BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I don't understand why people are more likely to rewatch a movie than play through a game again.
I'd assume the opposite, personally.
Why do Devs believe they deserve second hand sales? (srs)
- Thread starter CreateNowSleepLater
- Start date
I'd assume the opposite, personally.
Duxxy3
Member
My simple opinion - Publishers of any physical media don't deserve a single dime on a secondary sale.
Not one red cent. They got their money already and there is no other market where publishers are allowed to double dip.
If they want to go to an all digital system, fine... but they are going to run into the same problems that plague PC software, PC games, ebooks, movies and music... large amounts of piracy.
PC games on steam, GOG, GMG and amazon are cheap not just because of increased competition in lower prices, but also because the alternative is that the consumer pays nothing at all and gets the same (or even better) product.
My guess is that Microsoft will go through with this plan and it will get them more money from used games; but the system will get hacked, and whatever gains they made in their used game scheme will be obliterated by the losses from increased piracy.
Not one red cent. They got their money already and there is no other market where publishers are allowed to double dip.
If they want to go to an all digital system, fine... but they are going to run into the same problems that plague PC software, PC games, ebooks, movies and music... large amounts of piracy.
PC games on steam, GOG, GMG and amazon are cheap not just because of increased competition in lower prices, but also because the alternative is that the consumer pays nothing at all and gets the same (or even better) product.
My guess is that Microsoft will go through with this plan and it will get them more money from used games; but the system will get hacked, and whatever gains they made in their used game scheme will be obliterated by the losses from increased piracy.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
Except MS isn't creating Steam or a model like it. Go look at the prices on PSN and Live.
Compared to the budget of a new console title, how much do you really think those re-releases are making for their IP holders?
It's ridiculous to say that "Oh you can have multiple streams of revenue!" when your idea for doing that is to make a game, wait 5-10 years, then release it again. That's hardly comparable to film studios, that do not have to wait the better part of a decade to set up tertiary revenue streams.
Ouch but true..
You speak truths friend
Damn straight.
Wow, This is a firestorm right now for the gaming community and its about time its been set on the table...
Gamestop is the main heart of the issue as I think about it. Its a prime time retailer that's nationwide....
But at the same time despite how shitty I think they are... Gamestop represents something amazing to me. Gaming is popular enough to support its own nationwide retail chain. That's pretty powerful stuff when you think about it. Its a direct channel into the industry and while used games are the main attraction, New games fly off the shelves daily and at every launch event.
These publishers need to be talking to Gamestop, not the consumers
Hasn't it been stated before that a very small percentage of gamers actually beat their games?
I thought it was implied that this thread was explicitly talking about physical copies. I even addressed digital copies in a separate sentence in that post.
This is ignoring friction in the used market and the way that the structure of the market can influence the pricing, sales, and re-sales of particular games (not just the influence of the market structure on game design). These sorts of Econ 101 -type analyses of the market just aren't very helpful. What percentage of games do you think would actually be re-sold two dozen times in the real world, no matter how fun the game looks at first and no matter how crappy it ends up being after you've played for an hour?
Plus I think your analysis of the incentives of game makers is really incomplete. New IPs are basically sold on advertising and word of mouth. Sequels are sold on the basis of fond memories and advertising and word of mouth. There's always an incentive to make a game that people enjoy past the first hour.
daninthemix
Member
In fairness, PSN does actually seem to have some semblence of sanity in its prices, unlike Live.
When I bought my first car from someone else, Honda didn't get a dime. It's called free trade. I don't agree that corporations are people, but people are certainly people and have rights.
They shouldn't be entitled to after purchase sales. BMW isn't calling me asking for money because I'm selling my X5, MagLite didn't demand me to pay them when I loaned my flashlight to a friend, 20th Century Fox doesn't care about the fact I sold my laser disc versions of Star Wars on Ebay.
Why is it that game devs believed they are entitled to sales from all purchases. Gamestop is a middle man. No more than a third party, sort of like Ebay. I want to trade my game, I give it to them for money, they sell to someone else.
Don't confuse piracy with used games... Anything when bought new is used after the first day. The games industry is one of the few that demands money after first sale.
If they are unhappy with the money, ask the publishers for more, or demand retailers give you a bigger cut, or start selling direct from your own sites online. Once you sold it, you got your damn money. You don't get money if I decide to sell it to someone else or let a friend or family borrow it to play.
Why is it that game devs believed they are entitled to sales from all purchases. Gamestop is a middle man. No more than a third party, sort of like Ebay. I want to trade my game, I give it to them for money, they sell to someone else.
Don't confuse piracy with used games... Anything when bought new is used after the first day. The games industry is one of the few that demands money after first sale.
If they are unhappy with the money, ask the publishers for more, or demand retailers give you a bigger cut, or start selling direct from your own sites online. Once you sold it, you got your damn money. You don't get money if I decide to sell it to someone else or let a friend or family borrow it to play.
True.
But it shows there's a market for these kind of games. You can create the engine upfront as an investment, and create 5 Blood Dragon type games.
IT and Games have the incredible luxury of build once use infinite times. Developers should use this to their advantage, instead of building games from scratch over and over again.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
1. "growth" is a relative number. I could have 1000% growth on 0 but i'd still be making 0.
2. Those are domestic numbers. Iron Man 3 has made 1 billion dollars globally so far and will keep making money. How much has CoD Black Ops 2 made globally?
3. The box office is only part of the revenue stream that movies make. While "the console business" is all-encompassing.
what? no they haven't.
and yet I see time and agaiin people on GAF bragging about how they bought such and such recent title for 10 bucks or something crazy low.
Note: I'm not saying you need to buy your games at full price but these kinds of deals weren't always around and definitely not so soon after release
Pretty much.
Jake Tower
Banned
If the mp3s came on a physical media published under authority of the copyright holder, you may freely dispose of it.
The problem is, digitally distributed media cannot be disposed of without explicitly making a copy of it that is not authorized by the copyright holder. Not only has the publisher's rights in the mp3 been exhausted when sold to you, so has yours, since you are left with no way to separate the property without copying it. This is an area where copyright law needs to be updated to preserve your rights of disposal.
Wickerbasket
Member
Well maybe if they paid him a couple hundred grand he'd be more inclined to give them a better idea.
Hint: it's not his job to come up with business plans that work, it's theirs. I'd suggest to them though, that fucking over your customers doesn't usually increase revenue.
Just keep your head in the sand then. Because we never see GOTY/Ultimate Collections re-released a year later. Or Street Fighter/NG Sigma/name your game re-released multiple times in the course of a few years. Or RE4 going from GC to PS2 to PC to Wii to mobile to PS3/360 all within a few years. Or games getting handheld releases, followed by Steam and mobile releases a year or two later. Or on and on...
Nope, it's all just a mirage. Those opportunities just don't exist for publishers.
Never mind all the DLC, Limited Editions, online passes, etc, that also bring in additional revenue streams.
DigitalRicket
Member
I was just using the same reasoning for physical goods with digital media. Games are moving in that direction if they aren't already there.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
When I think about the developer getting a cut of the used game I buy at GameStop, well okay, sounds nice...
But then I think about the right to sell my own games, and suddenly the idea that someone else deserves a cut of my transaction makes my blood boil. That's utterly insane!
But then I think about the right to sell my own games, and suddenly the idea that someone else deserves a cut of my transaction makes my blood boil. That's utterly insane!
Jake Tower
Banned
Evidently, they are, in order set up some kind of used game cartel.
element
Member
It is actually pretty shocking the percentage of people that actually beat games. Achievements greatest impact was allowing developers/publishers to actually see that data.
You need to think about all aspects of the things you are speaking about.
First up. GOTY/Greatest Hits/Whatever are typically a relabel. Hell you can find greatest hits out there with just a sticker saying "Greatest Hits".
Second. Ports. These still take money to do and in the end are considered a new P&L. It isn't free money. VirtualConsole is about as close as you can get as all Nintendo is doing is selling you a ROM. RE4 being PORTED[B/] to any platform is exactly that. A port. Meaning developers had to go back and PORT the game for it to work on the new platform. All those PS HD had to be in the hands of a developer for months on end, go through proper testing, and add features. Again, this isn't free money.
It's not the fault of gamers that publishers are spending exorbitant sums of money trying to make AAA titles, where they have to sell 4 million copies just to turn a profit.
You can get GOTY-level games like The Walking Dead, Journey, and Hotline Miami with much smaller teams and smaller budgets. Sure you'll get smaller sales to match but you'll probably turn an easier profit.
Callibretto
Member
but if they want really varied and different game, then they probably have to create lots of new asset for it, which will just increase the budget all over again, even if the engine is already in place.
btw, I honesttly haven't played far cry 3 or blood dragon, does blood dragon reuse any asset from far cry 3 or is it entirely new?
And that looks to be exactly what they'd like to change to get more money while reducing our options as consumers.
I doubt I'm going to be able to successfully educate you in a forum thread given the deficit we're clearly looking at and how sure you seem to be of your own position already. I was mostly pointing out to un-careful readers the gaping hole in your argument, which I trust is obvious to basically everyone who has the slightest understanding of economics beyond efficient, micro-scale Econ 101 bullshit and who knows what Steam is. Economics is actually a whole field, and I don't know why you'd expect that I'd be able to teach it to you easily over the internet. Go take some courses.
But sure, GameStop and grocery stores are middle men. There's value in that relative to not having middle men, assuming that nothing else at all about the structure of the market changes as a result of not having those middle men. I bolded where I think you've completely missed the point.
As Jake Tower illustrated up thread, they're different things. Microsoft is changing the game with its mandatory install business, but that shouldn't change the rights you, as a consumer, have over a physical copy that you bought.
A movie is a 2 hour time investment with no challenge. A game is a 10-20 hour time investment with challenge. If I want to rewatch Inglorious Basterds, I'm not going to get stuck somewhere in the middle because there's a tough boss or a puzzle I can't remember the solution to.
More than that though, it's just economics. Nobody is going to buy a $15 DVD with the intention of selling it back to MovieStop 2 weeks later for a $4 credit. At that point you might as well rent it. Plenty of people buy games with the intent of selling it back within a month.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
$10 more each gen average. Add to that the intentional cutting out of material sold now as DLC. The shortage of mp maps so they also can sold as DLC. The average cost of a game, especially MP is a lot more than last gen. The number of annual rehashes is also quite a lot more. PS2/Xbox had big launches and sequels but nothing like we see today. Other than Madden and a few others not franchise had a definite sequel coming out 12 months later. All with season passes.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the pricing model of today's games. Not all games should cost $60. Hell, no games should cost $60. I think the current pricing model of mobile and Steam sale games are more accurate. People are way more willing to pay for those, especially with the way they transparently record your purchases and allow you to use it on different devices. They could have sell way more games with lower cost. That way more people are willing to buy games new, and everybody gain (except fucking GameStop).
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
The more I think about this, the more I think this industry-pushed debate shouldn't even be entertained.
Go ahead and block used games through DRM, or go digital only, in order to increase your revenues. Be my guest.
But acting like you deserve it? You don't. Not in any way do you "deserve" a cut of a private transaction between two parties for a game disc that one of them already owns.
Go ahead and block used games through DRM, or go digital only, in order to increase your revenues. Be my guest.
But acting like you deserve it? You don't. Not in any way do you "deserve" a cut of a private transaction between two parties for a game disc that one of them already owns.
DigitalRicket
Member
But doesn't Microsoft do this with every copy of Windows it sells? And haven't they been doing this for years?
Budgets can be lowered. he question is whether or not consumers would accept that? To lower the price of games you would have to lower money put into graphics and audio since these are the things that are causing the cost of development to rise.
Pureauthor
Member
And in the past generation, consumers have shown, very, very, very clearly, that they do not value graphics that much.
Publishers do need a better business model. My point is just that GOTY editions and HD re-releases have not really worked as a business model.
Those are options for people that had mega-hits in the first place. If your game only did middling sales in the first place, then your GOTY edition isn't really going to help that much.
If only they would.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
If publishers and developers fear of being undercut by second hand sales, why not raise your game prices to $99.99 and cover your ass
You'll earn an extra $30 from the first hand sale to cover those budgets that they already have no handle over
Then we'll see what happens next
Rather than the Industry try out multiple insane pricing factors, all homogenize to certain thresholds and make their product get stuck in those few price points
Why does a $15 FPS shooter like Section 8 prejudice (DD Title) can be sold for that, yet the FPS #43678 Wub-Wub-Dub Edition has to be sold for $60, no matter fucking what
B2P (Buy 2 Play) can be such a Huge Fucking Cash Grab going into next gen
I seriously think Destiny and Activision are going to corner that market too, and then the EA's and Ubisoft's of the world will start shifting or wedging their franchises to fit that mold too
You'll earn an extra $30 from the first hand sale to cover those budgets that they already have no handle over
Then we'll see what happens next
Rather than the Industry try out multiple insane pricing factors, all homogenize to certain thresholds and make their product get stuck in those few price points
Why does a $15 FPS shooter like Section 8 prejudice (DD Title) can be sold for that, yet the FPS #43678 Wub-Wub-Dub Edition has to be sold for $60, no matter fucking what
B2P (Buy 2 Play) can be such a Huge Fucking Cash Grab going into next gen
I seriously think Destiny and Activision are going to corner that market too, and then the EA's and Ubisoft's of the world will start shifting or wedging their franchises to fit that mold too
MotionBlue
Member
If the growing trends of DRM, anti-used and always-online continue, I will feel sorry for younger gamers, in 3 or 4 years many of today's games might not work.
Pureauthor
Member
Movies that nobody has heard of or cared about don't really gain much from their alternate revenue streams either.
Night_Trekker
Member
Because they need more money to keep developing high-budget games, so they're going to get it from consumers any way they can.
It would be smarter to develop more interesting games will sensible budgets, but creativity is generally frowned upon by publishers, who only understand video games in terms of probability on investment returns.
It would be smarter to develop more interesting games will sensible budgets, but creativity is generally frowned upon by publishers, who only understand video games in terms of probability on investment returns.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
idk, CoD, Gears, Madden, AC. Do these games that use essentially the same engine really have that much overhead in sound and graphics? Maybe composition of the soundtrack but graphics. Didn't activision pretty much make back their money in the IW engine used in CoD4? Hasn't every other CoD used that engine?
Callibretto
Member
if every gamer actually finish their games, I don't know how this industry can stay alive. there are limited amount of player and time, and if they all actually finish their games, they would have less time playing & buying new games. in that kind of world where people finish their games, only a few games/publishers would survive and the rest are just dead trying to compete for playtime.
the reason steam is successful is they found a way to make you buy games you don't really need or even have time to play, people who have lots of backlog games should be proud of themselves and know that we helped this industry afloat. lol*
*(have a shit ton of backlog and unplayed games in steam)
I didn't know it wasn't everywhere, but that second paragraph makes me think you've never been in one. They most certainly have multiple copies of new releases for sale used shortly after release.
Not only that but they keep saying, vote with your wallet. Gamers do, they want to take it away. If the guys game sold 2 million but has 5 million on the leader boards, are all those users active? You can't just assume you lost 3 million sales.
There were times on PGR that were still there even though I knew 15 of my friends didn't play anymore. Add that all up, come up with a real number.
Secondly, maybe your price point is TOO high. That's what the above tells me. Last gen I bought about 66 360,37 PS3 games. About 7 were used.
I haven't bought a new console game in over 3-4 years. I have used Steam but not lately. No used console games either.
Many gamers HAVE voted with their wallets, by buying used. So stop telling them to do so as if they haven't already. The industry isn't truly listening. People are complaining because silence would mean full on ahead. The more noise made, the better.
Exactly. If the product is valuable to begin with, then it has significant alternate streams of revenue available. If the product isn't valuable to begin with, then the alternate streams aren't very valuable either. It doesn't matter if it's a game/book/movie or whatever.
element
Member
And now the elephant is in the room...
Umm. Someone is buying all those crappy direct to dvd movies and tell that to Netflix with the 100's of movies that would fall into that category.
I think it's the rise of conflict of sales in recent years with the success of Gamestop. Before it was institutionalized, you would trade your game with your friends, lend it to your brother or cousin, lend it to the neighbor, bring it to the flea market or have a yard sale, etc.. no on generated extra profit off the good or was very limited and rarely conflicted with new sales.
Once Gamestop starting to mix & confuse sales of new & used, then it started to turn into a battle with publishers. There are many stories on here about Gamestop's business practices.. and that's the real problem where they are the ones solely benefiting. Sure players have some benefit but they would be just as happy simply to just exchange a game for another.
If you call a Gamestop they are already telling you to bring in used games, if you purchase a game they will suggest to get the used opened one instead, the receipt and pamphlets tell you to bring it back used, and they will call you at home soliciting games like Metroid Prime Trilogy.
Used games as an industry is the problem when conflicting with new sales. If there was no profit industry for used it wouldn't be a problem like we see it today.
I still get my physical copies and still have all the benefits of trading & sharing.... for now.
Once Gamestop starting to mix & confuse sales of new & used, then it started to turn into a battle with publishers. There are many stories on here about Gamestop's business practices.. and that's the real problem where they are the ones solely benefiting. Sure players have some benefit but they would be just as happy simply to just exchange a game for another.
If you call a Gamestop they are already telling you to bring in used games, if you purchase a game they will suggest to get the used opened one instead, the receipt and pamphlets tell you to bring it back used, and they will call you at home soliciting games like Metroid Prime Trilogy.
Used games as an industry is the problem when conflicting with new sales. If there was no profit industry for used it wouldn't be a problem like we see it today.
I still get my physical copies and still have all the benefits of trading & sharing.... for now.