy, 26 avril 2011 - 12:06 .

[theSteeeeels]

Gre3nham wrote...

Piracy: Game devs get no money.

Buying used games: Game devs get no money.

Now depending on how much you care about supporting the game store itself, (which I don't care about nearly as much as supporting the developers), there is a very slim difference between piracy and buying used games. In fact there really is no difference from the game developers point of view.

So, if you think piracy is bad, then by the same reasoning, buying used games is also equally as bad.

wtf? how stupid are you?

obtaining goods illegally, i.e stealing, is nothing like paying for goods second hand. are you high? seriosuly

[Elite Midget]

Buying New benefits the Developers.

Buying Used benefits stores like Gamestop. Developers get nothing if you go Used.

Used Games are cheaper and on the first day of sale Gamestop(and it's elk) sells used versions next to the full version for 5 dollars off. Hell, I saw ME2 used for sale before the end of the first week of launch.

Customers are more likely to buy Used to save costs.

Thus to actually get a game sale they have to make it look very tempting to buy the more expensive New over Used. Thus things like Cerberus Network, 10 dollar pass, and the such.

It's simply smart business sense since every business is out to make money first and foremost.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 26 avril 2011 - 12:33 .

[JayhartRIC]

The reason EA started doing this was to price Gamestop out of the used game market. Why would you buy a used game $5 cheaper and miss the extra content? They probably figured Gamestop would be forced to lower their prices. Instead Gamestop hasn't changed anything and people are still buying used games, in some cases not realizing their missing out on content until it's too late. There is actually a lawsuit going on now about an unhappy customer.

Also EA had very aggressive price cuts with ME2. It was at $20 about nine months after it came out, I believe. At that price it makes no sense to save $3 to buy it used, and miss the free stuff.

Modifié par JayhartRIC, 26 avril 2011 - 12:52 .

[MidnightRaith]

I bought both games for 30 dollars and I can still get all the extra content that someone who bought new can. I honestly don't feel cheated for buying used by anyone. The devs want money for their product and I'm perfectly willing to give them something for content I neither need nor feel forced to buy.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Just a note for people who talk about Day 1 DLC as "something that could just as easily have been included on the disc." I can't speak for Bioware specifically, but in a lot of cases that is just plainly untrue.

Disc lock can happen anywhere from 2-5 months before a game is available for purchase. After that time, nothing that goes on the physical disc can be changed. However, DLC can still be worked on. So, in a lot of cases, heck I'd say in MOST cases, Day 1 DLC is content that would have been omitted if they had considered the content lock for the physical disc a concrete stopping point.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

There is nothing wrong with buying a game used. I buy all my games used nowadays, except for titles I'm really into, like BF3 (when it's released), DW7 (lots of people don't like it, but I've always been a fan), ME3 (when it's released), and the upcoming Saints Row 3 (which I am REALLY excited for).

I buy all my games used because I can't afford them new, as I don't make enough money (sniping raccoons, groundhogs, and other little critters doesn't earn you much).

All this crap about how buying a game used is cheating the devs is pure BS.

[CurseofNight]

I just brought Risen an hour ago - used - with no booklet or cover. So what? I got the game. Its not scratched. Who cares if its not in a shiny and new case?