This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The end of used console games!

#91TrugamerPosted 1/12/2013 12:14:17 PM
The way the industry should be getting the cheap gamer sales is by selling new copies for cheaper after all the pre ordering fanboys have got their copy for $60 on day one.
The problem is not used games the problem is games that remain at $60 msrp long after interest in the game has died and sales at that price are non existent.
If new copies dropped in price faster it would make a new copy seem like a more viable option and would undercut used game sales .

Instead the industry plan is to devalue the product for the person who buys it new and wants to trade it in usually towards buying another game.

$60 - $10 = $50 is all you really need to know about the game gimper passes and how it relates to the value of any game new or used , new games are not as valuable initially because they lose an extra $10 in trade/resale value when shrink wrap is broken and used games are not as valuable since they are missing a $10 component from the retail product.
#92SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 12:19:08 PM
How many people buy a NEW game after previously renting or borrowing it? I have a rental plan and the number of games I have bought after finishing them is near zero. Given the frequency of complaints on gamefaqs about poor value, no replay, short campaigns, I really doubt they are buying after finishing for free.

And it's laughable you think pubs sell a few million units of each game to rental places. No wonder the rest of your math is so screwed up. In a world with no tradeins the new buyer may buy less and the used buyer becomes a new buyer. Seriously, ask your parents to explain simple economics.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#93TheBlueStigPosted 1/12/2013 12:35:41 PM
Sheepinator posted...
How many people buy a NEW game after previously renting or borrowing it?

People who support the industry, people who don't deliberately set out to beat a game on a rental cheating the industry out of it's money.

I have a rental plan and the number of games I have bought after finishing them is near zero.


Hypocrisy Much?

You have the f***ing gall to complain about used sales, yet you beating the games on rentals is as bad or worse.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#94SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 12:43:50 PM
Looking on my shelves now, I see about 100 retail 360 games bought new, nearly that many Arcade, and probably another 40 on PS3 and Wii.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#95WinternovaPosted 1/12/2013 12:58:18 PM
TheBlueStig posted...
Winternova posted...
No one is saying that the developer should get a cut of used sales, especially me.


Yet you ARE suggesting that they get paid more than once, and that means a cut of used sales.

Gotta love that double-speak hypocrisy.....


I never said that, at all, in this entire topic. NOT ONCE. I'd accuse you of lying, but I don't think you understand the conversation.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#96TheBlueStigPosted 1/12/2013 1:02:23 PM
Sheepinator posted...
And it's laughable you think pubs sell a few million units of each game to rental places.

A no-hype unknown game gets 1 copy per store in the biggest markets, if that much.

A big franchise mega-hype title is going to get no less than 20 copies per store, even in a "slow" area.

So that's 100,000 copies JUST for blockbuster.

Now realize that there's a few dozen different places renting games across the USA right now.

Almost every mom&pop game store still remaining below gamestop's radar is renting games. GameFly has more than 350,000 subscribers, and redbox has more than 42,000 machines operating across the USA (more than 8 times the amount of Blockbusters stores at their height).

So for the biggest games, that's a million copy hit they can't afford to take.

I honestly don't give a s*** if developers go out of business, because it's just proof that they don't know how to run their business the right way. Survival of the Fittest. If they're going out of business it means THEY screwed up, and them blaming the gamers is f***ing moronic.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#97SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 1:12:42 PM
TheBlueStig posted...
Elimination of used games also eliminates renting and borrowing. Since the rental industry buys their games new, that's a few million copies that won't be getting sold for each game.

You said every game sells a few million copies each just for rental purposes. Now VGChartz isn't always accurate, but you might want to check on there what the sales figures are for many recent games. Or read publisher PR's. Or look at earning reports. Or read the NPD statements. Or interviews with industry people. Or more generally, visit Earth and this reality. During your trip, take advantage of any educational opportunities to learn simple economics and math.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#98zyxomma100Posted 1/13/2013 5:21:25 AM
I had a much longer post typed up, but I've decided to delete everything and go for brevity:

Sheepinator, your numbers are horribly off. Horribly. Your "4%/33%" argument completely ignores the value of extra physical copies that gamers end up holding. Without used games, those copies are literally worthless, and you don't include the lost value in the numbers.

You assume that consumer spending will remain the same, but that's a very bold statement. Sure, in theory consumer spending on entertainment is always about the same, but believing that consumers will blindly accept the 40-60% rate hike (assuming they sell a copy back for ~$25-35)? In practice, when prices rise that much that fast on one particular item, consumers reevaluate their spending. And there are other sources of entertainment.

But the real loss is cultural value. Banning used games? Consumers get to experience less. And the availability of media 6-7 years in the future becomes minimal to nonexistent. I just bought an Atari Jaguar from a friend. Hell, the company that "should be getting money for this" doesn't even exist anymore! (In any real way.) Under any implementation of your silly idea, what I just did would be impossible to illegal. And the world would suffer for it.
#99TheBlueStigPosted 1/13/2013 8:16:22 AM
Sheepinator posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
Elimination of used games also eliminates renting and borrowing. Since the rental industry buys their games new, that's a few million copies that won't be getting sold for each game.

You said every game sells a few million copies each just for rental purposes. Now VGChartz isn't always accurate, but you might want to check on there what the sales figures are for many recent games. Or read publisher PR's. Or look at earning reports. Or read the NPD statements. Or interviews with industry people. Or more generally, visit Earth and this reality. During your trip, take advantage of any educational opportunities to learn simple economics and math.


The numbers from the post above yours was just for the USA, so 1 million for the USA, another million for the rest of the world.

That's for BIG FRANCHISES.

Do you get it yet or does your corporate shill side not allow you to see the truth?
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#100SheepinatorPosted 1/13/2013 8:25:57 AM
zyxomma100 posted...
Sheepinator, your numbers are horribly off. Horribly. Your "4%/33%" argument completely ignores the value of extra physical copies that gamers end up holding. Without used games, those copies are literally worthless, and you don't include the lost value in the numbers.

Actually no, you're mistaken. Those games the gamers are holding are the ones they are playing. You're thinking that if they sell them that's $X returned to gamers, but forgetting that whomever buys them is now down $X + $Y (middleman cut, if any). That's why it's important to consider total consumer spending, and like I said before elimination of used would probably mean those who buy new then resell would buy fewer new games, but also all those people who buy used only would switch to buying new games. Unless you believe they would all quit cold turkey, which isn't a realistic assumption.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.