Developers standing up to gamestop ?

[eastmen]

Well. Rockband 2 came out with a code that can be used only once to download an additional 20 songs. Gears of War 2 is going to come out with a code to download original game maps from the first Gears of war. Now Nba live has a feature that requires a code to be put in. After the free code is used the only way to get it is to pay $20 for it.

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2008/10/02/playstation-store-update-54/


Do you guys believe this is a good way to combat the used market ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Sounds like a reasonable way to add value to original purchases.

 

[eastmen]

Well basicly when someone buys gears of war 2 used they run the chance that the original person used the code and now your stuck without the maps or having to pay more. Suddenly that $5 savings doesn't look so great

 

[Tap In]

was trying to find the time to post this as it is HUGE turn of events IMO...

Good for the Pubs/devs... to add value IMO to buy their game new... the used market is good for me in trading and buying as it allows me to afford more games... but if more devs continue down this route I can see a massive shift in thinking and the way Gamestop does business. (if they stay in business)

this could lead to even more substantial features requiring new codes as well to combat the used market

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

But likewise anyone who buys new games and looks to recoup some of the cost by selling on (usually to fund another game purchase) will find the cost of buying games going up, and presumably they will buy less. I'm not sure if the devs will come out ahead on this, though they could kill off the second hand market if this extends to all games.

 

[eastmen]

Well remember gamestop used to give only $30 and under for games. Its very rare to see anything more and the majority of titles is under $15.

You would still be able to sell a game on ebay for like $20-$25 or more depending on how much the developer charges for the one time installs. Perhaps the gears of war pack will be $8 and so if you sell your used copy for $30 tehy pay $8 in addition so for $38 they get gears of war 2 with all the maps while saving $22. This way at least the dev gets an additional $8 for that gamer where before they got nothign

 

[expletive]

Sounds like a reasonable way to add value to original purchases.

Or remove value from used ones...

 

[patsu]

Would be interesting to see how it evolves. For price sensitive folks, they may not care about the additional DLC. The need for cheaper games will always be there. What if GameStop lowers the price of used games for these titles (when they become common) ? What happens if a guy has > 1 consoles ?

 

[Gradthrawn]

What happens if a guy has > 1 consoles ?

Said person would presumably have his/her Live!/PSN account on both of those consoles. So, with the code redeemed, downloading on the secondary console shouldn't be an issue. Unless they further restrict download limitations on those items.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Well, the price of used games will end up coming down if this works, which is good for those that don't care about extra content. In that sense, it can be a win win. But people who do the trade-ins will get less in return, which makes it cost more to buy new games.

 

[eastmen]

Well, the price of used games will end up coming down if this works, which is good for those that don't care about extra content. In that sense, it can be a win win. But people who do the trade-ins will get less in return, which makes it cost more to buy new games.

Thats assuming they were buying new games in the first place. At gamestop if u trade in alot of games the edge card is smart to have. It gves you a year subscription to game informer plus the 10% discount card. So you would trade in a game for $20 and get $2 more on the trade in and when you buy a used game you get a 10% off that so a $55 copy of gow 2 would come out to $49.50 and you have $22 already from the trade. That would mean you'd pay $27.50 for the game. Trading in to buy new would mean you'd get gow2 for $40.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

The price of games will never go down until the market undergoes a complete correction. If developers are 'losing' money because of the used games market and this method decreases the used games market and increases the developer's share, they sure aren't going to pass that savings onto the consumers who have already become accustom to paying $60 for games.

The fallacy here is the belief that those who purchase games used would purchase those games new at full price if the used market wasn't available.

A small percentage might, but let's be real. The reason games are rated (formally or informally) as 'buy, buy used, rent' is because of the quality of the title to begin with.

If the title already wasn't of a 'buy' value, removing content for the 'used' and 'rent' markets only decreases its value further.

What's the stick again?

'You'd better buy this game new, if you get it used or rent it you won't have access to X or Y or Z and therefore the game will be even shittier than before.'

People buy games new for a reason, it's usually because they have replay value (reason to buy instead of rent) and timing (reason to buy new rather than wait for used availability).

I don't see how this strategy motivates people to buy a game new they wouldn't have anyway.

 

[eastmen]

The fallacy here is the belief that those who purchase games used would purchase those games new at full price if the used market wasn't available.

But the point is that the used games hit certian price points first. Launch day the used verson is already $5 less. It will hit the $50 , $40 , $30 , $20 and $10 price points used much much quicker than the new verison ever will and thus robs sales from the new verisons of the game.

 

[BRiT]

Using that same logic, we should outlaw reselling of everything, including cars, houses, boats, appliances, clothes, books, movies, and music. You name it, you should not be able to resell it.

 

[eastmen]

Using that same logic, we should outlaw reselling of everything, including cars, houses, boats, appliances, clothes, books, movies, and music. You name it, you should not be able to resell it.

No one is outlawing anything with this. They are just making it more apealing to buy new. Unlike other products out there like cars , tvs and other things the age of the dvd doesn't matter, previous owners can't really do much no visable damage to the item. With a car its more attractive to buy new because you know no one ever rode it for 5 thousand miles with the check oil light on.

Movies are diffrent also because by the time a movie reaches dvd its already been out in the movies world wide and after dvds it goes on to premium channels and then cable.

 

[BRiT]

What's to stop them from taking the next step to having that activation code be required to obtain ALL of the game content? { Short of mass outcry over it as in the case of Mass Effect and Spore. } I wouldn't put it past them try this or keep trying to do this.

 

[assen]

What's to stop them from taking the next step to having that activation code be required to obtain ALL of the game content? { Short of mass outcry over it as in the case of Mass Effect and Spore. } I wouldn't put it past them try this or keep trying to do this.

PC games have had serial keys for ages, what do you mean?

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

PC games have had serial keys for ages, what do you mean?

A serial has been previously tied to the game itself. This is a step towards tying content to a particular individual or particular hardware, thus making the product unsellable on the second hand market.

I somehow think that while this may damage the pre-owned market, it won't necessarily increase the sale of new product. People will have less money to spend as this move effectively raises the cost of ownership for those titles, ergo people will spend less on their games.

If anything, it restricts the gaming market as a whole, and it becomes a less attractive hobby. What's going to happen to sales when retailers don't stock, or stock very little of your game because they know they can't make as much money off it as other titles by resales? The same mechanisms that drove game stores to make PC gaming a small shelf in the back compared to a shop full of console games will drive these "un-resellable" games into pariah status as far as shelf space goes.

It's an interesting experiment, and while I can see it working as part of an online delivery mechanism (such as Steam), I can see it leading to retailers being unwilling to stock or promote your product which seems to actively hurt the preowned market they have built up and is probably keeping them going in the face of competition from electronic and e-tailer distribution.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Using that same logic, we should outlaw reselling of everything, including cars, houses, boats, appliances, clothes, books, movies, and music. You name it, you should not be able to resell it.

It's not outlawed to sell games though - the law doesn't come into this. This is something the game creators are doing to affect their sales. They are using the technology available to them without stepping on any laws, and they're only offering a sales bundle bonus, not taking anything from the second-hand market. 'Buy a game and get a free add-on pack, normal retail $20'.

If this takes off, the second hand market will have to adjust, selling games at a price the reflects the decreased value. Some people who rely on second-hand sale to fund their hobby will be impacted for sure, but that's free-market economics for you. If it ends up costing more, they'll just have to buy less, or earn more money. I don't know that it's any legal or moral right that buyers of used goods should be entitled to everything the orignal purchaser was entitled to. If in the end less people buy the original games because they can't sell on, and the publishers revenue drops as a result, the Market will ahve spoken and they'll change their tune again. It'll be self regulating, reflecting what people are willing to pay.

 

[Silent]

I also have the feeling that such measures has more to do with making reselling of games a lot more difficult then that it something has to do with "added value". It has everything to do with added value... in their pockets. You know what I call a nice example of "added value", the Burnout updates. No hassle, no serials, no fuss.

In Belgium (and I'm sure this will spread to other countries) they already got it so far that it's impossible to rent games anymore. They hoped that it would increase sales.

But you know what looking at my own spending habbits in the past and present, I buy now even less games. Knowing that games in Europe are ridiculous expensive (demo's don't tell *** and on reviews you can't count) I don't like to make costly guesses. When renting a game it was easy to make buying decisions especially with all the uninspiring stuff that is released all the time.

The next logical step will be making selling used games a lot more difficult, piracy/DRM (wake me up when their is DRM that is effective with regards of stopping piracy) or "added value" is just an alibi. It is as clear as water.