PS3 will not play used games?
- Thread starter mckmas8808
- Start date
Comfortably Lomb
Newcomer
So are people who sell their used stuff on ebay scourges against the system? Is every grandmother who sells a rocking chair at a yard sale destroying the furniture industry? Is every used car sold destroying Detroit? Should used book stores be systematically shut down? How about the Salvation Army? Really?Magnum PI said:
These people are profiting from providing a service, not by cheating the gaming industry out of anything. The games aren't being copied and used by multiple people but rather just one individual at a time. Saying this is damaging behavior is absolutely ridiculous.
a688 said:
What are you trying to prove here ?
Should publishers/creators/etc.. also pay the used games merchant ?
When a seller of new games puts up the store space to sell games, the merchant makes money, the publisher/etc.. makes money. It's a partnership.
A seller of used games is parasiting the publisher/developper investment in money and human resource.. He is the only one to make money, and he the added-value he's of was made by someone else.
For the publisher, piracy and used games have the same net result.
What do you think you are proving with statements like that ?
This is no argument.
The same..
Are you serious ?
Please say me no.
Typical denial of pro-piracy argument.. When you want to give yourself the moral right to pirate videogames, there is never enough bad faith.
Comfortably Lomb
Newcomer
So you're saying that unless something is purchased new then the people involved in the transaction are some sort of pirates? Making copies is one thing but your position on this really is ridiculous.
valioso said:
No way. This completely undermines any notion of "ownership" that we assume as a basic right. Once you've sold a product, it's not yours anymore. It belongs to whoever bought it. He can use it, break it, pee on it, glue M&M's to it, or do whatever else he wants--including selling or loaning it to someone else (which is governed by commerce laws). If you don't like that fact, you'd better find another way of doing business. If that means coming up with some crazy scheme so that the media only works in one player, go for it...but don't be surprised when a competitor who isn't so openly hostile to consumers beats your pants off in the marketplace.
If fair use of your products keeps your business model from succeeding, it's the business model that's broken, not fair use. Fix your damn business model instead of lobbying the government to take away our rights (DMCA, I'm looking at YOU).
I personally couldn't give a rat's ass about publishers wanting to double-dip on used game sales.
If games were made to last and make me want to play them again, there wouldn't be this problem, would there? Making quick games without longevity should be discouraged, not encourage the publisher to make more money out of a game than one which I want to hang on to!
If this model was encouraged, publishers would push for shorter games rather than longer games, since it would encourage used game sales which in turn would provide more revenue.
Theoretically it could then end up with a publisher forcing a developer to withdraw content on a game saying "this makes the game too long. I want them to finish it and sell it". A little dramatic, but you get the idea.
If games were made to last and make me want to play them again, there wouldn't be this problem, would there? Making quick games without longevity should be discouraged, not encourage the publisher to make more money out of a game than one which I want to hang on to!
If this model was encouraged, publishers would push for shorter games rather than longer games, since it would encourage used game sales which in turn would provide more revenue.
Theoretically it could then end up with a publisher forcing a developer to withdraw content on a game saying "this makes the game too long. I want them to finish it and sell it". A little dramatic, but you get the idea.
Actually, software licensing agreements may prohibit transfer to a third party or anyone other than the original owner.
But who reads these things these days.
Still, can software really be set apart from any other commodity, which is traded many times over?
Publishers and anyone else who produce software take advantage of high-margins and virtually zero incremental production cost to be able to leverage volume. Yet they don't want the used software market to encroach on these dynamics?
But who reads these things these days.
Still, can software really be set apart from any other commodity, which is traded many times over?
Publishers and anyone else who produce software take advantage of high-margins and virtually zero incremental production cost to be able to leverage volume. Yet they don't want the used software market to encroach on these dynamics?
Anybody remember DIVX?
This news gave me flashbacks about DIVX at the beginning of the DVD launch. There's a reason why DIVX died and I hope that Sony's short term memory won't blind them to this same bad idea.
If the publishers and/or developers are feeling the burn from the lack of revenue from used game sales then they need to do something about the pricing of their products. I'm sure a free marketplace will eventually level everything out for what's best for consumers and companies.
Tommy McClain
This news gave me flashbacks about DIVX at the beginning of the DVD launch. There's a reason why DIVX died and I hope that Sony's short term memory won't blind them to this same bad idea.
If the publishers and/or developers are feeling the burn from the lack of revenue from used game sales then they need to do something about the pricing of their products. I'm sure a free marketplace will eventually level everything out for what's best for consumers and companies.
Tommy McClain
If you happen sell a car it it is because you didn't use it in full, and you sell its residual value which represents the remaining usage potential.Comfortably Lomb said:
If you happen to buy an used car you won't use it you won't be able to use it as long as if it was new.
When you finished the videogame you used it in full. But for someone else its usage potential remains full.
The so-said used videogames are'nt used at all.
Similarly, if each time an used car (even almost exhausted) was sold it would magically become as good as a new car, the car industry would not last for long..
They provide the exact same service as a reseller of stolen videogames provide.
They use a minimal financial and human investment and parasite a value created by other people.
These games are sold N times. During the first sale, the publisher and the console manufacturer made some money . But for the remaining N-1 sales the reseller of used games makes more than 15 $ each time, and these is N-1 times the publishers and co makes nothing.
Unless you prove your point, this somewhat insulting statement is gratuitous.
To sum it up:
For the piracy you can argue that the prejudice is not that clear, arguing that the pirate wouldn't have bought the game anyway, so there is no loss for the publisher.
Each dollar made by a used game reseller is a dollar from the gaming budget of some people. Once it is in the reseller pocket, it won't be used to buy some original game, and it won't profit to the industry at all. Given the scale of the used videogame business this is a massive diversion of money which should go to the industry.
The prejudice is clear.
If you really love videogames, please support the industry by buying original games.
What about used books, records, movies, etc.?
These are commodities which have been established for decades, if not centuries.
I can understand the publishers and developers feeling ripped off as others make money selling their creations over and over again but those resellers do risk some money in buying a used product because there's no guarantee that they will get back what they paid for it or enough to cover their overhead.
I think pricing is a big issue too. Some of the people who buy used games can't pay full price or need to extract savings as much as they can.
Another issue is that games are often discounted weeks after release. The used games market may exert some downward pressure on the discounting. Falling average sales prices for games is a big concern.
Yeah I can see publishers and developers wanting to move to online distribution as soon as possible. Will they price the products to better reflect their costs in this case?
These are commodities which have been established for decades, if not centuries.
I can understand the publishers and developers feeling ripped off as others make money selling their creations over and over again but those resellers do risk some money in buying a used product because there's no guarantee that they will get back what they paid for it or enough to cover their overhead.
I think pricing is a big issue too. Some of the people who buy used games can't pay full price or need to extract savings as much as they can.
Another issue is that games are often discounted weeks after release. The used games market may exert some downward pressure on the discounting. Falling average sales prices for games is a big concern.
Yeah I can see publishers and developers wanting to move to online distribution as soon as possible. Will they price the products to better reflect their costs in this case?
Absolutely. I don't see MS as being any better in this regard. Most every big and powerful company simply cannot get enough DRM. If it weren't for consumers, they'd have it. But then again, without us they wouldn't exist, so...one said:
Given that the companies are the ones who make the tech and distribute it, I'm sure we'll have several failed attempts at this or that shot down by consumers hating its DRM.
Magnum PI said:
No but consolidation is happening everywhere so it's probably inevitable in this industry as well.
Don't most of the employees of these bankrupted developers go on to work for other companies?
Perhaps in some of these cases, they just didn't produce games which were good enough?
Or are you saying the used games market made the difference between economic viability or even profit and bankruptcy?
Comfortably Lomb
Newcomer
Of course they are. They're no longer in the original wrapping, have been handled, could be scratched marginally enough so that they still run but are no longer in mint condition, and usually are purchased used further away from their original release than most new games.
Or the industry could accept the fact that it's like every other consumer industry on the planet and realize that once they've sold the product the consumer can do whatever they'd like with it short of intellectual property infringement.
BTW, just to be clear, I rarely buy used games. I remember maybe one game off the top of my head that I bought used and only because I couldn't find it locally.
But I do sell my old games. Hate the idea of leaving old game cases lying around collecting dust. Plus recouping some of these costs makes it easier to justify new game purchases, although I can afford new games without these transactions.
I've also given games and consoles away, which I did with the PSX and a couple of games because I didn't want to store it. I'll probably do the same with my PS2 and whatever PS2 games I have at the time, unless I can sell them for enough to be worth the effort.
But I do sell my old games. Hate the idea of leaving old game cases lying around collecting dust. Plus recouping some of these costs makes it easier to justify new game purchases, although I can afford new games without these transactions.
I've also given games and consoles away, which I did with the PSX and a couple of games because I didn't want to store it. I'll probably do the same with my PS2 and whatever PS2 games I have at the time, unless I can sell them for enough to be worth the effort.
wco81 said:
I was wrong, it wasn't long. He does comment as well, though.
http://davidjaffe.modblog.com/core.mod?show=blogview&blog_id=753323
YeuEmMaiMai
Regular
this is just another example of corporate greed.
These industries are suffering from this at various levels.wco81 said:
But I guess these market are more easy for them:
There are more consumers of CD and DVD than consumers of videogames.
Movie industry have other sources of income than DVDs.
Books need lower investments.
The videogame industry suffers from a crisis that none of these market have to deal with, so the loss can only make them more damage.
The used game resellers do know what they are doing and do not buy anything at any price, so the risk is very low especially if you look at the margins they do.
They are not entrepreneurs, they are opportunists.
If games where cheaper, used games would be even cheaper.
Used games buyers would have more money to spend for other things, or to buy more used games.
People are cheap, and often they don't realize they're hurting the industry, eventually they don't want to know.
Of course, publishers will do as much profit as they can, and sell the games for a price as high as possible.
Last edited by a moderator:
Magnum PI said:
Yes they have a partnership. A partnership to sell games. Stores don't make that much money on new items. Thats why they push used items so much. If publishers wanted stores to stay out of used games, maybe they should give retailers a bigger slice of the pie.
No.....I don't know where to start to tell you how wrong you are.
No. If one person buys a new game and then sells it later to another person. The first person has only spend NewCost - SellPrice while the publisher has their cut of NewCost. The first person now has more money to purchase another new game, therefore allowing the publisher to get more money. In Piracy the second+ owners have given nothing to the previous owners.
You're right
I'm glad you avoided putting words in my mouth and suggesting that I pirate my games. I never said pirating games was "ok". I only said that horrible decisions by management and shitty games do worse things for the industry than piracy currently does. What hurts a game company more. Somebody who pirates the game out of the hundred thousand or so that purchase it or the shitty game that only a few hundred buy because its so horrible. If you don't believe me then why are game companies so in love with sequals.
Similar threads
