Why Anti-Used Game Consoles Could Be A Good Thing

Posted on Monday, February 11 @ 18:00:00 Eastern by Alex_Osborn

There have been a slew of next-gen rumors slinging left and right over the past couple of weeks, and none have irked the gaming populace quite as much as anti-used game measures. We've heard talk of it on both the PlayStation and Xbox side of things, so a widespread move could very well be a possibility.

But instead of crying about it, I'm going to try and find a silver lining in all of this mess. Now I know what you're thinking... Is this guy out of his mind? How could limiting the consumer's options possibly be a good thing? Blocking used games will single-handedly destroy retailers like GameStop, bring down rental services like GameFly, and prevent gamers from getting a game on the cheap for making a buck on what otherwise would collect dust.

Believe me, I hear you loud and clear. Blocking used games would have some serious consequences that don't swing in the favor of the consumer, but upon closer inspection, there are also a lot of benefits that should not be overlooked.

Developers Profit From Every Game Sale

You know those guys who worked incredibly hard to make the games you enjoy? Well, a lot of them are struggling to stay afloat thanks to used games. Today, the gap is widening between triple-A big-budget titles and small downloadable indie games, as B-tier developers can't seem to make enough of a profit to justify funding from publishers. So many studios have been closing lately, and while a lot of that has to do with the growing pains that our industry is going through right now, used game sales are certainly not helping the situation.

Those who buy a game used are contributing absolutely nothing to the people who poured their blood, sweat, and tears into crafting that experience. Instead, online sellers, GameStop, etc. are the ones who collect all of that profit. Call me crazy, but isn't something wrong with that picture?

So now you're thinking... Well, Alex, I see how this helps the game companies, but what do I get out of the deal? Sure, you may have to spend a few extra bucks to get the games you want new, but isn't keeping those studios in business worth it? A number of promising franchises will never be continued thanks to poor sales, and anti-used game consoles help in preventing that.

Online Marketplaces Will Naturally Be More Robust

We're moving towards a digital-only future rapidly, so it's only a matter of time when used games will no longer be an issue anyway. As such, we're going to see better online marketplaces in place to curb games' weaker presence at retail. Take the Steam Store as evidence. It is far more consumer-friendly than the PlayStation Store or Xbox Live Marketplace. As such, if either Sony or Microsoft opt to block used games, they're going to need one heck of a compelling reason to keep you hooked on purchasing games new, and I can see much of that happening in the digital realm.

Wouldn't you like a PlayStation Store that isn't clunky and incredibly slow? Doesn't a more streamlined and easy-to-navigate Xbox Live Marketplace sound nice? Let's face it, gaming consoles are no longer what they once were. Thanks to heavy online integration, these two platforms have become ecosystems, where the services are the main draw rather than merely the hardware. To put it bluntly, if Microsoft and/or Sony think they can get away with locking out used games, they better be able to compensate, big time.

Games Will Be Cheaper, Have Larger Discounts

Wouldn't you agree that digital versions of games on Xbox Live and PlayStation Network are grossly overpriced? Why would I spend $59.99 on a digital version of the new Devil May Cry when I can pick up a brand-new boxed copy for the same price (or maybe even cheaper) at my local retailer? It's asinine, and Steam has proven that. So, once again, if Sony and Microsoft are planning to block used games, they'll need to have some compelling sales to keep gamers from jumping ship to the PC gaming sphere.

Apple's App Store and Valve's online marketplace have done so well because of two things: competitively priced software and convenience. If the next PlayStation and Xbox can do the same, the worries tied to used games will be but a distant memory.

So what say you? Do I bring up at least a few valid points or am I losing my mind? Be sure to sound off with your thoughts in the comments below.

Tags: next-gen, xbox 720, ps4, pc, steam

Comments

SolidSevchinko78
Joined: Jun 2012

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:23 pm
I like how they are making it like its a good thing. It's not good! Like someone said the other day in the comments here on GR what happens when your console dies? So if you have to get it replaced then that means you have to repurchase your ENTIRE library? Honestly I don't see the logic in this article supporting this. Now there are things it talks about namely the developers getting money. I'm not talking about the used games market. I'm talking about the average gamer who goes and buys games. What are they supposed to do when their console malfunctions and it gets replaced? I think its ridiculous to have to go buy your entire library again because of this policy. It's almost like they are getting punished because their console fails. If this indeed becomes a reality, then Sony and Microsoft make better damn sure that their consoles are reliable(looking mainly at you MS on this) because if not I know there will be a lot of upset people if their system fails

2 1

sandineyes
Joined: May 2008

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:00 pm
Normally I think things like digital downloads are tied not to consoles, but user accounts. If your console were to fail, then the obvious thing to do is log in on your new console and re-download the games for no cost.

This does, however, require some work I think to avoid allowing people to simply log in to many consoles and download games on all of them.

0 2

NickKmet
Joined: Jan 2007

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:11 pm
This is exactly how it would work.

0 1

Lenin17301
Joined: Jan 2007

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:19 pm
The redownload can be very expensive for people without an unlimited bandwidth, so a digital only future scares my wallet. Of course I've bought games online on several platforms, but having that as the only option? I can't agree with that yet. As for used physical games, in my country that market is pretty much inexistent, so I can't really gauge how much it will hurt to eliminate them as a choice

0 0

sandineyes
Joined: May 2008

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 7:21 am
Yeah, I hear that in some countries ISPs offer terrible download quotas and insane overage penalties. I shudder to think of downloading a Total War game in a country where the standard is 20GB a month; you'd probably double the price of the game!

0 0

Klandathu
Joined: Apr 2008

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:35 pm
I have a few issues with digital downloads, but that is one thing that I do see as a huge advantage. If you have a disc and it breaks or gets scratched, you're pretty well just screwed and out whatever you paid for it. Accidentally delete a downloaded game that you purchased? Just re-download it. Problem solved.

0 0

Fieperskaivu
Joined: May 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:10 pm
Yea I don't think you get how it works, you had a Gamertag/PSN ID and all your purchases would be linked to that. New console just means you have to redownload everything, which can be long and annoying, but you don't lose anything you bought.

0 0

wildmario
Joined: Jan 2007

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:24 pm
I think most of the consumer base could care less about supporting game studios as long as they, the consumer, can shave a few bucks off each purchase. Most people don't care who makes the stuff or where it comes from; all they see is the price.

1 5

Lien
Joined: Feb 2008

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:29 pm
I don't know... you know, i miss the days when you could just lend a game to a friend so he can check it out. It seems so distant these days... Guess they are gone for good.

1 3

Sourdeez
Joined: Feb 2012

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:33 pm
The idea that getting full price to the developers for every game only works if you really believe that every gamer has the money to do it. Not true for a lot of poor gamers who live by trading in 4 old games for a new one.

I do agree with the last bit about steam and digital sale price cuts. With the steambox it will be interesting to see if sony and microsoft decide to have active sales like steam does.

1 4

moretokes
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:35 pm
I work in e waste collection and junk removal.today I found a Fatboy ps3 working perfectly fine. There are a lot of old consoles Usually. If the next gen prevents used consoles sales that would just ruin what I got going on right now. I find a lot 360s usually or p

1 0

moretokes
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:37 pm
I work in e waste collection and junk removal.today I found a Fatboy ps3 working perfectly fine. There are a lot of old consoles Usually I find . If the next gen prevents used consoles sales that would just ruin what I got going on right now. I find a lot 360s usually sell the parts from them for a little dough. They can't take this away from me. It's my dream job!

1 3

moretokes
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:40 pm
But I certainly do look forward to a more robust market place! I love the convenience of downloads, no disc swapping.

1 2

oblivion437
Joined: Nov 2006

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 6:49 pm
Rendering used sales impossible is a way of getting around the first sale doctrine. It stipulates that neither author nor publisher may derive profit from secondary sales of a work. That's what this is really about. Video game developers and publishers aren't going broke because of used sales (or even piracy, for that matter) but because they fail to control costs effectively, produce increasingly undifferentiated products and vainly chase trends (Fernando Melo may still be eating crow for wanting Call of Duty's audience, but the numerous Call of Duty copycats aren't eating at all; they're out of business) hoping that they can catch some of it. Meanwhile, essential steps in the pipeline are overlooked, second-string developers' work gets treated like shovelware, and post-launch support is used to bandage problems responsible publishers iron out in advance. If this industry is careening towards collapse they have no one but themselves to blame. They've pissed off the fans who made them rich, squandered treasured IPs, driven legendary talent out and generally turned things into a pump-and-dump. And they've made biblically absurd amounts of money doing it.

1 6

pavlos
Joined: Dec 2012

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 12:53 am
Case and point, brap !!

0 0

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Publishers yes, devs not so much...pretty good points. Used gaming does have an undeniable negative market impact though. Post consumer I mean

0 0

tinymhg
Joined: Jun 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:08 pm
I think it will increase piracy. Anything that pisses off the gaming consumer will increase piracy.

0 5

tearatherflesh
Joined: Dec 2012

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:04 pm
The thing is, if someone is buying used games, none of their money is going to the developer anyway.

0 0

TurinAlexander
Joined: Sep 2006

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 9:12 pm
...and to that I say "so f*cking what?" Why should video games be exempt from a secondary market? Damn near everything can be bought used if you want to go that route, you don't hear other industries crying about it. A smart business person takes advantage of the secondary market, they don't try to destroy it.

Take cars, for example. You want to buy a new car, most dealerships will take your old car as trade in towards the new one. They then get to turn around and sell your old car to someone that can't or won't pay full price for a new one. Everybody makes out on the deal. If publishers really want to make money, instead of trying to crush the Gamestops of the world by shutting down used sales, they'd start selling used games themselves.

1 7

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 12:30 pm
You have some points there, but the current trajectory the industry is on isn't sustainable. The one price fits all for full size titles has to end, or most developers are going to collapse.

0 0

Heath_Hindman
Joined: May 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 10:37 pm
Re: "The thing is, if someone is buying used games, none of their money is going to the developer anyway. "

In addition to what Turin said, I might had that unlike piracy, buying a game used does not artificially increase the number of available copies. Someone had to buy it new.

0 1

sg4real
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:09 pm
I don't mind that much as long the prices of games drop.

0 1

DaVillain
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:37 pm
Good for developers, bad for retail.

0 0

DaVillain
Joined: Apr 2011

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:45 pm
And particularly bad for the consumer. It is removing the consumers option of choice and forcing our hand. This makes it harder to save a buck at times when pockets are flat. I am not a fan of this and I do agree with tinymhg. It will definitely increase piracy for that exact reason. If this becomes reality then I may just have join them in their efforts of cracking. Just dont tell Sony ;-)

0 0

sliverstorm
Joined: Jun 2007

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 7:40 pm
Console Users: "Oh No!"

PC Users: "It's about time."

1 2

Imnickson
Joined: Jul 2006

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:29 pm
Am I mistaken? The way I understood it is, developers make their money before the game is released and publishers make their money after. Publishers get pretty much all of the money from sells, unless there are agreements otherwise.

I look forward to a no publisher future.

0 0

Dirkster_Dude
Joined: Feb 2013

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 8:41 pm
I usually buy new regardless just to make sure I don't have to worry about scratched discs or it not including something. However, I cannot see used games being in anyway completely restricted. Seasonal and Online Passes are 1 thing, but making the entire game unplayable when it was clearly designed to work on a specific set of hardware with the only thing being that Microsoft didn't get a royalty payment? That is called protectionism I believe AND for a monopoly company to act in such a fashion might be looked at as anti-trust violation. Microsoft has already been convicted of such violations in the USA over IE and in Europe over Media Player. The only difference I can see is Microsoft also designed the hardware not just the Operating System.

0 0

vasu_bangera
Joined: Feb 2013

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 10:19 pm
Yes i agree with this, but we have to know this also that, many people buy games cause they know that they can sell it back. If people come to know that they cant sell it back then ppl wil get choosy, they will buy only few games and good games. Then those smaller gaming companies wil shutdown cause no one wil buy their games cause ppl have become choosy...

0 0

cereal13killer
Joined: Nov 2008

Posted: Feb 11th, 2013 at 11:23 pm
Game prices will not drop. I generally am very respectful of GR's views, but this will not happen. A precedent has been set that the market (consumers) will pay $60.00 - $70.00 for a brand new title, so unless you're willing to wait a few months for a sale, that price will not change. Even Steam charges full price for new titles, despite the fact that there is almost zero cost to distribute it.

The online markets don't naturally have to be more robust, because they can just say "this is what it is! Deal." In addition, DLC is going to cost more, not less (as has been the trend over the past few years - because we're willing to pay for it), and we will see the rise of more pay-for-benefit services like COD Elite, Battlefield Premium, or "Season Passes," that only guarantee DLC, but don't assure quality.

I don't even think this is even necessary. Gamestop/EB, Best Buy and most other used game chains are going bankrupt and won't be around in 5 years. This just makes MS/Sony look bad.

0 0

Bobert
Joined: Nov 2007

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 4:17 am
Used games drive overall quality of games. Developers are pressured to make good games so the first owner doesn't turn around and sell it. The one huge advantage is that good single player games will no longer be pressured to include crappy multiplayer. In addition without used games, there will be less pressure to drop prices and have sales. The PC market has always been very different and probably doesn't reflect what we will see if consoles scrap used games.

2 0

EarthboundMike
Joined: Feb 2013

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 8:56 am
Another concern down the road if indeed everything does end up going digital and download-only through online marketplaces, is system memory. Hardcore gamers will need a TON of memory to save all the titles they'll be purchasing, and with games becoming larger and taking up more memory with each passing year, there better be some pretty massive harddrives included out of the box with the next gen systems that will last more than a short timeframe before filling up completely. I see that becoming another issue. It already is right now for casual gamers. My brother just picked up his first 360 last year and only had enough cash to start off with the smaller 4GB hard drive, and picked up Halo 4, couldn't even play the multiplayer at all which was his whole reason for buying it, because the multiplayer required almost 3 GB's of space alone just to play it. And that's just one game, he only owns 4 or 5 games and is having issues with hard drive space. I on the other hand have about 65 to 75 games on disc and probably 15 to 20 games downloaded and have used more than half of my 205 GB hard drive, but I don't install any of my discs into my system at all. If Microsoft and Sony do think of basing all games as downloadable in the future, they may have a lot of work to do.

0 0

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 12:26 pm
I think the need for expanded memory is part of the overall model here.....be it larger physical drives to buy or some combination with cloud storage.

0 0

EarthboundMike
Joined: Feb 2013

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 9:04 am
As for the Used games market, I believe there is a place for it and that like anything else, people have the right to different options and to shop around for a product, but it seems maybe some people are abusing the system too much? I worked for a rental chain for 7 years and we sold both new and used games, and there are a LOT of people who would only buy a game used, wouldn't touch a new copy of a game. Yes, it's great to get games at a lower price obviously, and I've bought the odd game used in the past, but I tend to try and buy new when I can, especially for a game that I'm really anticipating or if it's a game that I know will be worth it. It's almost the same issues with DVD's and music now. People have access to so much free/pirated versions of everything now, they feel they shouldn't need to pay full price for anything anymore, and then we wonder why places like Blockbuster, Gamestop, etc struggle to stay in business...and why people spell doom and gloom for the economy and the video game market. There's a very fine line here, and it doesn't seem like there are any right or easy answers to the problem.

0 0

Hatecrew
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 11:17 am
I agree to a certain point. I think that blocking used games will help the industry but I don't like buying games online. Call me old fashion....but I like to get out of my house every now and then, go to the store of my liking...and browser the game selection. Just like I used to do back before "Tower Records" went under. It was about the experience. Now that Tower Records is gone...I don't get that anymore. Most of my Cd's I have to buy them off Amazon or Ebay. And like you said Alex.....to pay a full price for a digital copy over a physical copy is just insane. That's why I hate itunes. I like to have my cd collection just as I like to have my game collection. My shelf on the right is nothing but cds and my right shelf is nothing but games. I like to collect thing and I pick up "Limited Edition" or anything between those lines of any of my fav games. Plus DLC content should be free and not charge us if they block used games. Not a fan of that either.

0 1

Hatecrew
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 11:25 am
I agree to a certain point. I think that blocking used games will help the industry but I don't like buying games online. Call me old fashion....but I like to get out of my house every now and then, go to the store of my liking...and browser the game selection. Just like I used to do back before "Tower Records" went under. It was about the experience. Now that Tower Records is gone...I don't get that anymore. Most of my Cd's I have to buy them off Amazon or Ebay. And like you said Alex.....to pay a full price for a digital copy over a physical copy is just insane. That's why I hate itunes. I like to have my cd collection just as I like to have my game collection. My shelf on the right is nothing but cds and my right shelf is nothing but games. I like to collect thing and I pick up "Limited Edition" or anything between those lines of any of my fav games. Plus DLC content should be free and not charge us if they block used games. Not a fan of that either.

0 0

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I think the end of used games will become a fact of life. If you really enjoy a game like XCOM, but wait for a used copy to save 5 bucks, then there less market support for sequels. Then there is less likelihood of a developer or publisher taking a risk on a future XCOM titles. By buying new you directly support what titles and genres you would like to play in the future, almost like voting. What I would really like to see is the flat 50.00 to 60.00 dollar pricing models go away. That business model subsidizes crap games by leveling the market, it allows some Wii shovelware to be priced the same as ME3 sitting right beside it, and discourages risk and innovation. Let the market decide a games' value. Would you pay over 60.00 for the next gen ME4 if it meant that lower quality games would be priced accordingly? maybe, maybe not.

0 2

Jobin_Wendy
Joined: Mar 2012

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 3:45 pm
Quit being optimistic, buttface.

0 0

Imnickson
Joined: Jul 2006

Posted: Feb 12th, 2013 at 4:10 pm
Am I mistaken? The way I understood it is, developers make their money before the game is released and publishers make their money after. Publishers get pretty much all of the money from sells, unless there are agreements otherwise.

I look forward to a no publisher future.

0 0

oblivion437
Joined: Nov 2006

Posted: Feb 13th, 2013 at 5:57 am
As a general rule this is true. Developers are paid for meeting milestones and are not paid beyond that. Bonuses are offered per the contract for meeting targets (sales, metacritic score) but the days when developers generally either owned the IP or held licenses to develop in an existing IP and the publisher came later are long gone. Also gone are the days when developers controlled the quality assurance phase. Is it any wonder that, though games are generally no more sophisticated on a systemic level, they are less stable now than they were fifteen years ago? The people with the strongest possible interest in the well-being of the reputation and reception of the product (the developer) were in charge of the tasks which ensured it. The time when this business model reached its height is looked back upon as a Golden Age. Replaying the games of the era it's tough to dispute that.

0 0