surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
I feel like this is a response to my blog entry, but I shouldn't be so vain. In fact I agree with most of the points you are making (and will totally fap to it which is something I never do.) I too like to pop in a my copy of Wind Waker from time to time just to go island hoping, watch as they turn from a small speck on the horizon into a full fledged island right before my eyes. To me, there is no greater experience in gaming. I also agree with your statement about not thinking trade-ins through. I traded in both The World Ends With You and Professor Layton and the Curious Village only to re-buy them later down the road. But, and I say this with personal experience, it's not always the trade-in that needs to be well thought out. It's the initial purchase. Did I really need to pay $50 for Cooking Mama on the Wii? Hell no. I don't know if there are other ala carte gamers like myself (those with disposable income who buy any game that catches their fancy), or at least if there are many of them, but the initial wrong headed purchase is much more costly than the trade-in by itself.
There is one thing about this article that I'm not quite following: you say (to paraphrase) the value of a game is found in actually playing it, in studying it, in mastering it. You say that trading in a game robs you of experiencing the true worth of it. If that's the case, how is just owning the game but never playing it any different? You're not experiencing it and you probably never will, so isn't that just $60 plus the true worth of a game down the drain? Theoretically, couldn't it be more costly? If your space for games is limited, couldn't that dusty-never-gonna-play game be costing you the experience of a game you want to see the true worth of because you have no more room for new games?
I feel this kind of thinking only applies to games you enjoy. Obviously, the copy of Kidz Sports: Crazy Golf that my mother gave me for Christmas was going to the nearest Gamestop the minute she left town.
There is one thing about this article that I'm not quite following: you say (to paraphrase) the value of a game is found in actually playing it, in studying it, in mastering it. You say that trading in a game robs you of experiencing the true worth of it. If that's the case, how is just owning the game but never playing it any different? You're not experiencing it and you probably never will, so isn't that just $60 plus the true worth of a game down the drain? Theoretically, couldn't it be more costly? If your space for games is limited, couldn't that dusty-never-gonna-play game be costing you the experience of a game you want to see the true worth of because you have no more room for new games?
I feel this kind of thinking only applies to games you enjoy. Obviously, the copy of Kidz Sports: Crazy Golf that my mother gave me for Christmas was going to the nearest Gamestop the minute she left town.
Whats to me even a worse waste of money is buying games at launch, just wait a few months which is nothing really and see the prices drop like a brick. Also when I still bought console games I never traded them in, well I just traded them with classmates for games I had not played and after some time when we where both done with the game we traded them back. This works a lot better than that silly system where you only get a fraction of the money for a game. Just trade the game with friends lend them your games while you lend theirs really its a lot more efficient.
Not everyone is a completionist.
Not everyone is a collector.
Not everyone is a hardcore gamer.
Some people just trade in games because they are done with them.
I think some of us are well aware of how trade-ins can be a vicious cycle if we really like a particular game, but the used market also helps create new customers for developers that otherwise might not have been discovered by consumers. Someone that buys Fallout New Vegas or Persona 4 used might become an Obsidian or Atlus fan thereafter.
If no one trades in, then that has a lesser chance of happening.
I think its better to temper how you buy games rather than rush out and buy new games willy-nilly. With the Wii U launch looming I can already spot the sorts of games I would keep and the sorts of games I would trade in eventually.
The solution? Don't buy the ones I know i would trade in, Gamefly those instead. If by chance they really stick with me as something to keep, I buy them new later.
Not everyone is a collector.
Not everyone is a hardcore gamer.
Some people just trade in games because they are done with them.
I think some of us are well aware of how trade-ins can be a vicious cycle if we really like a particular game, but the used market also helps create new customers for developers that otherwise might not have been discovered by consumers. Someone that buys Fallout New Vegas or Persona 4 used might become an Obsidian or Atlus fan thereafter.
If no one trades in, then that has a lesser chance of happening.
I think its better to temper how you buy games rather than rush out and buy new games willy-nilly. With the Wii U launch looming I can already spot the sorts of games I would keep and the sorts of games I would trade in eventually.
The solution? Don't buy the ones I know i would trade in, Gamefly those instead. If by chance they really stick with me as something to keep, I buy them new later.
Silent Protagonist put it pretty well. Gamefly, discretion and patience works well for me when it comes to gaming.
Nice write up. I see your point in getting you money from a game, but as Silent Protagonist put it, it's almost like you methodically calculate a game's worth on every level. Although I admire your dedication to such a practice, I can't say I agree with your views, it would actually take the fun out of it for me.
i admit that i tend to trade in almost every FPS i owned since Call of Duty II. They are good for a fast session in between (after the initial period of unhealthy obsession) but they do not age very well, not at all. The single player campaigns are ususally a bad joke nowadays and due to the fast succession of new installements the communities are rather fragmented - making it harder to find players after some time has passed.
Other genres are much more difficult to let go.
apart from the pangs of bad conscience i experience right now i liked reading this.
thanks
Other genres are much more difficult to let go.
apart from the pangs of bad conscience i experience right now i liked reading this.
thanks
Reasons why I trade:
1) Why play an online game (read Call of Duty) out of it's current generation where the online player-base is dead or only full of super elite geeks?
2) I didn't LIKE the game.
3) I completed the game. I don't achievement whore on most things. I just like some entertainment, challenge and a good story.
4) I can't afford to blow $60 on multiple games per month.
Now I don't trade everything in. Currently I am keeping Arkham Asylum, and Arkham City because they are just ace. Same goes for some Guitar Hero titles, Deux Ex, Red Dead, all on the 360. I've blown through hundreds of games, mainly on the PC, and yes, most have been a great experience. But there's only a handful of games I'll replay. A literal handful.
Now I've worked in the games retail industry and I can safely say 99% of PS3 games are returned/traded in in mint condition, purely because of the Blu-ray aspect. 360, being the shoddy bastard that it is, tends to mark the discs much easier.
We also had habitual players - someone who'd buy a game Friday, trade it in the next Thursday. They viewed it kind of like Blockbuster, only they could keep the game if they really liked it, but had the option to get rid of it if it was Dragon Age 2 levels of turd.
Personally I think the way the market, the developers and everyone in the industry should react to is the complete opposite of EA and the pass system. You should have real incentives to keep the game. But that shouldn't be because you'll screw anyone who buys the traded in copy next.
1) Why play an online game (read Call of Duty) out of it's current generation where the online player-base is dead or only full of super elite geeks?
2) I didn't LIKE the game.
3) I completed the game. I don't achievement whore on most things. I just like some entertainment, challenge and a good story.
4) I can't afford to blow $60 on multiple games per month.
Now I don't trade everything in. Currently I am keeping Arkham Asylum, and Arkham City because they are just ace. Same goes for some Guitar Hero titles, Deux Ex, Red Dead, all on the 360. I've blown through hundreds of games, mainly on the PC, and yes, most have been a great experience. But there's only a handful of games I'll replay. A literal handful.
Now I've worked in the games retail industry and I can safely say 99% of PS3 games are returned/traded in in mint condition, purely because of the Blu-ray aspect. 360, being the shoddy bastard that it is, tends to mark the discs much easier.
We also had habitual players - someone who'd buy a game Friday, trade it in the next Thursday. They viewed it kind of like Blockbuster, only they could keep the game if they really liked it, but had the option to get rid of it if it was Dragon Age 2 levels of turd.
Personally I think the way the market, the developers and everyone in the industry should react to is the complete opposite of EA and the pass system. You should have real incentives to keep the game. But that shouldn't be because you'll screw anyone who buys the traded in copy next.
The only game I regret trading in was Dante's Inferno. I played i once, thought it was short and assumed I would never play it again. I traded it in.
After a couple months, I had a strange urge to play it again. So I bought it again.
I should of kept my first one because both the case and CD were in good condition. My second one is not. :(
Other than that I dont give a flying fuck about my other games I've traded.
After a couple months, I had a strange urge to play it again. So I bought it again.
I should of kept my first one because both the case and CD were in good condition. My second one is not. :(
Other than that I dont give a flying fuck about my other games I've traded.
I only buy games I desperately want, so I end up with about 4-6 new AAA games every year. This year, I've bought Mass Effect 3, Sleeping Dogs and Dark Souls. I am waiting for AC III, Dishonored, and XCOM. I find buying indie games (especially Humble Bundles) helps stretch out a dry period when you get a bit bored.
But, honestly, I am a rare breed. I have many friends who buy games, then to rush through them to re-coup some of their money by trading them back in, or using them as credit to buy another new release. It's a pretty stupid cycle, really.
Some of my best game memories come from trade ins, or rather, from charity shops. Seriously, charity shops are where it's at if you are looking for old PC games or PS2 stuff. I got Age of Empires II, KOTOR, Fable (in French) and others for ridiculously cheap because charity shops don't understand the value of some games, so they mark 'em down.
But, honestly, I am a rare breed. I have many friends who buy games, then to rush through them to re-coup some of their money by trading them back in, or using them as credit to buy another new release. It's a pretty stupid cycle, really.
Some of my best game memories come from trade ins, or rather, from charity shops. Seriously, charity shops are where it's at if you are looking for old PC games or PS2 stuff. I got Age of Empires II, KOTOR, Fable (in French) and others for ridiculously cheap because charity shops don't understand the value of some games, so they mark 'em down.
... what Silent Protagonist said.
I trade in games or sometimes give them away to friends. I'm simply not a collector. When I'm done with something I want it out of my house. I keep games I might re-play but over the years I've learned that this often never evolves, or eventually the media becomes outdated. I still have a few VHS tapes that I have yet to convert to DVD and then dump (mostly my wedding video).
I recently just threw out a whole bunch of floppy drive games that I found hidden away in a box (my Zork collection mostly). Who has a floppy drive on their PC nowadays and the operating systems likely wouldn't run these old floppies anyway. What was the sense of hanging on to them?
I would rather get rid of old games that I have no interest in re-playing now... while they are worth a few dollars and while someone else can still play and enjoy them. It's better than waiting 20 years and throwing them in the garbage. I guess the odd game might actually be worth something in 20 years...but likely not worth much more than the trade in value anyway (unless it's a really rare game and I don't tend to play imports or odd games).
I trade in games or sometimes give them away to friends. I'm simply not a collector. When I'm done with something I want it out of my house. I keep games I might re-play but over the years I've learned that this often never evolves, or eventually the media becomes outdated. I still have a few VHS tapes that I have yet to convert to DVD and then dump (mostly my wedding video).
I recently just threw out a whole bunch of floppy drive games that I found hidden away in a box (my Zork collection mostly). Who has a floppy drive on their PC nowadays and the operating systems likely wouldn't run these old floppies anyway. What was the sense of hanging on to them?
I would rather get rid of old games that I have no interest in re-playing now... while they are worth a few dollars and while someone else can still play and enjoy them. It's better than waiting 20 years and throwing them in the garbage. I guess the odd game might actually be worth something in 20 years...but likely not worth much more than the trade in value anyway (unless it's a really rare game and I don't tend to play imports or odd games).
