surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
the online pass is never about stopping used sales it is about getting money from used sales if they wanted to stop used sales they could just have implemented the pc cd key system with online activation that would have stopped used sales to
After some consideration, I find my self agreeing with the arguments against making gamers pay for functionality (online etc.) unless the game is purchased new. At the same time, these publishers are often raking risk when they publish a game, particularly when it's not part of an established franchise. if they feel like used games are cutting into potential profits (which is possible) then they need to take what ever actions they feel appropriate. I'm sure the consider the implications of things like online passes and the possible effect it can have. At the end of the day most of these publishers have to answer to their board and it seems more publishers are embracing this strategy. Maybe it's shortsighted but for the time being I believe we'll see more of these types of online passes.
@PalinRMA
It is hugely unlikely that the gaming industry will switch to digital distribution any time soon. Although digital distribution would be great for the big gaming companies, I know no one who would forego a hard copy of a game for its software equivalent.
As for your claim that buying games second-hand is as bad as piracy, I vehemently disagree with you and really can't muster up the energy to prove you wrong. I'm sure some kind member of the Destructoid community will stumble upon this story and do it for me.
It is hugely unlikely that the gaming industry will switch to digital distribution any time soon. Although digital distribution would be great for the big gaming companies, I know no one who would forego a hard copy of a game for its software equivalent.
As for your claim that buying games second-hand is as bad as piracy, I vehemently disagree with you and really can't muster up the energy to prove you wrong. I'm sure some kind member of the Destructoid community will stumble upon this story and do it for me.
How is the used game market good for the industry? It's good for Gamestop, but that's pretty much it.
"The next generation will switch to digital distribution. Get used to it"
NOPE.jpg
As dumb as most publishers are, they're not willing to cut out most of their consumer base who would not jump into digital distribution. Publishers are too stupid to discount games even though they are digital only(ex. Xbox on demand), and no one wants to shell out $60 without the possibility of being able to recoup that money when they get tired of the game.
NOPE.jpg
As dumb as most publishers are, they're not willing to cut out most of their consumer base who would not jump into digital distribution. Publishers are too stupid to discount games even though they are digital only(ex. Xbox on demand), and no one wants to shell out $60 without the possibility of being able to recoup that money when they get tired of the game.
Danielzilla
How is the used game market good for the industry? It's good for Gamestop, but that's pretty much it.
You have it right there.
How is the used game market good for the industry? It's good for Gamestop, but that's pretty much it.
You have it right there.
i don't really care about the topic here, but something has become apparent to me. why is it that dtoid is ignoring the issues in japan? with the obvious connection between the japanese and gaming, why hasn't the issue even been discussed here? why is it that we haven't formed the intention to help? are we really just self serving slobs that only care about the gratification that gaming brings? does destructoid really not care about helping the japanese people (and therefore japanese gaming)? i really thought this was a no brainer, guys. who the fuck cares about the used game market, there are much more important things happening in the industry and world. let's start talking about THAT.
bobyoko: Um, they didn't. But it's not going to be an everyday update because Dtoid is not the fucking news. Are you really this dense? Instead of bitching on a VIDEOGAME BLOG why don't you go donate or discuss this on a news blog?
@PalinRMA
Wait, how is the used game market good for the industry?
Uhh...it gets people buying games?
When people buy games they give a fuck about games. That's pretty damn good for the industry.
Industry dies without interest. It allows consumers to take risks on franchise they might never have taken a risk in, giving them mote incentive to buy that next title or others like it, for the new price. And as videogames expand into DLC and merchandise territory there's a new place for that interest to be, for lack of a better word, exploited.
GameStop is very good for the industry. GameStop buys up niche titles new that Wal-Mart and Target won't. GameStop advertises to the masses on all the new titles in a fashion that a lot of other stores can't. GameStop makes money off of used sales but they then turn around and buy boatloads of the latest and greatest and far quicker rate than department stores.
I get if you don't like GameStop, I work in an indie videogame shop and we're right down the street from GameStop so they're probably more of a threat to my job and my livelihood (awful spelling) than they are to you, but to say GameStop is no good for the industry is just flat out wrong.
@bobyoko
I've kinda wondered if Dtoid would do anything myself. Especially with Dale being there. I mean he did write his whole piece on the experience, and a few stories about auctions have gone up, but that's it.
Wait, how is the used game market good for the industry?
Uhh...it gets people buying games?
When people buy games they give a fuck about games. That's pretty damn good for the industry.
Industry dies without interest. It allows consumers to take risks on franchise they might never have taken a risk in, giving them mote incentive to buy that next title or others like it, for the new price. And as videogames expand into DLC and merchandise territory there's a new place for that interest to be, for lack of a better word, exploited.
GameStop is very good for the industry. GameStop buys up niche titles new that Wal-Mart and Target won't. GameStop advertises to the masses on all the new titles in a fashion that a lot of other stores can't. GameStop makes money off of used sales but they then turn around and buy boatloads of the latest and greatest and far quicker rate than department stores.
I get if you don't like GameStop, I work in an indie videogame shop and we're right down the street from GameStop so they're probably more of a threat to my job and my livelihood (awful spelling) than they are to you, but to say GameStop is no good for the industry is just flat out wrong.
@bobyoko
I've kinda wondered if Dtoid would do anything myself. Especially with Dale being there. I mean he did write his whole piece on the experience, and a few stories about auctions have gone up, but that's it.
One thing that blows my mind over the last few days is the game Homefront.
Stopped in at a shop a few days ago and was amazed to find out that if you buy the
game new you get a code thats one use only. Apparently, this gives you access to
the whole game. Now the second owner (from a used sale) or a renter that doesn't
have this code they get stuck with the ability to only play through the 5th level.
This is the kind of one use code that is a terrible idea. I agree with the
'extra' content type of code, but a code that prevents you from playing the
game is just wrong.
Stopped in at a shop a few days ago and was amazed to find out that if you buy the
game new you get a code thats one use only. Apparently, this gives you access to
the whole game. Now the second owner (from a used sale) or a renter that doesn't
have this code they get stuck with the ability to only play through the 5th level.
This is the kind of one use code that is a terrible idea. I agree with the
'extra' content type of code, but a code that prevents you from playing the
game is just wrong.
Whether publishers or retialers win or lose with whatever new profit boosting schemes they cook up in the next few years.. it wont mean a damn.
Both instututions are OBSOLETE. All the games industry needs to be TRUELY GREAT is content developers and content consumers, thats it. publishers and retailers do nothing but HURT developers and consumers. As soon as online marketlpaces give the freedom to developers to sell and distrubite their games digitally (how software is MEANT to be distributed), then we can cut all these greedy useless companies out of the business entirely. Nothing against them personally, but I fully believe that the quality and quantity of games getting into consumers hands will exponentially increase, and the cost of doing so will become much more affordable.
Games do not need to cost $60 to be successful for a developer. Of that pricetag, the people who actually create the games we love only get a small percentage. Im not saying that for example the 99c standard value in the Appstore is better, only the rediculously popular games in that catagory can bring enough profit for a developer to survive.. but surely without all the overhead from paying all these middlemen to promote, package, shelf, and clerk all these games out there, we could easily lower retail costs by atleast half. If that sounds too crazy to be true, remember that the largest publishers spend more promoting and distributing their largest games, than they spend developing the game itself.
As far as the "used" product market goes, it's BS. anybody who's ever sold or traded a $60 to gamestop for $2, only to see it back on the shelf later the same day for $40 should understand there's something wrong here. There isnt a person alive that would rather not have a new item instead of a used item. The problem is that the retail pricepoint for new games is too high for a large percentage of the core consumer class.. which unfortunately is getting larger everyday. So the only alternative is to bring the price down on new products, not by cutting content or rushing out incomplete products.. but by cutting out the people in the middle.
Publishers will never lower prices on software.. but developers WILL. If you pay even $20 for a game and that money goes directly to a developer, they will actually stand to profit a great deal more than from their share of that same sale after a publisher and retailer take their cut.
Give the power to the developers and the consumers we all win.
Both instututions are OBSOLETE. All the games industry needs to be TRUELY GREAT is content developers and content consumers, thats it. publishers and retailers do nothing but HURT developers and consumers. As soon as online marketlpaces give the freedom to developers to sell and distrubite their games digitally (how software is MEANT to be distributed), then we can cut all these greedy useless companies out of the business entirely. Nothing against them personally, but I fully believe that the quality and quantity of games getting into consumers hands will exponentially increase, and the cost of doing so will become much more affordable.
Games do not need to cost $60 to be successful for a developer. Of that pricetag, the people who actually create the games we love only get a small percentage. Im not saying that for example the 99c standard value in the Appstore is better, only the rediculously popular games in that catagory can bring enough profit for a developer to survive.. but surely without all the overhead from paying all these middlemen to promote, package, shelf, and clerk all these games out there, we could easily lower retail costs by atleast half. If that sounds too crazy to be true, remember that the largest publishers spend more promoting and distributing their largest games, than they spend developing the game itself.
As far as the "used" product market goes, it's BS. anybody who's ever sold or traded a $60 to gamestop for $2, only to see it back on the shelf later the same day for $40 should understand there's something wrong here. There isnt a person alive that would rather not have a new item instead of a used item. The problem is that the retail pricepoint for new games is too high for a large percentage of the core consumer class.. which unfortunately is getting larger everyday. So the only alternative is to bring the price down on new products, not by cutting content or rushing out incomplete products.. but by cutting out the people in the middle.
Publishers will never lower prices on software.. but developers WILL. If you pay even $20 for a game and that money goes directly to a developer, they will actually stand to profit a great deal more than from their share of that same sale after a publisher and retailer take their cut.
Give the power to the developers and the consumers we all win.
Well said. As I've said time and time again the used market is always going to be around. It's big business like GameStop that has turned it into a very lucrative market, completely shutting out devs/publishers from profits. Not the consumer. Publishers/Devs and stores should be competing with each other for our business and our money, not teaming up against us.
Buying used games can ABSOLUTELY take away from new games sales in SOME cases, how is this an argument? If a kid wants to buy the new $60 game that just came out last week(assuming it doesn't have online pass BS) and decides to save $5 on a used copy instead of the new one, obviously that dev just lost the profit off a new sale. However if that same kid is looking for a copy of Knights of the Old Republic it goes without saying that the used game market is his best, cheapest and possibly only option. As a gamer that refuses to pirate, the used games market has helped me rebuild my collections with many classics I loved as a kid.
Hey THQ, guess what? I rented Smackdown vs Raw 2011 from Redbox on a whim after seeing the Destructoid gang have so much fun playing on Jtv with all the awesome community-created characters. And wouldn't you know when I tried to access the online community I couldn't because I chose not to pay $10 to access contents for a game I wasn't quite sold on yet. I wasn't even able to truly "try before I buy" so I DIDN'T BUY YOUR GAME! Online passes make renting many games with online play a waste of my money, and if I can't try your game in it's entirety first I won't even consider buying it unless it appeals to my particular niche of taste. Online passes are another tool for me to use in deciding whether or not I want to buy a game I'm "on the fence" about purchasing these days, if it requires an online pass I WILL PASS! *ba dum bum!*
@bobyoko
I appreciate your sentiment very much, more so because I have extended family in Tokyo, but don't attack the people out here and claim they don't care simply because they neglect to mention the horrible current state of events in their VIDEOGAME comments. If you frequent this site at all you would know the Destructoid community as a whole was very concerned for one of our own (<3 ya Dale) and while we may not shout it out to the world, many of us care very much and have made personal efforts to contribute.
Hey THQ, guess what? I rented Smackdown vs Raw 2011 from Redbox on a whim after seeing the Destructoid gang have so much fun playing on Jtv with all the awesome community-created characters. And wouldn't you know when I tried to access the online community I couldn't because I chose not to pay $10 to access contents for a game I wasn't quite sold on yet. I wasn't even able to truly "try before I buy" so I DIDN'T BUY YOUR GAME! Online passes make renting many games with online play a waste of my money, and if I can't try your game in it's entirety first I won't even consider buying it unless it appeals to my particular niche of taste. Online passes are another tool for me to use in deciding whether or not I want to buy a game I'm "on the fence" about purchasing these days, if it requires an online pass I WILL PASS! *ba dum bum!*
@bobyoko
I appreciate your sentiment very much, more so because I have extended family in Tokyo, but don't attack the people out here and claim they don't care simply because they neglect to mention the horrible current state of events in their VIDEOGAME comments. If you frequent this site at all you would know the Destructoid community as a whole was very concerned for one of our own (<3 ya Dale) and while we may not shout it out to the world, many of us care very much and have made personal efforts to contribute.
Well, if people would not being STUPID by buying their used games from GameStop for only $5 less than the same game new, this wouldn't even be an issue! If the used games were bought at a significant discount like >= $20 more off, the $10 fee wouldn't be a problem.
They said differently last year. The fan backlash must have taken it's toll on the company.
They don't honestly give a shit about the consumer. After all in THQ's own words "Buying used is cheating" and "Worse than piracy".
As has been stated, I'm all for a company/publisher to include some cool free dlc stuff to new buyers, but don't take a major component out of the games to those who buy used. That's bullshit.
They don't honestly give a shit about the consumer. After all in THQ's own words "Buying used is cheating" and "Worse than piracy".
As has been stated, I'm all for a company/publisher to include some cool free dlc stuff to new buyers, but don't take a major component out of the games to those who buy used. That's bullshit.
People keep saying you save only $5 going used. Uh...yeah, if you try to get the game a few days after release or something. You can wait for a game to go down in price new, but either that won't happen, or it will and then the game will quickly cease to exist in any place that isn't a used games store or online somewhere.
I don't buy used.
But I do not support the limiting of the online community. the $10 pass is straight up bullshit.
But I do not support the limiting of the online community. the $10 pass is straight up bullshit.
" The most important thing is we have to participate in the value chain in used games"
Dear THQ, EA and others.
If you SINCERELY want to participate then your choices are as follows:
OPTION 1.) buy, stock, price, market, sell, and fulfill used games YOURSELF and in the process PUT SOME OF YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK to earn revenue from used games sales.
OPTION 2.) buy stock in a used game retailer AND PUT SOME OF YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK to SHARE in used game revenue as the value your purchased equity in the retailer increases.
Those are your legitimate and honest ways to participate in the used market.
Your approach, Option 3.) is dishonest.
Option 3.) Demand TRIBUTE from retailers or your customers through abuses of contract law in the form of user agreements that demand a lot without providing any real consideration for compliance. (sell you something twice, or sell you something that disappears).
Pretend that 1st sale laws somehow don't apply to your product because you consider software to be some exotic and novel property AKA "magic beans" that exists beyond the normal scope of consumer protection laws merely because you claim it does.
It is obvious that your approach is dishonest because it aims to gain(not earn) additional revenue and weaken competition WITHOUT EVER PUTTING YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK.
Instead of competing in the used game market or investing in it you either try to shake down used the game retailers like a mafioso with threats of going online only, or you rob the customer of product value by sabotaging the resale value of your product without justly compensating for the loss of value to the original purchaser by lowering the purchase price.
Dear THQ, EA and others.
If you SINCERELY want to participate then your choices are as follows:
OPTION 1.) buy, stock, price, market, sell, and fulfill used games YOURSELF and in the process PUT SOME OF YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK to earn revenue from used games sales.
OPTION 2.) buy stock in a used game retailer AND PUT SOME OF YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK to SHARE in used game revenue as the value your purchased equity in the retailer increases.
Those are your legitimate and honest ways to participate in the used market.
Your approach, Option 3.) is dishonest.
Option 3.) Demand TRIBUTE from retailers or your customers through abuses of contract law in the form of user agreements that demand a lot without providing any real consideration for compliance. (sell you something twice, or sell you something that disappears).
Pretend that 1st sale laws somehow don't apply to your product because you consider software to be some exotic and novel property AKA "magic beans" that exists beyond the normal scope of consumer protection laws merely because you claim it does.
It is obvious that your approach is dishonest because it aims to gain(not earn) additional revenue and weaken competition WITHOUT EVER PUTTING YOUR OWN MONEY AT RISK.
Instead of competing in the used game market or investing in it you either try to shake down used the game retailers like a mafioso with threats of going online only, or you rob the customer of product value by sabotaging the resale value of your product without justly compensating for the loss of value to the original purchaser by lowering the purchase price.
I love how everyone is bitching about it with knee-jerk reactions like "THQ is punishing us for not having the money to buy new!"
Really? You couldn't afford the $5 more to buy new? At Gamestop a newer used game is $55, and a new is $60. If you can't afford the $5 difference maybe you should consider a different hobby or a job.
Really? You couldn't afford the $5 more to buy new? At Gamestop a newer used game is $55, and a new is $60. If you can't afford the $5 difference maybe you should consider a different hobby or a job.
my emotions: but (shrugging his shoulders) you know nothing about fincar online
follow
