Braben Says Pre-Owned Titles Need To Stop
If there is one thing that angers me more than anything, it is when people who make lots of money decide that the current standard sucks because it is stopping them from making lots of money. David Braben, founder of Frontier Developments, is one of these people:
More than half their floor area is dedicated to pre-owned and that is something as an industry we don't see... those same retailers are only carrying new copies of games from the past few months - if it's a game that's been out for two months and you want to buy one from a shop not Amazon and you don't want pre-owned, it's very hard,This is essentially rental, and it's not tolerated by other industries... Why can we not introduce special 'for rental' copies?
I've said it once before, and I'll say it again: David Braben is essentially saying you do not own your game. Every major industry allows for the resale of every product imaginable. I cannot think of a single item which cannot be purchased, used, and then sold at a discounted price with the exception of perishables and admission to a park or movie.
What David Braben is saying is essentially this: No one may make a profit off my software except me, even if that means redefining ownership. When you spend $60 on a piece of software, you are not paying for the right to play the game. You are purchasing a license to the software and a physical copy of the software there in.
It seems obscene to want to charge exorbitant amounts of money for the "experience". Honestly, I love used games. Often I purchase them when the game looks interesting but I'm not committed to paying upwards from $50 for a new copy when I know I might only play the title a handful of times. Additionally, what will happen to games as they age? What happens when the key lock server goes down? These titles will simply die, making classic titles as unusable relics of the past.
Ultimately, nothing I say will change his mind. I doubt that the destruction of the used game industry would improve sales figures dramatically, in many cases I think it could hurt them. I also don't see the practice of system locking being widely adopted.
Braben calls for action against pre-owned sales [gamesindustry.biz]
Asterick
Posted to Video Games on 30 July 2008
· Comments (19)
Other stuff like this: braben, pre-owned, rentals, your rights
I can't completely agree with you here. While I do not know (or care about) the full context of the quote, I can tell you this: As a consumer I don't generally mind supporting a developer if I enjoy the game. However, when I go into GameStop (which I can guess that is what he is talking about) I have a VERY hard time finding a new copy of a game that has been released even as recently as the last 6 months. Instead I am offered a used copy that may or may not have the original case or manual that is generally about $4 less than the "new" price. A used copy that they probably bought off of someone for $10 and are selling for $45. Even better, if I do manage to find a "new" copy there is about a 50/50 chance that it will be the store display... so basically not new.
For perspective, I enjoy opening a new game. There is some sort of connection of being the first person to rip off that shrink wrap. ALSO, I don't usually want to pay $50 for most games, so I tend to wait until they are $20 or $30, which does make the problem worse...
Anyway, it feels like GameStop is trying to take the developer almost completely out of their retail process... but they are the people who make the game!! They deserve some of the cash!
I am not, of course, talking about games like GTA or Final Fantasy as we know they are going to make wads of money no matter what. I am thinking of lower profile games/ developers like Penumbra or Kuon or Koudelka. It is possible that the money that they aren't making from used game sales might be enough for small dev teams to keep making good games. (If this was a wikipedia rant I realize there would be a huge [citation needed] next to all of this crap.)
This has probably gone on long enough, but it something that I am actually a little passionate about. I would much rather pay the extra $4 and get a new copy of a game and be able to support the developers, but GameStops apparent refusal to carry new games prevents this from being a case.
"Sad, but true" time...
- Most developers are not millionaires, few are paid what they are really worth.
- Used games sales don't support developers in anyway.
- With very few exceptions, games are too expensive.
- Publishers only care about / track the games that purchased new at retail.
- The lack of a "used game" market on consoles is what fueling a lot of publisher/developer attention to XBLA, PSN, WiiWare.
- The only way to change this industry or it's focus is to vote with your dollar/purchases.
"When you spend $60 on a piece of software, you are not paying for the right to play the game. You are purchasing a license to the software and a physical copy of the software there in."
This is quickly becoming reality or already is depending your platform, for better (no install discs!) and worse (crappy DRM terms). Just look at online portals like Steam, Gametab, and iTunes.
Where do you buy your used games for less than $5 off the original price? It's true there's little difference between used and new when you're dealing with the current console generation. Besides, you spend $60 on a game and you get, what, $15? Might as well keep that sucker.
The method selling of both new and used games needs to be improved without a doubt. Somewhere in this system (probably a lot of places), something is wrong. I mean, I don't even enjoy going to video game stores anymore. I just run in, buy, and skeddadle. Maybe part of it is too much focus on what's new.
Even still, targeting the sale of used games as the culprit is misguided, I think. Video games are items, not even items you can copy and share without the right equipment and hardware, and so they can by all means be resold.
This guy is full of shit to the degree that he things used games cannot be resold. If I pay for a new game, I now have ownership of that copy.
I will say, however, that he's right about it being hard to find new games a month or two after they come out, unless its a bestselling game. However, that's a problem they need to take up with retailers like GameStop, and they can really only do so by providing some sort of incentive for them to stock more games for longer periods of time.
However, one thing I find hilarious is his clarification of "not Amazon". By eliminating the internet from his argument, he's eliminating a huge chunk of retail, and its this huge chunk where you actually can find nearly any game long after its been released. That's like someone complaining they can't vote if they don't live near a polling place unless they use absentee as an argument for disenfranchisement.
I refuse to buy used games. I just think it's wrong that GameStop will buy your used game for $5 and then turn around and sell it at a significant markup. And i agree with Akio there's just something about being the first person to break open the shrink wrapping that somewhat gratifying. If i want to buy a new game and they try to give me the display box i refuse to buy it there. If i'm buying a game that's already been opened by someone other than me, then it's used, and i expect the used price. long story short...i hate used games
I have mixed opinions on this. On the one hand I have to fully agree that when one buys a console videogame, he or she owns it and has the right to resell it if he or she so desires.
That said, the market model does seem a little warped. The bottom line is that for many folks, they "are" essentially renting a game and with the exception of a few services, the market just doesn't support that in a way where the developers make any profit--and that does seem warped. Then again, a new DVD costs $20-30 to buy whereas a new 360 game costs $60. If the model were different, would new game prices go down? Probably not.
For me, I keep 99% of the games I buy and never sell games to retail outlets (I do on occasion trade games online with other gamers). But, since I keep most of my games, I also wait to purchase them. There are only a SMALL handful of games I've bought full-price at launch. Usually I just wait till they come down to a reasonable price.
As a collector I would probably die without the used market. I enjoy the idea and challenge of finding a classic game and if I happen to not have the money (or the time) to play a game the day it comes out and they don't have it new later on. Then I'll happily buy a used one.
The fact is that they are over priced as it is, if they charged less for games I would probably end up buying it new. If I have to pay $24.99 for used or $29.99 for new, I'll go with the new. However, if I can get it a fair bit cheaper elsewhere, I will.
If things went the way he's suggesting it does, I would just stop being a gamer for new games, I would give up because I love my physical copies, I love my used market, and I love games. I support the companies I enjoy.
The only way it would be fair and justified is if they somehow (which they already do, in some places) required a paid lisence to sell and distribute used videogames, and a percentage (albeit, small) would go to the companies. The problem with that is that tracking it just isn't possible, really.
If it hadn't been for pre-owned games, I would have never been able to play ICO.
I liked the game so much I would have kept it, but I sold it simply because it would give someone else the chance to find an play it.
Justin
I don't know what this guy's problem is. If your company can produce a killer app like ohhh I donno; Oblivion, Halo, Bioshock, Half-Life 2, GTA, Rock Band, etc., then you won't have to worry about losing so much money from the sale of used games. Why? Because people are going to buy it on day 1. This should encourage developers not to make crap, because no one wants to pay full price for crap. Braben wants to be able to make subpar titles and reap the full $60 per copy benefit. Please tell me this man isn't procreating. And if he is, please tell me where he is so I can kick him in the sack with my size 15 steel toe.
BTW, I occassionally like to buy old SNES and NES carts. By his logic I shouldn't be able to do this. But since they are no longer produced, I don't have a choice. So imagine if you would, a world where all games sold are new. That means that facilities which could be geared to produce other product would always have to be prepared to produce the product at any given time from here untill eternity (like old NES/SNES, Sega CD, Atari 2600 games). Yeah, that makes sense. Do I dare bring up the farfetched concept of recycling? 99.9% of the material that goes into making games is plastic. Plastic is derived from oil, and does it seem smart to anyone to overproduce an item from an already limited resource? This guy is what I like to call a Fugidiot.
Ah! Just remembered something here:
I just perused the local Blockbuster. Has anybody been to a rental place lately? The selection is terrible! These places used to be a lot more interesting.
(Do the people here recall renting games more often in the past than today? No wonder people basically "rent" games by buying and selling back.)
I know, I know. "Online." But some of us don't like playing the waiting game, or having our disks stolen by the mailman. Some of us like to peruse a store and say "I feel like this tonight."
ah the age old "as a developer, we don't make money on used games sales; we're being robbed!!" whine.
I only buy used when it is a significant price cut. 10% less than the MSRP? no thanks. more than 30% off the MSRP? sure, sign me up!
also, the Gamestop model IS really insulting to hardcore gamers. you pay them $60 + tax for a new piece of software. a week later, they will give you $25 to buy it back, and turn around and sell that for $54? seriously, you couldn't sell it for, oh, say $45? oh wait, you wouldn't make you ZOMG massive profitz!!!!
this is why I frequent the remaining small businesses that sell used games in my area. Lost Odyssey for $45 last week? yeah, I bought it. Psychonauts for $18? hell yes I bought it.
I still buy most of my software new, as I tend to be the impatient sort, and want it as soon as I can afford to get my hands on it, but I refuse to pay into the pre-order business without cool swag.
Solution:
Make good games THAT PEOPLE WON'T WANT TO SELL RIGHT AWAY.
Have you ever sold a newish game that you LIKED?
I absolutely agree that the game you buy is yours to do with as you wish.
But I also think that Gamestop et al.'s system of "pre-owned" game sales is a giant load of crap. Really, they pay you 3-5 dollars for your game and then sell it to someone else for 3-5 dollars less than the new, retail price.
Honestly, why as a gamer would you choose to support a game store, instead of game developers?
Used game sales do benefit developers. Basically, people are much more open to spending $60 when they can turn around and sell a game to recover half of that.
As someone who works for a place that trades and sells used dvds and games AND someone who's dating someone who works for a place that trades and sells used games, I find some of the comments here are a little one-sided.
First of all, price mark-ups. OBVIOUSLY a company that takes in used product is going to increase the re-sale price afterwards. Why would they take your game if they're not going to profit from it? And though I don't work at Gamestop, usually the difference in price between a new game and a used game, at least where I live, is about $6-10, which I think is pretty fair, especially when it's a new game and you know the person who owned it before couldn't have done that much with it since they didn't keep it very long. If anything, keeping the prices for used copies higher for newer games is doing a favour to the developers, so people are more inclined to buy a retail copy since the price difference is not very steep. Maybe that's not WHY Gamestop does it, I'm sure they just want money, but it still would theoretically incite people to buy retail copies of games for a longer length of time.
Also, you REFUSE to shop at a store that has display copies or otherwise open boxes? Are you serious?? Isn't that a little petty? I mean, you're really gonna begrudge a store for trying to protect itself from theft (which seems to be escalating, especially for video games, in recent years, now that they're worth more)?
There also seems to be this mentality that used games/movies are the digital equivalent of leprosy. I can understand not wanting to buy used games as a statement against middle-man profit raking, but a lot of people don't want to buy them BECAUSE they're used. I've even seen kids, kids who keep their money in ziplock bags because they're that fiscally immature, who REFUSE to buy a used game and instead pay full price for the new copy. Doesn't that seem like a big waste to you?
Also, the whole "why support the game store over the developer" argument is invariably flawed. Here's some simple math.
Game and dvd retailers frequently make very marginal profit over retail sales. Without the profits from used copy sales, the market would probably be pretty barren because nobody would see any potential there. Which would mean there would be few to no game retailers at all. Which would mean you would have no place to buy the games the developers are making. Which means they can't sell them. So why would they make them? The answer is they wouldn't.
There's a reason the economy is the way it is, and it's because however amoral and indifferent it is to different parties at different times (USUALLY the consumer), it works. Maybe it doesn't work great, but it still works. Everybody comes out with a shared amount of profit (or enjoyment, for the customer) and a shared amount of compromise. Tipping the scales in someone's favour would only lead to imbalance.
Personally, I'm all for used games and movies. If I save even $10 on each of the movies or games I've bought used (and I usually do), then I've saved about $3000 in my not-very-long-yet life, and that's a lot of money.
Spinning Demon hits the nail on the head, I see completely why shops like Gamestop, which we don't have in the UK, but we have Gamestation but back games cheap and sell them to make money.
The point is, they're businesses, they exist solely to make money, it's infuriating when people live inside this little bubble where big business isn't about the next fiscal quarter, it's about ethics, timing and good cheer, it never has, nor ever will be, which is exactly what the majority of people in gaming seem to think it is/should be.
Can't say I've ever had a problem with open box policy, never had anything bad happen to a disk in a plastic slip kept in a drawer so it can't be shoplifted, and I would be dubious if anyone ever said a new game they bought was damaged in such a way, probably edging more towards shoring up their own strawman argument than actual truth [My dads friends cousin etc].
I but used games a lot more often than new games, the last new game I bought was GTAIV, any time I can save money, I see it as a prudent investment, if it was Used for 5-10% cheaper on launch day I would have got it used.
The stigma of used games/DVD's is 95% snobbery, 5% really been afraid of bad disks, just do what I do, buy them, if the disks suck, fix them, I have a Dr. Skipmaster and it's one of my best purchases this past couple of years, buying semi damaged copies for oftentimes 70-80% cheaper is something I advocate every which way but loose.
As for not supporting the developer, seems a rather empty point, as clarified above, it seems the last moral stick left in the hands, and even then it's dry and easily broken, make better games that don't need to be traded in within 10 minutes of been released and you don't have a problem there.
No sympathy for developers crying wolf about their own inferior products, you deserve to go out of business if you fail, fact of life, it's not pretty and incredibly cutthroat, you want a market share, fight for it.
Crying wolf drives more and more people to piracy.
I am indifferent and amoral, and incredibly selfish as a consumer, just like everyone else, but I admit it.
I think this is one of the few articles that I have followed up on any comment I have made and I have to say one thing: Everyone on the site is actually pretty articulate. That seems hard to find on the internet these days... uhhh anyway!
I do generally agree with, or if not at least respect, the opinions above but I would like to clarify one thing: I don't have a problem with the used games market. As pointed out by a couple of people, it is the only way you can get a hold of some classic games. The problem is when a retailer leaves that as your only option for relatively new games.
Anyway... if we really want to pick on GameStop I am pretty sure there is a long list of shady things that they do somewhere out there. Also, there is this: Confessions of a GameStop shift Supervisor
You know, interestingly, in Japan all games have "not for resale or rental" on the back of them. That wouldn't fly here, but it is interesting nonetheless.
I sell my games I dont want on Amazon to get a 20-25% increase compared to Gamestop. Its a real good idea.