Publishers and their used games gripes.

[jp1]

If I am purchasing games in order to reward their creators, and to ensure that more of these ingenious contraptions are produced, I honestly can't figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy.


Um

1) Money in a used game, is still money going into the industry. Just that it's to the retail part of it.

2) One is actually illegal and punishable by the law you idiot.

You're missing his point.

He isn't saying that buying used games is the same as piracy. He's saying that buying a used game doesn't do any more to benefit the people who make the game than just pirating the game. There's nothing "idiotic" about that statement.

Supporting the "retail part of the industry" doesn't do a whole lot to support the people who make the games.

Because every person is going to purchase the game still knowing that it won't be worth shit used because the industry has finally achieved it's goal? I wouldn't drop a dime on a game if I knew I could never sell it and recoup some of that money.

[Limewater]

You know I have been reluctant to mention it up until now because I know someone is going to come to defense of it and claim that it somehow makes sense but I watched a show a while back about the best jobs on the planet and two of the companies featured were game developers.

These guys had an arcade in the break room, a reflection pod or some other stupid shit to just take a break whenever they wanted, gourmet lunches, hell I can't remember but trust me there was a plethora of other pampered shit for these whiny assholes.

Yeah, a game developer tried to complain to me the other day before flying off on his solid gold flying robot unicorn. What an asshole!

[Limewater]

Because every person is going to purchase the game still knowing that it won't be worth shit used because the industry has finally achieved it's goal? I wouldn't drop a dime on a game if I knew I could never sell it and recoup some of that money.

Thanks, I am aware of this argument. I've seen it the fifty times it has already been posted on this thread. I'm sure Mr. PennyArcade is aware of it as well.

But it really is true that when you buy a game used, you are a customer of the person selling the game and not the developers. That's the whole point of the article-- IF you want to support the developers, you should buy the game new. If you don't care about supporting the developers, then sure, buy used.

He wasn't calling for a blanket ban on selling used games in the Penny Arcade article. He was just stating that, because he wants to support the developers and encourage them to make more games for him to enjoy, he is only buying new games. I don't see where that stance is unreasonable.

[Regginmad]

Because every person is going to purchase the game still knowing that it won't be worth shit used because the industry has finally achieved it's goal? I wouldn't drop a dime on a game if I knew I could never sell it and recoup some of that money.

Thanks, I am aware of this argument. I've seen it the fifty times it has already been posted on this thread. I'm sure Mr. PennyArcade is aware of it as well.

But it really is true that when you buy a game used, you are a customer of the person selling the game and not the developers. That's the whole point of the article-- IF you want to support the developers, you should buy the game new. If you don't care about supporting the developers, then sure, buy used.

He wasn't calling for a blanket ban on selling used games in the Penny Arcade article. He was just stating that, because he wants to support the developers and encourage them to make more games for him to enjoy, he is only buying new games. I don't see where that stance is unreasonable.

I'm fine with that, I don't feel any worse for buying used games than buying a used car. The major difference is that few people will argue I'm taking money out of Honda's engineer's pockets.

[jp1]

You know I have been reluctant to mention it up until now because I know someone is going to come to defense of it and claim that it somehow makes sense but I watched a show a while back about the best jobs on the planet and two of the companies featured were game developers.

These guys had an arcade in the break room, a reflection pod or some other stupid shit to just take a break whenever they wanted, gourmet lunches, hell I can't remember but trust me there was a plethora of other pampered shit for these whiny assholes.

Yeah, a game developer tried to complain to me the other day before flying off on his solid gold flying robot unicorn. What an asshole!

Don't lie, you know he went back to his cardboard shack tucked in the woods. When he got home he rubbed some rat lard on his dry calloused hands and pulled the single pea from his pocket that he and his entire family would split. Afterwords they all talked about the good old days before these thieves started to purchase used games and they were living the good life.

Anyway, once again I've allowed myself to get sucked into the pointless vortex that is trying to talk sense with the gamer fanboys who are firmly cupping the jockstrap of these game developers and publishers.

You've heard the point about how people won't buy a product knowing that it will be essentially garbage the moment they crack it open and you dismiss it so it isn't true...well eureka that is a revelation.

I didn't make that up about the cushy work environment that some of these guys have either. I clearly said it wasn't all of them as well if you didn't bother to process that bit of info. Dollars to doughnuts says that the ones that work for the company that provides them pampers so they don't have to bother with trips to the golden toilet are also the ones that groan the most. The rest of them are busy actually trying to earn a living.

You know I really love movies. I watch movies all the time. I still don't idolize and defend every person who makes them. I'm not going to go and make a post about how they can't scrape by these days because people are too busy borrowing dvds from their friends. Seriously, try letting these guys stand on their own two feet a little. If you really need a cause so bad why not defend someone who needs it.

EDIT: Edited to remove a line. Sorry, let my agitation get the best of me.

[MrPopo]

These guys had an arcade in the break room, a reflection pod or some other stupid shit to just take a break whenever they wanted, gourmet lunches, hell I can't remember but trust me there was a plethora of other pampered shit for these whiny assholes.

Yes, they do have fun toys in their office. They also have something called "crunch time", where they work 100+ hour weeks for the three months before the game ships. It's a constant in the industry; no matter how much they try to get everything done early this seems to sneak up on them. Every retrospective I've seen from a dev always includes "crunch time" in their list of things that went wrong. Really the toys are almost necessary; without an escape like that you're going to lose a lot of employees to burn-out.

I cannot believe that these guys work in such an environment and still find a way to complain that they are only pulling in high 5 or low 6 figures.

Most game devs make between 60-80k. It's a respectable salary, but they are paid lower on average than software development jobs at other companies. If you're a programmer you don't go into game development for the money.

Meanwhile the guy scraping the toilets in the same building who isn't allowed to touch any of the cool stuff probably barely scrapes by above minimum wage.

I am shocked that a highly skilled position pays better than menial labor.

I have a problem with the people in that situation who will always find something to complain about. Give these guys dumpster duty for a couple months and pay them $7-8 an hour and see how much bitching is done when they return to the cush life.

Here's the part you're missing. It's not the average game dev who punches in, slams out code, and punches out every day. These are thie management types who are looking at the overall money the company is taking in. If a large group of people buys the game used instead of buying it new that's less money that goes into the studio to pay for the next game. The thing about game development is that you have to pay a large group of people 2-3 years with very little revenue in the interim. The money is made in large lumps at a time. Unless you're baced by a large studio that can absorb losses then a single game not selling as well as expected is enough to sink a studio.

[jp1]

Yes, they do have fun toys in their office. They also have something called "crunch time", where they work 100+ hour weeks for the three months before the game ships. It's a constant in the industry; no matter how much they try to get everything done early this seems to sneak up on them. Every retrospective I've seen from a dev always includes "crunch time" in their list of things that went wrong. Really the toys are almost necessary; without an escape like that you're going to lose a lot of employees to burn-out.

Lot's of other people have to work long weeks to make deadlines too. Without the added perks. I mean sure they may be in jobs in the "menial" area of the spectrum but somebody has to do it. At least I don't generally have to listen to them whine about it. Many of them are just happy to have a job.

I am shocked that a highly skilled position pays better than menial labor.

Not really my point. I'm saying that these guys should appreciate the added bonuses they are afforded instead of finding something to complain about. I'm not saying they should make the same as someone without an education.

Here's the part you're missing. It's not the average game dev who punches in, slams out code, and punches out every day. These are thie management types who are looking at the overall money the company is taking in. If a large group of people buys the game used instead of buying it new that's less money that goes into the studio to pay for the next game. The thing about game development is that you have to pay a large group of people 2-3 years with very little revenue in the interim. The money is made in large lumps at a time. Unless you're baced by a large studio that can absorb losses then a single game not selling as well as expected is enough to sink a studio.

I'm not really blind to this fact but the more of these articles that get posted I am reading comments like "I'm a game dev and I support this.." etc. It seems like a good deal of them are also on board with the whining. I also realize that the publishers and every one else wants to make money but to continually harp on the consumer about not providing it to them the way they want is just bullshit. It's a simple fact that many people wouldn't buy the games at all at the new price and that another percentage of people wouldn't buy the game new if they didn't know for a fact that they could trade it in or sell it to recoup some of that cost when they finish with it, especially if it sucks. These companies are supporting the game industry because they are providing a service that allows some consumers that wouldn't otherwise purchase new games at all to purchase them and then trade them in when they are tired of them.

The simple fact that unlike any other industry the video game industry thinks it should have the right to tell the consumer what to do with their own property is what is disgusting. If you can't make it work with the business model you have in place then adapt or disappear. Someone else can and will do it right.

It also seems to be impossible to get across the point that I am not making blanket statements. All of my arguments get grouped into one big "game developers suck" blob when the responses come in. I am talking about specific devs and publishers namely the ones that are crying to anyone that will listen that they don't get enough money.

[Flake]

If a large group of people buys the game used instead of buying it new that's less money that goes into the studio to pay for the next game. The thing about game development is that you have to pay a large group of people 2-3 years with very little revenue in the interim.

Real quick thing to remember: Every copy of the game you see that you don't buy direct from the publishers website? Already been purchased. You walk into Mega Game Store Inc and see thousands of Call of Duty: Super Duper Teenage Warfare's behind the counter? The gamestore already bought those to sell to you at a mark up (the difference between wholesale and MSRP)

So that large group of people will have zero affect on the income of the game company that made [insert] game. What bothers the publisher / developer is that the subsequent games and sequels will get fewer pre-orders from the gamestore if Mega Games Inc knows what percentage of consumers will be willing to wait to get it used.

As for no income in the interim? MAYBE that's true for a small time developer or tiny start up. But for the Activisions, Nintendos, and EA's of the world they have investors and stocks to take care of the income. It's all about the stock holders for these guys.

[MrPopo]

If a large group of people buys the game used instead of buying it new that's less money that goes into the studio to pay for the next game. The thing about game development is that you have to pay a large group of people 2-3 years with very little revenue in the interim.

Real quick thing to remember: Every copy of the game you see that you don't buy direct from the publishers website? Already been purchased. You walk into Mega Game Store Inc and see thousands of Call of Duty: Super Duper Teenage Warfare's behind the counter? The gamestore already bought those to sell to you at a mark up (the difference between wholesale and MSRP)

Except your not counting vendor returns, plus the fact that if a store sells out of all their copies they usually order more. If instead they fill their stock with games traded in to them they can do a second batch without the publisher seeing a dime.

As for no income in the interim? MAYBE that's true for a small time developer or tiny start up. But for the Activisions, Nintendos, and EA's of the world they have investors and stocks to take care of the income. It's all about the stock holders for these guys.

Yes, the large publishers which handle many studios get a fairly steady stream of income, which I alluded to in my post. But there are a surprising number of developers who self-publish. And even a large publisher will shut down a studio if the studio's games aren't selling.

It's a simple fact that many people wouldn't buy the games at all at the new price and that another percentage of people wouldn't buy the game new if they didn't know for a fact that they could trade it in or sell it to recoup some of that cost when they finish with it, especially if it sucks. These companies are supporting the game industry because they are providing a service that allows some consumers that wouldn't otherwise purchase new games at all to purchase them and then trade them in when they are tired of them.

I think you overestimate how big that demographic is, but I also don't think that's the demographic they're concerned with. I think the demographic they're really targeting is the patient gamer who would probably buy the game new, but he'd rather wait a few weeks for the used copies to show up and knock $5-10 off the price.

Also, your whole "they want to sell back games that suck" thing is a tiny portion of buyers. If you're protecting yourself from shitty games by selling them back then you shouldn't be allowed to handle money; at best you'll get 50% back of what you paid. There are professional reviewers out there who can give a good rundown of the game; I"m not even talking about looking at scores, just the descriptions of what they liked and didn't like. And sure, you'll still find a game or two that doesn't click with you, but if it's 1-2 games a year it's not a big deal if you can sell a game back or not.

I've also seen a few people bring up the used car industry, which does have a lot of parallels to the game industry. Except for one major one; when you buy a used car it is likely the warrenty near it's end (if not gone) and the machine has wear and tear on it. Disc-based media essentially doesn't have an aging problem. The only downside to buying used is you might not have the manual or case, which isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things. That is why you never hear a peep about the used car industry; buying new has a ton of advantages over buying used. What the devs are starting to do is introduce the same kind of divide.

[ZeroAX]

Totally agree with Mr Popo's first post.

Guys I don't have a problem with the industry finding ways to make extra money from used sales. For example them giving away free DLC to the one who bought it new is ok in my book. What I don't really like is gamers defending moves like the online pass, by saying "you don't have any rights to complain" and shit like that.

And also JP1, game developers have to study a LOT. Technology is always changing and so they must keep up. That plus the 100 hour weeks, I'm sorry the "toys" in the launch room are there for people to relax a bit, you can't say they have it easy because of that.