Toys R Us is today rolling out its huge nationwide videogame trade-in program, a new initiative that will allow customers to sell back all manner of games, including classic titles that retailers such as GameStop have long-since forgotten. If you want an idea of just what sort of games are acceptable, be aware that Toys R Us will accept Atari 2600 games. Yes, you read that correctly.

Trade-ins will be exchanged for gift cards that can be spent at any store or used online. To trade a title in, simply take your moisture-warped and dusty old crap to the "guest services desk" where the items will be scanned. If you accept the price, you get a gift card and that's that. Everyone's a winner. 

This is seriously surprising news. Who'd have thought that Toys R Us, of all stores, would go all retro on us? Looks like it might be a nice store to check out if you're in need of some old obscurities. 

No sh*t?

Eidos life president Ian Livingstone has attacked the pre-owned sales market, becoming one in a long line of people who have suddenly decided capitalism is bad, despite all the exploitation they've done of the very same market. He believes used games are a serious issue and that something needs to be done. 

"The pre-owned market is a serious problem, because there is no benefit to developers or publishers," he explains. "A shop makes a bigger margin on a pre-owned title, and can sell them six or seven times, so there is no incentive for them to reorder and the content creator gets no slice of the action."

Lingstone notes, however, that retail chains are still crucial: "These aren't just shops, they are a marketing tool, a window into our world where software houses can display their wares."

Most publishes don't care about their consumers, often going so far as to show contempt, so why should consumers care about publishers? It amuses me how companies will be as cutthroat and ruthless as they like, yet balk and cry when a retail outlet decided to be equally as cuthroat and ruthless.

Maybe when we consumers get a guarantee that our sixty dollars will actually get us a game worth sixty dollars, I'll pull out a little violin for those poor, poor publishers.

While visiting Valve this past week to pop zombie heads in Left 4 Dead 2, we took the time to sit down with marketing VP Doug Lombardi to chat about two subjects very close to my heart -- used games and piracy. While Valve has used Steam as a great way of dealing with such issues, we wondered whether the studio's retail games suffered at all, and what they made of the whole used game debate. Lobardi's answer was quite refreshing.

"We always see these overall numbers, like how much money GameStop's making per year off of used game sales," he says, "but we really don't have a breakdown of details for those. I don't personally know, after being at Valve since Half-Life 1, how many copies of our games per year are sold used, and on the PC versus the 360, so I think there's a certain amount of information that's missing, sort of like piracy. I think a lot of folks cry piracy when a game fails to hit their forecast and it may or may not be part of the problem, and it may or may not be all of the problem, but I think to throw any one reason at any problem is probably a mistake, considering the lack of information on both fronts.

"Having said all that, though, I think that it's probably true to say that gamers tend to have affinity for the games that they like, so if you're doing your job and making a good game, and providing a high level of service for that game at the time of release and post-release, I'm guessing you're probably less of a victim of piracy and trade, because people want to have the full copy, the legal copy, and have all the updates.

"I think there are ways of curbing both piracy and used game sales by providing a higher level of service at the time of launch and post-launch. And I think what we're seeing, as platforms become more and more connected, that this problem will become less and less an issue as the idea of offering a service post-launch becomes more and more en vogue."

It's always good to see a developer that doesn't stomp its feet and have a trantrum because GameStop's exploiting the same free market that they exploit. I'm totally with Doug on this one -- people keep games that they like, and that they feel they can get their money's worth from. If your game wasn't made to be worth keeping, you shouldn't whine and moan when it's sitting on a GameStop shelf a week later.

Many of you loved Crackdown. I loved Crackdown, too. Maybe we should form a club. If we do form a club, Gamestop isn't allowed to join. Yep, once again a developer did not sell as many games as expected, and those evil, evil secondhand copies are to blame. 

"With Crackdown we sold about 1.5 million copies, but even at that we pretty much only managed to break even," says Realtime Worlds boss Dave Jones. "It was due to the amount of factors that were out of our control as the developer, influences such as GameStop's amazing used-game sales; we know 1.5 million new copies were sold, but it's likely there were 2.5, three million sold when you include used."

To be honest, this kind of thing is expected. It's not like Microsoft exactly pushed the game out of the gate in terms of marketing, even with the Halo 3 beta key, so it's little wonder that people bought it used at a much later date rather than pick it up brand new. I personally think it says a lot more about the game's marketing than the used game market that not even a beta key was enough to make people take the risk on a new purchase.

Once again for those at the back of the class: The games industry is a business. Businesses have competition. Publishers need to man up and compete with used games, not just sit back and whine because they're not making an extra million dollars. I find it amazing how some of these businesses conduct themselves without mercy, morality or scruples of any kind, which I can appreciate, but then expect retailers and consumers to show them the sympathy they've never shown others.

It doesn't work both ways.

The games industry is a multimillion-dollar behemoth, currently raking in more cash than Hollywood and growing at an exponential rate. There is no denying that it is the predominant form of contemporary entertainment and looks only set to continue remaining the dominant medium of choice for many years to come.

However, videogames are under threat. A very real and threatening threat that threatens to threaten everything that we hold dear. This threat is real and it is a threat. I am of course referring to USED VIDEOGAMES, the single most dangerous beast the videogame industry has ever faced, and a pervasive peril that could tear at the very fabric of American civilization. 

Used videogames are a truth. An inconvenient truth, if you will. Read on as we tell you about the disgusting truth that is used games. It's so very, very disgusting.

Dave Perry is obsessed with the issue of used games. His rants on the subject have been numerous, and now he's implicated GameStop and its ilk in the game industry's recent drive to pursue digital distribution. Claiming that his own digital service Gaiki has already made folks at GameStop "hate" him, Perry has basically implied that such services are the company's own fault.

"I've made so much money from their store, so I can't be mean to them about that," says Perry, talking about Gaikai. "I can be mean about their used game policy, because they're pushing the industry to digital distribution perhaps faster than it would have gone."

Perry will likely never shut up about used games until the world has gone fully digital, but I really wish he'd can it. We get it -- publishers love making vast amounts of money and they feel cheated that they can't continue making cash off something they already sold once. Boo hoo, poor publisher.

Once again, I'll reiterate what I've said many times before -- it's a fact of life and a part of business. Capitalism is great for the games industry when it's using the system to make a fat profit, but sadly you can't just cut out the bits of capitalism you don't like. Take the good with the bad, the bad in this case being that GameStop has a right to sell secondhand products, just like car dealerships and charity chops can sell used cars and clothes.

I wish publishers would just sit tight and wait for the digital age. We all know they're going to rape we  customers with the fury of a thousand suns once they achieve complete market control, so the least they could do is shut up and take the hit while consumers still have a choice.

Reggie Fils-Aime, the savory Nintendo of America President, has been making wild claims about used games, joining the ranks of those in the industry who only like the parts of Capitalism that benefit them, and wish certain parts would go away so they can have their meatloaf and eat it too.

"You don't see businesses selling used music CDs or used DVDs," claims Reggie, ignoring the fact that you see businesses selling used music CDs or used DVDs. "More and more retailers are experimenting with the used game mode.

"We don't believe used games are in the best interest of the consumer. We have products that consumers want to hold onto. They want to play all of the levels of a Zelda game and unlock all of the levels."

Quite how the concept of secondhand games means that customers can't hold onto their games, I don't know. However, publishers rarely seem to inhabit the realm of Earthly logic when talking about used videogames, instead existing in some alternate fantasy kingdom where they are all given loads of money for doing nothing. Still, he continues with his inane chatter:

"A game like Personal Trainer Cooking has a long life, We believe used games aren't in the consumer's best interest. Describe another form of entertainment that has a vibrant used goods market. Used books have never taken off. The consumer likes having a brand-new experience and reliving it over and over again. If you create the right type of experience, that also happens in video games."

To Reggie, the used car market isn't real. He also seems to get the words "consumer" and "Nintendo" confused an awful lot.

God of War creator and Youtube video poster David Jaffe has posted his latest diatribe, this time tackling the thorny issue of used games. You already know our stance by now -- that publishers need to stop whining and accept that some parts of capitlism aren't as kind to them as others. Jaffe, however, believes we should keep our sticky beaks out.

According to Jaffe, it's none of our business. We, the consumer, should have no part of the ongoing used game debate, and it should be a matter for publishers and retailers only. 

"I don't mean this in a mean way, like it's none of the consumers business," explains Jaffe. "But literally, it's none of the consumer's business. It should not affect the consumer at all. All the consumer should worry about is, can I get the best deal possible?"

Right, and a part of getting the best deal possible is worrying about the future of secondhand games. I don't agree with Jaffe that consumers, those people whom publishers seem to believe are a right and not a privilege, shouldn't have an opinion on the matter. I understand that he's on our side, and he brings up some great points, but it's good that we know what's going on. It's our money, and we all know that eventually publishers will exploit digital distribution and choke the secondhand market out of existence. What happens then? What happens when publishers can price-fix with extreme prejudice? Is that not our business either?

The debate between secondhand retailers and publishers IS our business, especially due to the fact that it keeps happening in a public arena. If publishers don't want us getting involved, then maybe they should stop airing their dirty laundry for all to see.

The used game debate is one that shows no sign of slowing down, with most publishers ironically (read: hypocritically) raging such capitalistic practices. We've covered the majority of these outbursts, arguing time and again that secondhand games are a basic part of trade and commerce, and that game publishers shouldn't try and be special exceptions to the rule. Luckily, it seems a few people get that, not least Microsoft's Chris Lewis.

"I'm a fan of the ecosystem overall," explains the EMEA VP. "I can see the positive in it, because I can see that what you then get is more and more people touching, playing, experiencing a game that they may not otherwise have access to.

"I think you've got to try and extract some positive from it, and that's undoubtedly a good factor -- a positive swirl of ecosystem that results. Clearly it's a reality, and certain retailers are very focused and spend a lot of time on it. It's good business for them."

Lewis' opinion is grounded and realistic, and it's great that he's able to pick his positives out of the whole situation. Naturally of course, the Microsoft man would like to see more money made out of each sale, and is among those who view DLC as a way of doing so:

"I think things like premium downloadable content, and that kind of thing, will ultimately play a part in used games - and that's not me saying that it's a great way for us to try and minimize that. I think it will be a great enhancement to the way that people experience games. If some additional content is available via the Xbox Live service, for instance, that further enriches the game experience and might encourage folks to hang on their games for a bit longer."

I wish more publishers (and people within Microsoft) thought the way Lewis does. I would be so much happier forking out extra money to people who believed in rewarding and encouraging their consumers, rather than spend their time whining about not making an extra million dollars.

Lately, a good deal of game industry spokesmen have shown just how unreasonable and out-of-touch they are by whining about second-hand games, pleading that somehow their industry should be exempt from a basic rule of trade. Sega Europe, however, has admitted that secondhand games aren't high on the publisher's list of worries, claiming it has a more "realistic" view of the situation.

"Right now it's probably not on our top ten list of things that we need to take action and be concerned about," explains boss man Mike Hayes. "The whole second-hand games market is one of those very, very sensitive areas that I've got to say Sega keeps a pretty low profile on - and I'll tell you why. I know that there are publishers that are vehemently, aggressively against it.

"My reluctant view is that while I can understand that, if publishers were to try and enforce a non-second-hand market to the consumer, I think there would be relationship damage with the consumer. Of course, commercially, do I support it? Of course not, and I have to think here of the 650 people we employ at Sega Europe.

"However, do we have a successful business working with the retailers that offer that service? Yes, we do. So would I ever join a campaign to get it stopped? The answer is no. Do I like it? The answer is no. I may be sitting on the fence here, but there needs to be a bit of reality on the market."

Hayes offers the most reasonable assessment of the situation I have seen from an industry rep. Compare that to the publishers who sit in the corner crying about it, trying to garner sympathy because they can't make an extra million dollars from products they've already sold, and I think we can easily see who the bigger, more mature spokesman is.

Atari has joined the crowd of publishers intent on demonizing used games, claiming them to be "extremely painful," but also suggesting that it isn't too concerned in the long-term thanks to its focus on online content.

"Second hand game sales represent consumer choice and desire," states Atari CEO, David Gardner. "Obviously, it has economically been extremely painful for the industry... the publishers don't benefit.

"But as games change and they become more and more network centric, the disc in the box becomes only one part of the experience. As that experience grows then it becomes not such a problem."

I do love how he followed "consumer choice and desire" with "extremely painful." Something tells me that the idea of customers having any sort of choice must feel like needles being dragged along a penis head to some of these publishers. Phil Harrison at least offered one of the most sensible arguments I've seen from an industry spokesman concerning the issue:

"There's no doubt that second hand games sales has a macro-economic impact on the industry and a lot of people get miserable about it. But it's no coincidence that the most valuable games, the one's that have the most lifetime as a game experience, are the one's that don't get resold, that don't get traded."

It's fairly simple. Create a great game, and you'll find that consumers will consider them keepers. Make an Atari game, and you'll find that second-hand store shelves are full to the brim.