Anti-Pre-Owned Gaming: This is Going to Be Painful

Gamestop makes the bulk of their money from used game sales. Plain and simple. Other items in their inventory net them profit as well, but at the bottom of their money making barrel is selling a new game. They push you to purchase products pre-owned. This is what they do, and they have perfected it. The used game market has grown significantly. Does it really surprise any of you that now we see day one DLC, online passes, and retail exclusive bonuses? If it does, perhpas you should be exposed to other sides of our industry than just what is at the surface. It is time to understand a little more, lets start with a little storytime shall we? Imagine you just picked up Battlefield 3 a week after launch and somehow you managed to find a used copy. Wanting to save money, maybe $10, you make the purchase used after the "sales associate" suggests. What he fails to tell you is that the game requires an online code to play multiplayer. Driving home you blast your radio, preparing for the battle that is soon to come. Sinking into your favorite chair, the disc already loading up your next addiction, you select multiplayer only to find that you have to pay $10 to play the main component you were wanting in the first place. Who should you be angry with? The Gamestop associate doing his job to make the company a profit and sell you that used title, or the publisher trying to protect their investment from potentially losing the entire $59.99 after you purchased the title used? Is it right to say neither, or all of the above? I say, all of the above. Gamestop has created an environment where they profit off of the hard work that a game development studio puts in, they will try and rob you blind, and never push an 80 hour work week to get a game out at release. While on the other hand, this begs the question of how can a publisher lock a gamer out of a major component of the game regardless of second hand sales or not? Perhaps paying for day one content that was free to new buyers is understandable, but an entire component of the game seems unreasonable. It feels that the gaming industry is in a never-ending circle of pointing the finger, and instead of attempting to break free we have all just happily resulted to the blame game. When a new game is sold at Gamestop the game publishers have set very low percentages to be given to the store for profit. This in turn has encouraged Gamestop to push used sales, whereas if publishers could perhaps strike better deals with the stores they may find an even greater ally. Used game sales force developers and publishers to find new ways of making back the money they have lost, so the idea of the online pass has become widely encouraged. Incentives, such as day one and planned DLC, are used in order to not only reward those who support the developer with a new purchase, but hopefully entice more gamers to make that day one purchase. While we're on the subject of DLC, let's talk about how many gamers are angry with developers for releasing DLC content. Many feel it should be included in the pricetag. When we shell out $60 for a title, we expect it to be damn near perfection, and we have a right too. The only problem is that it seems the gaming industry is divided. "To purchase or not to purchase, that is the question." In 2011, 51% of gamers purchased some form of downloadable content. This percentage has been raised a substantial 34% in 2009 alone. We see more and more DLC because WE are buying it. Publishers and developers are not going to stop if there is still a profit to be made from DLC. (Wired) With sales being lost through the used gaming market, DLC practically guarantees money to be made that will go straight to both parties. Why would they stop creating this content? The truth is they will not, and should not have to. When used games net them nothing, and DLC brings in revenue it is a great way to make a profit especially when this cannot be re-sold. This content is optional to purchase and not required for the full experience of a game, why do we punish the developers for this? Besides the fans opinions, who is most important in our beautiful gaming community? It is really quite simple, the development teams themselves. Yet, we have created an environment where they seem all too afraid to speak their mind, in fear of a revolt. They fear that all we will think of is their greed, and so far all we have done is prove them right. It should come as no surprise to anyone that many game developers are not strong supporters of used game sales. Any artist, musician, filmmaker, or writer would rather receive compensation for their work than continue living off of Ramen Noodles. This does not mean that developers are completely against used gaming. Many understand that it is a way to gain acknowledgment and long term fans. Many great games are discovered because of used gaming, but the truth of the matter is perhaps there needs to be a co-existence that helps support developers. David Cage of Quantic Dream was interviewed by Greg Miller of IGN, on the topic of used games and here is what he had to say. http://youtu.be/zjwli8GaHcs David Cage makes it clear that he feels there is a problem with the industry, but understands the value of used gaming. It does not need to vanish entirely, and it never will, but perhaps we can find a way to grant developers greater access to the compensation they are entitled too. Stop, seriously, you do not need to write that comment. Which one? The one where you say something along the lines of, "I can buy a book, movie, album, comic, shirt, or sex apparatus second hand, and games should be NO different." I am very aware of these ideas, but a musician makes the bulk of money on tours, not record sales. Films potentially have two chances to make money, in theatres and through DVD sales. Mostly any writing medium now is slowly converting to E-books in order to combat second sales, the rising costs of publication, and it is a damn shame. I refuse to see video games make the transition to only digital distribution. With the way our industry is heading, I fear this is what we will see. The key to everything in this heated volcanic debate of whether used games are bad or good, should not be what is great for one industry or another, it should be what is best for our industry. The one we grew up with, and ripped away a seemingly endless supply of cellophane from our games. The one where we had piles of games stacked around our little slices of gaming heaven. There are problems in our industry that need solving before games are only limited to a file name and a click, and used gaming is one of them. Used games take away from the rightful compensation entitled to developers after spending years working on a product enjoyed by millions. When you purchase a used title the money does not go back to the hard working people creating what you just purchased. In this time of digital distribution, online passes, and day one DLC, it€™s easy to understand the appeal of the used game market, but it punishes the people who create the content we lose hours of our lives to in pure enjoyment. Gamers should support the studios they love, without being made out to be guilty for a used purchase even if it means waiting a few weeks before buying the game, and gaining ample time to judge what is the right purchase for them. We are all consumers that want to gain more while saving, but used gaming inescapably hurts our beloved industry. Even the idea of used gaming has created a barrier where developers are seen as greedy, simply for voicing their opinions against the used gaming market. Every dollar you don€™t spend on a new title is a dollar that the developers will never see. We must view each level of the second hand game market, and while it is not necessary to eliminate it, something must be done about understanding that at their basic level games purchased used are taking away from the developers, and without them we would not have anything to play.