How to Kill the Used Game Market without Angering Consumers

Sony's patent application for on-disc tagging is a step in the wrong direction because it offers no benefit to consumers. The D Pad D Bags, however, have a plan to kneecap the used games market that could make a lot of gamers very happy.

[dedicatedtogamers]

The PC market has effectively killed "used" sales in a way that most people are okay with: cut the price of games. Spending $60 on a brand-new game with no hope of resale is a bitter pill to swallow, but cut that game down to $30 or less (which often happens for PC games) and that game will sell.

[NovusTerminus]

I don't like digital games, I prefer owning a disk. That said, I am fine with the online pass that comes with a game. I don't think that a disk based block is a good idea, if you buy a game used, you can still play it, and if you like it enough, you get the online, or other thing that came with it for a small price.

This also saves lifetime sales. If a game bombs on release, but after a short time word of mouth spreads out and more people start to guy it, well they might get it used, but then get the DLC. Why lock the disk out in it's entirety? It will also slow random purchases... A game that is in a bargin bin might pick up more and more games slowly over it's life, maybe ensuring them to get the next installment.

There is allot to consider, but I think of all the methods Online Passes have shown to be the best so far for disk based games. This is a bad move if Sony goes through with it.

[matrixman92]

just lower the fucking price of games....everyone wins, people will be more inclined to buy games, giving developers more money...simple enough

[STK026]

I think it's okay to give bonuses for those who buy the game new, however, I don't like it when they strip feautures out.

Example : giving free DLC with a new game is a good way to have people buy the game new.
An online pass however, punishes those who buy used games, people who rent games and those who bring the game at their friend's house.

Another thing I think would help, is to lower the prices of games after soem months on the market. The fact that many games are still priced at 60$ after over a year on the market when the used version is priced under 30$ makes it hard to justify paying for the new version.

[ziggurcat]

funny that they would bring up the sony patent... considering that it's just a *patent* and *not* something that is actually going to be implemented since most patents don't even see the light of day, and are really only filed for legal reasons (i.e. to prevent the unauthorized use of the technology).

the reality is that sony filed an identical patent prior to the PS3 release... and we all know that we can't play used games on that system, right? /sarcasm

but really... why should the used game market get killed off?

[Y_5150]

The real reason that Sony is using to kill off sales from the used market is the online pass. Some would say "how?" Well you see the two big games Sony is bringing out this year called The Last of Us and God of War Ascension is having multiplayer put into the games. So in order to play the multiplayer without a $10 fee, you have to buy it new. So I think most Playstation titles are going to have some sort of online function in order to justify buying it new over used. Not a bad thing because seeing God of War multiplayer is fun and The Last of Us would have something enjoyable about it.

[palaeomerus]

I'm not even buying those games new.

[Y_5150]

Thanks for the feedback.

That's fine, really nobody is forcing you to buy it new obviously. I just wonder what everyone else thinks why I'm wrong that's the real question.

[Hicken]

Not happening. Well, unless people are really as dumb as they often show themselves to be.

... it might happen.

I mean, PC gamers are all perfectly happy with DRM and such, right?

[psp2roundup]

Many gamers feel so entitled these days, they'll be angered by pretty much anything anyone does to make money out of them.

[Hydralysk]

There it is, the idea that we OWE the developers and publishers full price on a game instead of a fully legal and practical alternative...

If the developer is someone I trust or a game I have faith in, I'll buy the game new, usually around release day. As a consumer however, I have no obligation to choose the more expensive option because the developers/publishers would prefer it that way.

The developers need to prove to me they know what they are doing before I'll pay a premium to help support them, because I'm not sure till I've played their games whether I WANT to support them.

[slugg]

Release a game digitally (when downloaded to your hard drive, it can't be traded in, etc.) two weeks before it is sold on disc, and for 15 - 20 dollars cheaper. Since the middle-man (retailers) are cut out, the publisher/developer gets most of the money for that sale. Then, two weeks later, when the disc version comes out, it will cost more...but you can lend it, sell it, whatever-- keep the passcodes for multiplayer, etc. Then, all DLC is released to digital buyers earlier and cheaper, as well. Use this INCENTIVE to get people to buy a game in a way that funnels more of the money to the developer and publisher instead of instituting draconican measures that make consumers feel punished. Then, follow Steams example and sell older games as digital downloads for great deals-- people will buy them that way instead of a used disc.

[mananimal]

If its not on disc & I cant play a used game in my console, im not gonna buy "said " console or game, its simple.