Dyack: used games threaten the industry as we know it

[Maawdawg]

The thread title is the title of the Jim Sterling Distructiod "article" here. Sterling is never one to shy away from taking shots but he isn't always wrong either.
http://www.destructoid.com/dyack-use...t-224674.phtml

his article references this original article from Gameindustry.biz yesterday
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...try-says-dyack

Regarding both articles...

The used game market doesn't necessarily have to kill the "tail" of a game if the developer actually makes a game that people keep or extend their lives with good use of DLC. The used market is exponentially worse for developer/publisher profits and life length on bad games, and less so for the very high quality ones. At least that is how it seems to me. Not all games, and actually VERY few, have had a tail similar to the likes Diablo 2, Warcraft, or Half Life so it is hard to use them as a reference for what the extended life on a game should be. Those games have a tail a decade long because they are superb products that stand the test of time for customers, it also helps that they were PC based games where the used market is completely muted compared to consoles. The average game produced now (or even when those were released) is/was far from that.

I started buying, trading and selling used games on my C64 and Amiga at a local shop ages ago, the used market is hardly a new invention in the gaming landscape. It is certainly more readily accessible now and more prevalent but the insinuation that this never happened before isn't accurate. I really feel that game companies should adjust to the marketplace instead of trying to force it to come back to their way of thinking. Markets evolve, companies that want to do business in those markets must as well if they want to survive and be profitable. The industry itself won't die, only the production models it no longer supports and the companies that can't get away from them will.

Make games with good value, make them replayable, make the campaign long, make the multiplayer engaging, have a good DLC schedule (in time and monetary value) that extends the life of your game, focus back to PC, go digital, go episodic. All of those things can combat used sales.

If used games are the huge issue developers need to take it to the publishers and have them stop giving Gamestop preferential treatment and bonus items. Yet that won't happen because they still feed the industry TONS of money in firsthand sales and the publishers deem the early run sales they give to be worth more than the used sales they take from the overall life sales of a game. Developers have put themselves into positions where they are now beholden to publishers if they want to continue to make high budget long dev cycle games (that they think they need to make to be successful). Sometimes when you tie yourself to a rock because of the wind you are going to have to try to swim with it later. I think some companies (SK included) would be much better served in backtracking and rebuilding their structure and direction to better work within the current marketplace than staying stagnant in this publisher profit driven model until they completely fail.

As it stands now the Gamestops of the world are being catered to by the very people who complain about them "killing the industry" because noone is really taking an actual stand or organizing against it on the developer end. Publishers and corporations are the force driving this industry and used game market to where it is now, not consumers. Customers just aren't going to organize to fight for developers as a whole on their own, they are focused on getting the best value for their dollar as they always have been. Even on a per customer basis it is hard for customers to take a stand when the devs asking for support are barely taking advantage to the methods right in front of them to fight used game sales themselves, and therefore are feeding into the problems they so readily complain about.

/endrant

[Guirec730]

Well, I think a lot of the problem is development costs. You can have a multi-million seller that doesn't break even. That's a huge difference from the days of Amiga. Alan Wake sold two million copies and was considered a flop. GTA4 didn't do Take 2's stock any favors at all.

Gamestop certainly isn't helping anybody except themselves, though.

[Purple Gryphon]

I see were Denis and others are coming from the used game industry is not what is was when we were growing up. Most used games was trading or borrowing from friends. There were also a lot less games coming out. The market is over saturated at this point. That is why we see all the developers joining publishers lately. There are probably over 2,000 games coming out every year when you count the consoles and handhelds. Now we also have casual games on PC and mobile devices competing too it is ridiculous. Gamestop said they generated $1.2 billion from trade-ins but how much of that was spent on new games and how much went to developers.

I totally agree with you on the stop feeding the giant you claim is killing you Maaw. I actually brought that up to Denis a few weeks ago. I have been saying that digital is going to play a huge roll in next gen gaming on consoles. MS is already added the cloud. What they need next is to release a game day and date digital and retail. They do it for PC's, I can't see it not happening soon on consoles even this gen if a developer/publisher is brave enough.

This DLC/on-line pass/pre-order strategy that the developers are using is not working and it is actually driving people away more than attracting consumers I feel. Developers are adding more to packages so they can charge more for a game on make-up the development costs in other ways.

I do see the developers/publishers will have to lead the fight. One defense could be to have a tiered pricing system, which has kind of come around with live and psn. But I could see paying $80 for Skyrim and Mass Effect and getting everything and maybe $40 for a movie licensed game. If you deliver a quality product people will pay more for it.

As the market contracts the developers and publishers will naturally consolidate and they will manage the release qunatity/quality/and timing of games better if they want to survive. It has happened with every industry. You will have some niche developers but most will be comglomerates. It happened with cars, movies, books, clothes and even food. We don't go to local markets anymore and buy local products. We generally go to large supermarket chains who buy from a few major distributors.

[All Knowing...]

I agree that companies like gamestop will eventually feel the pinch as digital download becomes a bigger and bigger part of how a consumer purchases their goodies... (which is likely why Gamestop are trying to make their billions while they still can...)

But I do agree that one key way to combat it is too make a game that you can't live without... i.e. how many of you still have your copies of Diablo 1 and 2 or OoT? when a dev pushes out obvious shovelware, they shouldn't be screaming bloody murder when they see their product being traded in...

I personally will not trade in a game of high value even if I doubt i'll be playing again, while I have no issues getting rid of any crap I don't want associated with my collection.

Basically, devs that are complaining about this need to step up their game or accept the reality that their babies are ugly and up for adoption...

[daniel ampudia]

Basically, devs that are complaining about this need to step up their game or accept the reality that their babies are ugly and up for adoption...

Developing a game is becoming increasingly difficult and complex. At the same time our tastes become refined and demanding. Game development is a tough work environment with high risk and everyone deserves respect.

It's interesting that we are hearing rumors of next gen consoles carrying technology aimed at destroying the used game market. It is a strong statement at the reality of the problem.

[All Knowing...]

respect is earned not given...

that anti used game bit sounds much more like some journalist writing something polarizing to receive hits then based on any factual information.
There is no way MS will ostracize companies gamestop... the only gram of truth might be a better method of digital distribution within the console, which ultimate curbs used games, but I can assure you, that used games will continue to be a reality next gen...

[Guirec730]

I find this article relevant:

http://anerdoccurrence.com/2012/03/2...ay-profitable/

[All Knowing...]

So if I were to purchase a car from Honda, then decided to sell the car to Joe. Would I have to give some of the money I earned from the sale back to Honda? Publishers and developers already received their cut from the initial sale, demanding money for used game sales would be like Honda asking for money for the sale of used cars...

[daniel ampudia]

But the used game market in gaming has grown so much that it is actually hurting the industry, and that's not the case with cars. Think of how many studios have close this gen (including good ones), that's far more than ever before, and it's only getting worse.

And this is just because people wanna save 5 bucks per game...

[Maawdawg]

Used games aren't the only reason companies fail. It is A reason, sure, but poor budgeting, over-bloated company structure, and delivering poor products to market are FAR bigger reasons for most companies failing. If you look at the list of major dev-house closings in the past few years many of them were companies making giant budget AAA game attempts and failing miserably which caused them to go so far in the red they close shop, or caused the publisher they sold themselves to just to make that attempt shutters them. It is a failure on the production level and also in the fact that they were companies taking a giant risk to make a game in many cases. Giant risks to make money often end up blowing up, and that is what has happened to many devs now. It is not something that the customer or used games should take the lion's share of the blame for.

The "$5 savings" isn't all the used market is, it lets people re-coup money to buy more new products when they sell and trade unwanted games, it lets people save some money (often more than $5) on games they probably wouldn't buy at full price anyway if there wasn't a used option, and it can create new customers for future games in a series or from a dev if someone buys a used product and likes it enough. All of those things get overlooked at times by devs and publishers.

[kouper]

Ok, I've written this post several times now, let's see if I can write it without it vanishing.

I still don't see why game dev's and software programmers are the only people in the only industry on the planet who get to double dip. You can talk about how used game sales are hurting the industry, but understand that used car sales outnumber new car sales several to 1 on car lots. Hell, we'd occasionally get a car back with a couple hundred miles on it is all, it'd be sold again for 500 less than the original sticker and it'd sell fast.

Any studio who believes used game sales is why they failed, deserved to fail.

And like maaw said, not every person who purchases a used game would have actually bought it new, much like piracy, can't actually declare all those dollars lost.

But is it really so bad to lose the cash on one product? Look at me, the first used game I ever purchased was this little title called Final Fantasy from SquareSoft. I loved that game, got it for like 20$ from GamePeddlar in the mall. I liked it so much, that basically any time I saw their name on a game I bought it. SInce that one used purchase I've also bought,
FFII
FFIII
Secret of Mana
FF Adventure1-3(GB)
FFVII (3 times new)
FF Tactics (3times new)
Legend of Mana
FF Anthology
FF Collection
FFX
FFX-2
FF Dirge of Cerberus
FFXII
FF4 gba
FForigins GBA
FFXI (3 pc copies, 2 xbox copies as well as a 2 year subscritption
Kingdom hearts
Kingdom hearts 2
Radiata stories
Valkery Profile lenneth (psp)
FFVII Crisis core
FF tactics war of the lions
FF3 DS
FFXII: revenant wings DS
Children of Mana DS
Kingdom hearts BBS DS
FF Spirits within (2 dvd's and a blu ray)
FFVII Advent children (initial import, a dvd, the super collection dvd and the final extended cut blu ray)
parasite eve 1
parasite eve 2
parasite eve 3rd birthday
ff 1-2-3 ios
basically all of their IOS games up until rings of chaos when they started charging 15 bucks each.
FFVII on psn
FFXIII
FFXIV Collector's edition.

and I'm pretty sure Im actually leaving some purchases out. So, did that one used game hurt them? That's the only company I've gone that crazy for, but you can look at SOFTWARE and I bought the first armored core used, bought every one since new.

Game dev's need to realize that a used sale, can be far better for them than any advertised they have planned.

[All Knowing...]

I would argue that its crappy *** full priced games that are killing games industry ultimately...

Devs regularly expect consumers to dish out $60+ for titles that well below the AAA standard in terms of quality and user experience.
Then wonder why their games are ending up in used game bargain bins, while the larger consumer base trend towards the casual mobile market... well, I can spend $60+ on a potentially **** game or I can spend 99 cents on one...

As it were, the industry is now trending towards a market where you'll have maybe a handful of $60+ true AAA titles release a year from the big pubishers (EA, activision, WB, Sony, MS and Nintendo, etc...) and a literal tonne of inexpensive mobile games flooding the market, because anyone and their dog can make one...

The less than AAA games will disappear because instead of charging the $20 the game is actually worth. These devs insist on the consumer paying top dollar despite the product not delivering the value one would expect at the $60 price point. With their demise, the industry will suffer as a middle road will be lost and the potential of any true innovation along with it.

This hurts the industry in several ways, because it creates a market where on one hand you have blockbuster, sequel driven products selling at full price. and on the other hand, you get a literal mountain of .99 cent games. The blockbuster titles will continue to play it safer and safer to ensure ROI, (i.e. COD) while innovation then rests solely on the shoulders of the .99 cent mobile devs.

This will potentially make the whole industry implode, because consumers will eventually refuse to buy the same COD game year after year, and will also tire of digging through endless mobile **** in search of that one nugget of gold...

Now one could argue that maybe it will all be OK in the end, because this is a similar series of events that occurred in the film industry. sure, that is true... but then it opens up the debate of whether or not the film industry is better off for it... i.e. Michael Bay continually ****ting in your ears and eyes and still remaining successful (cough cough activion cough)

[Eleazar]

So if I were to purchase a car from Honda, then decided to sell the car to Joe. Would I have to give some of the money I earned from the sale back to Honda? Publishers and developers already received their cut from the initial sale, demanding money for used game sales would be like Honda asking for money for the sale of used cars...

No one is arguing that you shouldn't be a le to sell you game to a friend, what developers are complaining about is corporations using used games for profit.

[Eleazar]

But the used game market in gaming has grown so much that it is actually hurting the industry, and that's not the case with cars. Think of how many studios have close this gen (including good ones), that's far more than ever before, and it's only getting worse.

And this is just because people wanna save 5 bucks per game...

That isn't entirely true. There is a reason why we now have certified used cars. The car industry saw used cars as a threat so they formulated certified used cars to off set normal used cars sales.

[kouper]

Manufacturers make jack from certified cars. It's an incentive to help dealerships, who already make a lot off used, take some of the used business from private sellers/small dealerships.

[Wargamer]

For me that's quite simple about how I buy my game, if it is one of those i don't buy it until it's under 20$:
70$
5 hours long
bugged
false advertising
rehash
So I buy like, one game per month but at least it last me for a month.

[Yarrrmonger7]

For me that's quite simple about how I buy my game, if it is one of those i don't buy it until it's under 20$:
70$
5 hours long
bugged
false advertising
rehash
So I buy like, one game per month but at least it last me for a month.

I'm really confused by this. Really I have no idea what you mean. You only buy it if it's under $20 if it's the following?

[Sevens]

Seems to be working for the movie and TV industry. And if you flood the market and people get caught up in multiplayer modes of a select few games, the only thing that will truly help is quality (including things such as art, direction, story and gameplay - not all of which necessarily depend on huge budgets, even though they do depend on talent).

I object to invasive and restrictive measures such as always-online requirements, digital distribution (which really can't be separated from DRM -- it is DRM) and cloud concepts. I don't buy used games, and I rarely sell games I bought. I can see the interest in restricting sales of used games. But the measures are not all that acceptable to me. And such discussions should be led with actual exact numbers.

[All Knowing...]

Seems to be working for the movie and TV industry.

yeah it is, financially, but which film are you looking most forward to, one of the snow white re-makes, or perhaps the TMNT re-boot? Actually you sound more like a Total Recall remake guy? Me, I`m looking forward to the ALIEN prequel and maybe even the Spider-man origin story... take 2...

[Purple Gryphon]

Manufacturers make jack from certified cars. It's an incentive to help dealerships, who already make a lot off used, take some of the used business from private sellers/small dealerships.

Seems like the manufacturers profit to me. Dealerships get there cars from where? If they don't make enough they close down and that hurts the manufacturers distribution network. Manufacturers probably make the most from selling parts and dealers from repairs. It is hard to relate cars to this discussion though. But if you have the EA store and the MS games store and etc. then they would not care about used sales. Gamestop is a private seller and make trillions in profit on used games. I can't say I would not want piece of that pie as a developer of games or consoles.

The game manufacturers can get in to the the initial sale but they can't really get into the used game market. It was cost them too much to compete unless they could some how buy out gamestop shares.

[cap am]

Seems like the manufacturers profit to me. Dealerships get there cars from where? If they don't make enough they close down and that hurts the manufacturers distribution network. Manufacturers probably make the most from selling parts and dealers from repairs. It is hard to relate cars to this discussion though. But if you have the EA store and the MS games store and etc. then they would not care about used sales. Gamestop is a private seller and make trillions in profit on used games. I can't say I would not want piece of that pie as a developer of games or consoles.

The game manufacturers can get in to the the initial sale but they can't really get into the used game market. It was cost them too much to compete unless they could some how buy out gamestop shares.

Its the publishers that are at fault here. Publishers are pushing games as being disposable commodities, then they complain that people sell them once they are finished.

It is the publishers job to make sure games are tested, marketed and sold sufficiently to recoup their investment. The shelf life of games is a part of this process.

If a game fails, it is because the PUBLISHER has failed.
If the game fails because it is bad, its because the publisher invested in a studio that couldn't do the job, or the publisher did not take the time and effort to ensure the product was up to standard.
If the game fails because no one buys it then the publisher invested in a game with too small a market to recoup their investment, or they didn't market it properly.

If not enough people are buying the game new, then it is the publishers responsibility to give customers a REASON to.

If you want more tail Denis, give people REWARDS for holding on to their games. DLC, new features, patches to fix common issues, special editions.

If you have a problem with not enough tail, go to your publisher, and ask them why they aren't doing their job.

It is disgusting for ANYONE in business, be they publisher, developer, or ANYONE in ANY industry, to blame their CUSTOMERS for the failures of the industry, and even MORE disgusting to suggest that the solution is for customers to surrender their consumer rights.

I've never traded in or sold a game in my LIFE, but I value my right to do so.

It is up to businesses to conform to the demands placed upon them by the market. When businesses decide they know what is best for everyone... well, we all know what happens then. The bubble bursts and we ALL get screwed over.

[Maawdawg]

That is exactly how I see it cap. It is up to publishers and devs to work within the market as it stands, not for them to try to operate how they see fit and try to conform the market to them and make customers come up with the difference.

[All Knowing...]

Mr. Michael Pachter, (who I just had the pleasure of meeting, he's very tall...)
comments on this in the most recent PACH_ATTACK (1st question...)

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/used-game-pach-attack/728745

[Eleazar]

I have no beef with used games, what I hate is a business profiting off of the used games market, and even actively trying to undermine new game sales.

[cap am]

I have no beef with used games, what I hate is a business profiting off of the used games market, and even actively trying to undermine new game sales.

Retailers are just doing whatever it takes to maximize their profit. Margins on games are pretty low, especially on console games. This is because of the huge chunk of profit that is taken by publishers and console manufacturers.

The problem is publishers what to have their cake and eat it too. Publishers should be adjusting their MARKETING and PRICING to compete with second hand sales, instead of whining about it.

You know why they don't do this? Because they made their money back from day one sales. Publishers don't care about used game sales. Its just a convenient excuse to strip away more of our consumer rights, in the same way the film industry goes on about piracy. Piracy isn't hurting them. They only care because its all a wonderful excuse to get their filthy hands on your personal details for their marketing department, through making us sign up to endless 'memberships', and 'services, and 'online networks'.

If developers, publishers, and retailers could just decide between themselves to treat PRODUCT and CUSTOMERS with some respect, instead of this demented attitude from the 1980's that games are toys for children, only played by children, only marketed to children, only bought for children, then maybe they could get their act together and make real games, with real value, that people can say "I bought this game and I'm proud to have it on my shelf" instead of "I bought this game a week ago, now I'm bored, can I trade it in for $5 off Modern Call of Battlefield Warfare Duty 27"

When you hear someone say "used videogame sales are bad" ask yourself when you last heard someone complain about used books. Or used videos. Or used dvds. Or used cars. Or EBAY.

You don't hear publishers complain about used game sales on EBAY do you. Why is that? Its because retail used game sales are much easier for publishers to point fingers at and cry that somebody else is making money that they want, but can't be assed getting for themselves with actual WORK.