Piracy less harmfull than Gamestop?

tman

Kaneda_ wrote: »

I dont think used games a bad thing for the devs or the industry at all,used games have been around for as long as i can remember and still plenty of new titles and sequels are pumped out every year - so is it that big a problem for the industry?

Back in the days of the SNES there were only a select few shops selling used games, the preowned business was nowhere near the scale that it's at today. Places like Game wouldn't have dreamed of selling scruffy used stock at the time.
In most game shops today, the amount of preowned games on the shelves far outnumber the new...

I for one applaud people like EA for trying out online passes and the like, but sadly most people see it as them being a bunch of greedy scumbags, when in fact the game shops are the true ***** here!

jill_valentine

As somebody above pointed out, it's the preowned business that's actually keeping game stores in business. Without it, devs would lose that platform from which to sell their new titles, which is why they've never aggressively pursued the shops for doing this even though legally they probably could.

I usually buy preowned, but when I do buy new, I usually trade a few things in against it to soften the blow. So I end up occasionally buying new games that I wouldn't buy at all otherwise.

I don't play online at all, so EAs online activation code buggery is of no use to me, it turns me right off getting it new or second hand.

wnolan1992

I suppose it is true that Gamestop would cost dev's more than piracy, for consoles at least. I mean, unless you know someone who is selling pirated games, then it's not as simple as downloading a ROM and throwing it into the Xbox.

But, if there was no second hand trade, dev's would lose even more money. I bought my first GTA game second hand for about £5, and since then I've been buying nearly all of Rockstar's games new, because I get excited before the release knowing it'll probably be a good game. If I hadn't bought that game second hand then I probably wouldn't have bought most of the titles new that I have.

I also prefer buying new when I can, there's something nice about ripping off the plastic and breathing in the fresh scent of the manual...

And anyway, it's a little unreasonable for some dev's to expect us to shell out 50e for some of their back catalog. Say, for argument's sake, you wanted to go out and buy Fifa 09, is it fair to 50e for that, when you could get Fifa 11 for the same? (this is a very unlikely situation, but it's just to put that point out.)

Gummy Panda

I buy PC so this doesn't really affect me but when I bought for my ps3 it would be new.

The market is in a weird stage were devs and publishers are trying to crawl back power from shops. I can see the free2play model being examined more and maybe brought onto consoles as a test title.

Weepsie

Personally I'm surprised there never seems to have been a serious legal challenge to the selling of second hand games. The content of the disc is protected by copyright laws and is as far as i know therefor illegal to sell on or profit from in anyway. Perhaps because they let it slide for so long theyd be dismissed

steviebg

As far as i'm concerned buying second hand games can help the sale of new game's. In my own case i bought COD4 second hand and loved it so i then bought both MW2 and BLOPS new! and i'll be buying MW3 new so 3 new sales for 1 second hand "loss". And i don't view second hand sales as a loss to the dev's because i would'nt have bought it new anyway.

cython

Weepsie wrote: »

Personally I'm surprised there never seems to have been a serious legal challenge to the selling of second hand games. The content of the disc is protected by copyright laws and is as far as i know therefor illegal to sell on or profit from in anyway. Perhaps because they let it slide for so long theyd be dismissed

Precedent and law akin to this in the US would probably make it very difficult, and may in fact explicitly permit the second hand trade. There may well be similar in place here and in other territories too, but to be honest, if it can't be prevented in the US, then the single biggest territory/jurisdiction (and therefore likely the most cost effective) is off the table, and it's of questionable worth to pursue it on a piecemeal basis across other jurisdictions.

krudler

I only ever buy new, if I want something thats been out a while zavvi and amazon and play all have games less than a year old for 15 quid and less these days, stuff like Alan Wake, Red Dead and MW2 are/were all 15 euro on all of those sites at one stage, itd cost more for a preplayed game. game shops make an abolsute fortune on preowned games and they constantly rip people off with them, ever notice that theres "preowned" new release games on the shelf the day after they're released, smells like shenanigans. Recently saw MK and Portal 2 , 49 new, 45 preowned, why would you bother? 4 quid saving on a game thats probably scratched to bits? no thanks.

And I'm way too finicky about my stuff to buy something that someones had their grubby mitts all over, factory sealed is preferable I dont like how gamestop store their games, at least game keeps sealed copies of new stuff behind the counter and give you those instead.

Retr0gamer

Whoever buys second hand from Gamestop is a mug. You can usually get the game cheaper brand new online. Games publishers shuld quit whining and basically deal with it. The second hand trade is here to stay and is perfectly legal. Maybe they should lower the price of their games and myybe they'll sell more.

As for the law it's the same that applies to books and films. You don't own the copyright when you buy it but do own the physical copy. You are free to sell on the physical copy and do with it as you like and aren't in violation of any copyright laws.

Overheal

What I found bemusing is that this only concerns console games, up to a point. The vast majority of retailers cant sell second hand PC games. It's only in the backwater shops you will find those. And many of them will fail to work because of activation keys. Who wants a used copy of World of Warcraft? But it's still there because the guy thinks he can score $5 off a shmuck.

Thing there is that at least in PC games you are paying for a License, not a Disc. While technically this might be the case with console games, it is not true in practice. The disc itself has it's own intrinsic value, with little to stop you from giving it to your friends. Or to stop the game rental industry.

But that's just one more thing to be thankful to PC Gaming for. While it may have it's pirates you have the benefit of ensuring all sales are considered New and go to the developer.

But I suppose then you have to ask yourself, which is more harmful to developer revenues: PC Piracy or Console second-hand trading and renting? We're left with our original question.

super_furry

Thing is, while developers might moan and whinge about pre-owned games, with the ability to trade in old games, I'd buy fewer new games.

The purchase of new games is funded by the trading of older games.

Helix

jill_valentine wrote: »

As somebody above pointed out, it's the preowned business that's actually keeping game stores in business. Without it, devs would lose that platform from which to sell their new titles, which is why they've never aggressively pursued the shops for doing this even though legally they probably could.

the tescos, asdas and walmarts of this world would ensure that wasnt the case

dreamers75

super_furry wrote: »

Thing is, while developers might moan and whinge about pre-owned games, with the ability to trade in old games, I'd buy fewer new games.

The purchase of new games is funded by the trading of older games.

So you are treating games as disposable which is what they have become on console.

No such thing as a game collection anymore, its shifted to must play "latest game".

Problem devs/publishers have is now shops buy 50 copies of a game rather than 100, shop knows it will sell the 50 then buy them back and % margin means: gamer buys game A for 60, sells it back for 40 uses 40 to buy game B on offer if you trade in 2, other gamer buys A for 40 and the cycle begins again.

So only 50 copies of the game are bought but the shop keeps the % of money coming back in from one initial buy and all others.

If i was a game dev i would look at the PC serial code and implement it on console. Instantly devalue any trade ins and make that 50 initial sell back to 100. The online pass isnt really going to work 100% only for some users.

amacachi

super_furry wrote: »

Thing is, while developers might moan and whinge about pre-owned games, with the ability to trade in old games, I'd buy fewer new games.

The purchase of new games is funded by the trading of older games.

I know quite a few people like that alright, pay 50 for a new release game and get 30 credit a week later for trading it in so they only end up 20 quid a go. If they were paying 50 at a time they'd be buying far less.

Helix

dreamers75 wrote: »

If i was a game dev i would look at the PC serial code and implement it on console. Instantly devalue any trade ins and make that 50 initial sell back to 100. The online pass isnt really going to work 100% only for some users.

its something that's coming imo

tman

amacachi wrote: »

I know quite a few people like that alright, pay 50 for a new release game and get 30 credit a week later for trading it in so they only end up 20 quid a go. If they were paying 50 at a time they'd be buying far less.

Why not just rent in that case... Seems like a bizarre way to waste €20!

amacachi

tman wrote: »

Why not just rent in that case... Seems like a bizarre way to waste €20!

Gives them longer to play if they need it. "A week later" in my post wasn't a hard limit.

Also to some people paying for games when they can be pirated seems like a bizarre way to waste money. Whatever about the logic behind it, it's something I notice happens a fair bit.

pablomakaveli

I've often bought a mix of new and used games. With new releases that im interested in ill buy brand new. The used games i buy are usually games that have been out for over a year and dont have new versions stocked in shops and i dont really buy used games for more than 20 euro either.

I dont see the point in buying a used copy of a new release though thats only 3 euro cheaper than the new copy. I'd rather have a brand new copy and pay the extra 3 euro.

I'd imagine its the selling of used copies of new releases thats affecting the market the most as the first few months are the games most profitable stage.

tonydude

I always buy new, but i keep my eye out for bargains. The likes of gamestop and game have very high prices for there pre owned old stock and id never buy from them especially Game ( new or old ). I prefer buying online, but having said that ill be paying a visit to Gamestop tomorrow to get portal 2 and la noire with the 3 game exchange

ShadowHearth

Barrington wrote: »

Most new games are €50 these days, bar limited editions and the like. Then most 2nd hand games of newer titles are still around €35-€40 anyway for the first few months.

I prefer buying new to be honest. Admittedly, a lot of the time I buy new it might be with store credit after trading in games or dvds, but if I feel like I'm going to get my moneys worth, I'll normally buy new.

in all fairness new game prices droped alot. normal 45eu limited edition 50eu. excluding cod which come for 60-70 when they come out.

when games were 70eu second hand was prety solid deal, but these days i buy second hand only if i find something for pennies and i cant be arsed to wait stuff from zavvi.

you can get brand new games cheaper on websites like zavvi.co.uk, so second hand games in gamestops have less apeal with all the activisation codes etc.

i have a feeling that gamestop is shooting themselfs in foot with all this 3eu deal. developers know about it, and will drop brand new price game lower or same price.

i could not see people buying second hand games for 5 quid cheaper then new one.

Helix

ShadowHearth wrote: »

developers know about it, and will drop brand new price game lower or same price.

i could not see people buying second hand games for 5 quid cheaper then new one.

1) developers dont set game prices

2) people have been buying second hand games for a fiver less than new games for years

ShadowHearth

Helix wrote: »

1) developers dont set game prices

2) people have been buying second hand games for a fiver less than new games for years

Do you know it for fact, or is it just a guess? havent seen much of second hand new releases to be sold out quickly, unless no brand new in shop.

jill_valentine

ShadowHearth wrote: »

havent seen much of second hand new releases to be sold out quickly, unless no brand new in shop.

Because they're brand new trade ins, they generally won't bother putting new title preowned copies on the shelf because they won't have many. They'll keep them on the counter. So if I go up to the till with LA Noire, and they go "Here, do you want that for a fiver cheaper second hand?", I'll probably say yes.

It's only a fiver, but it's better in my pocket than theirs.

Helix

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Do you know it for fact, or is it just a guess? havent seen much of second hand new releases to be sold out quickly, unless no brand new in shop.

if they werent selling they wouldnt be that price