Pachter: 'Industry not better off without used games'

GameZone's Matt Liebl writes, "Imagine a world in which you could not play any previously owned games on your console. Given the seemingly tightening restrictions placed upon the used game market through Xbox One, and possibly the PS4, it's not too hard to envision this. A scary thought, indeed. It's well-known and well-documented (thanks to a recent #PS4NoDRM campaign) that consumers oppose any sort of DRM on used games. Yet it seems console makers and publishers don't seem to care much about what the consumer thinks -- though they say they do."

[Nitrowolf2]

for once I agree with you

[-Mika-]

For me personally, it the opposite. If you can't afford to keep up with this hobby. Then get out. If you're going to be a cheap and selfish person that doesn't want to support the developers that keep your favorite hobby alive. Then just leave. Im seriously disgusted at the comments I read on here,neogaf and other gaming websites. It like the only thing gamers care about is themselves. They want everything to be free or cheap and with the cost of how much games cost to make. That just not a possibility and gamers needs to realize this. Its really disgusting seeing how selfish gamers are. If I was a videogame developer. I would honestly find a new career because the gaming community is just a big mess. Srry for the long post but I just had to get that off my chest.

[zeal0us]

When bills start paying for themselves college tuition is lower then I will jump on your side until then I'm with Patcher on this(for once).

Cost of living has steady increase of the past decade alone while the price of videogames still $60.

In 2011 in video game industry made 65billion according Reuters( http://uk.reuters.com/artic... So obviously used games isn't doing squat to the industry. The same can be said piracy but I don't condone piracy.

[Dno]

When we leave your "hobby" becomes "History"

[chrish1990]

What about all the people who buy used DVD's and Blu-Ray? What about all the people who buy used clothes? What about all the people who buy used books? What about all the people who buy used cars? What about all the people who buy reduced food?

Should they stop buying movies, clothers, cars, books and food?

Face it, those at the top of the gaming industry food chain are well off, those at the bottom - gamers - aren't. Why should we be paying £50/$60 for games that are mediocre, last 4 hours or are just re-hashes? I can go to the cinema and watch a film produced on a £200 million budget and it's only going to cost me £10.

Get your head out of your arse, step out side of your little bubble and see that not everybody is quite as amazing as you obviously think you are.

[BlackWolf]

"Srry for the long post but I just had to get that off my chest."

You should have kept it. So you think you have to buy every game new to prove... what? That you support the industry? That you have money to spare? That you love games? Grow up!! People love games, but there's other matters, big matters that also require money. Lots of money. And for that reason, we have to think in what we need to do, not what we want. So what if people want cheap things? You're going to turn away a chance to get a game because is used? Now, if you feel you have so much money to spare, why don't you buy consoles for everyone here at n4g?

Developers deserve a just payment for their hard work, I agree with you on that (I can't believe I just wrote that I agree with you at something), but not everybody is rich, so we are looking for accesible ways of keeping up to date with our hobby. In conclusion...

You should have kept it.

[Starbucks_Fan]

Why do you waste so much time trolling?

[Cam977]

That is absolutely stupid. Used game allow people to take risks with franchises due to the cheaper price which may lead on to te purchase of DLC or future titles from the developer; in the long term this is much more affective than your small-minded perspective upon the industry.

Not only is your comment offensive to some, but it is insanely childish and says everything about you. So money rules your life? GTFO the Internet, we don't want snobs such as yourself lurking among us. Gaming needs second hand games to keep it going. If there weren't any then people wouldn't have a collection as large as the one they currently have.

Without second hand games the industry would a hit. Gaming has been perfectly fine with it and doesn't need to see it go.

[Mikelarry]

I see your up to your old tricks Adam Orth.

not everyone can afford buying a game new, if you can fair enough to you. if developers want to fix this issue they and gamestop like business need to come to an agreement on spliting the profits made from used games but that will never happen.

and it will be thier undoing if developers somehow manage to get used games to die because you think gamers are cheap now, you see all those your new IPs you are looking forward to when the cheapskate gamers don't invest in them as they are unable to buy them new guess what smart ass..... yeah you guessed it they will fail, developers will stop trying to innovate and who wins ACTIVISON and COD 16

[I_LOVE_MYSELF]

Whilst I agree that a lot of gamers have a false sense of entitlement, I disagree with your stance on pre owned games. If people buy pre owned it is their choice. If developers hearts were truly in the games then they would be happy with the fact that the customer got to play the game, not disappointed that they didn't get a sale. As long as they make enough to keep going it isn't an issue. Pre owned opens people to new franchises, helps gaming stores that stock new titles and also allows late adopters a chance to play games that are no longer being distributed as new.

Quit with your narrow minded attitude.

[bangshi]

I'm surprised Pachter said this. Because he is wrong and you'd think it would be in his area of expertise.

Whilst it is true that some cannot afford new games and that someone can trade in their new game to get money to contribute to another game, if you completely block used games developers would earn more money.

Why? Because retailers make profit on used games.

If used games were blocked then people would be forced to buy new, and whilst people who buy new and trade-in will have less money to spend and ultimately buy fewer games, those who bought used games are now forced to buy new.

They also won't be able to buy as many games as before - but because the value they buy their game at is higher than the price that the retailer paid out to the person who traded it in, publishers will earn more money.

To make it really simple and easy to understand let's say that one gamer buys 10 new games for $600 and trades them all in for $300. They've spent $300 of their own money.

Another gamer buys those games that the other gamer traded in. But he doesn't buy them at $30 each because the retailer needs to make a profit. He buys them at $36 each.

Currently, in that scenario there were 10 new game sales for $600 total, so publishers would earn their % of that, let's say its just 10% to make it easy to calculate.

They make $60.

Now let's ban used games.

They both still spend the same amount of their own money on games.

Now the first buyer can only afford 5 new games as he only has $300 to spend, as he is missing the other $300 from trading in.

But the used game buyer now has to buy new not used. He used to get 10 games, but now his $360 can only buy him 6 games.

So his 6 games and the other buyer's 5 games gives you a total of 11 new game sales, and at 10% the publishers are now making $66.

More money to the publishers, even though the gamers are still spending the same amount of their own money as they currently do right now.

The only down side is that less games were sold, meaning you'd end up with a situation where some games will bomb hard because people will only buy the best of the best, as they're limited on what they can buy.

[mydyingparadiselost]

Mika=1%

[Heisenburger]

There are undoubtedly cheap people on this Earth.

You seen to not understand the difference between being middle-class or lower, and being cheap.

Though when you say "if you can't afford to keep up then get out" perhaps you DO understand the difference but look down your nose at them regardless.

You don't have the right to talk down to somebody. It is unnecessary, and it speaks volumes to your character.

I respect your right to speak your mind, I just don't respect your type of mind. And I don't mean that cruelly.

I just had to get that off my chest.

[Groo]

@ -Mika- your comment sounds selfish to me.. I take it there is no one in your life relative/friend that you would let borrow any of you games when you are done playing them? you just put them in a box somewhere or throw them away? If you are ok with this with games then imagine if this money grubbing tactic applied to other things? would you want to pay full purchase price to rent a movie every time you wanted to watch a movie? or how about pay full price on a used car? didn't think so..

[THamm]

Similarly, the used market provides currency for people who want to buy new games at full price

Guys USED games actually sell NEW games. Many gamers trade in their used games to bring down the price of the new games. Now if you wipe out used = less new game sales period. Especially at 59.99, now at 19.99 may be a different story

[grassyknoll]

You're lucky your hobby is cheap: Trolling.

[travelguy2k]

If Sony says there will not be any cost involved to play used games, i will be worried about them simply charging a higher up front cost for the game.

If they charge 10 bucks more per game i think this will more than compensate for the loss associated with used game sales.

I hope this is not the route they go, i don't buy many used games, and i live in mexico where the average game is already 900 - 1000 pesos (74 - 85 USD)

[Sephiroushin]

If companies think only about themselves why would consumer think about them, don't get me wrong I don't buy used games but when companies get so greedy that made a game and cut 30% of it to sell it as downloadable content, or when they make a new stand alone game w/ something new that could have been a truly DLC and not the common "DLC" (disc locked content); why would consumer care ( I don't buy used games as stated, but I won't support games likes Dragons Dogma Dark Arisen, even when the original DD was awesome and I have the money to spend, no matter how much money I have, even if I have enough money to buy whole Capcom I won't pay publisher that just treat their fanbase as beta tester, so it's not just about affording ) ... publishers don't care about you, just your money ...

It's a billionary industry so It won't die even if some people buy used games, In fact blocking used games could hurt it, it get's harder on some people to decide whether they should get a game or not, and the publisher might not lose just a sold unit but also potential sales on DLC ...

And If you're so disgusted w/ people on here and there, then let me tell you there's an easy way to fix it!
- Get out, find another forum or something ( your same suggestion for developers to change from career )!

[DevilishSix]

Mika putting in DRM is only beneficial to developers that self-publish, which are few and far between. This is more for publishers to line their pockets with more money. Developers will still close up shop as publisher executives and stock holders buy bigger yachts.

[DangerousDAN]

Someone's rich, I see.

[Testfire]

Mika, you got one thing right...it's a hobby, not a lifestyle. Gaming, like all hobbies I have is something I do in my spare time (with my spare cash). There are some games I do buy new, but the majority are rentals or used. If gaming is your life that's cool for you, I understand and dont knock you for it. But gaming IS NOT my life, just a side hobby, and throwing down $60 for every game I want to play would be irresponsible of me as a consumer and more importantly as a parent. I would hope you can understand that.

[Darrius Cole]

@banshi - post# 1.1.9

Your example is wrong because you didn't consider entry price and competition, and you left didn't count some of the money in the first scenario.

In your example, before used games were banned, the first person would get back $300 and immediately spend it on brand new games. Gamestop give back store credit, almost never cash. That means there would be 15 new games sold in the scenario with used games, not 10, and the publisher would make $90 not $60.

But looking at a case of 2 large buyers still misses an important concept. I'll look at it my way.

First of all, it's rarely a case of one person buying 10 games at a once. It's 10 different people buying 1 game at a time. Each person has a choice of spending his money on games or on something else.

Let stipulate that the first set of 10 people each buy one game at $60 and then sells it back to Gamestop for $30 credit toward another new game, who in turn sell them to a second set of 10 ten people for $36 a piece. In this scenario, given 10% profit for the publishers then the publisher made $60; Gamestop made $60 on used games; The second set of gamers spent $36 each on games; the first set of gamers spent $30 each on games AND they each have $30 in store credit that will get spent on games.

Total Revenue $900
Total Games Sold - 15
Gamestop profit - $60
Publisher Profit - $90

Now we ban used games

The first set of 10 gamers buys 1 game a piece for 10 games total. But they can not sell them back as they are worthless, so they will do no further transactions.

The second set of gamers won't buy any games. They won't buy any because they need $60 to buy a game and they only have $36 each. No two of them will combine their funds and buy one game because only one of them could use it after they have combined their money to buy it. Each of those people will spend their $36 on something that they can afford individually, something other than video games.

Total Revenue - $600
Total Games sold - 10
Publisher Profit - $60
Gamestop Profit - $0

[quenomamen]

Yea we the consumers are at fault here, ahhhh poor companies like Activision i mean they only make 300+ mill every Nov off turd games like COD and now they getting ready to do it all again next gen off the same godamn game as last gen ?

I got an awesome idea ! Why dont we all pitch in and send poor activision another 300 mill this June ! I mean they just invested all of what ? $60 on that " Brand New Engine " we been hearing do much about for their next Gen COD. Tell you what, why dont you write them a big check for all their hard work.

[sunnygrg]

Even Pachter is joining in lolwtf.

[Kaizin514]

While I am not one to typically buy a used game (out of let's say 12 games purchased per year, maybe 2 of those will be used for me), I still have to say that used game support is a very important thing. I feel that everyone deserves a chance to play games and have that freedom of choice, so when someone buys a used game, then good for them, they can finally enjoy that game, even if it means that they got it for 50% off the MSRP. Yea, it hurts the publisher, but at least the publisher has another fan. If that means sacrificing $20 for one game only to have the gamer buy the sequel at full price, is that worth it?

In either case, if you buy your console, you should have the option just like clothes, dvds, whatever. When a company takes away that choice, then many gamers (including myself in some cases) take their money elsewhere. So when Microsoft said they were slapping on extra pricing for used games, it defeats the point of the used game and that freedom of choice (same with online codes). I know someone could say "then don't buy used, buy new and you won't have that issue" but that is not the point, and anyone who continuously says that obviously doesn't understand the perspective of the many gamers that do buy used.

[MikeyDucati1]

Nobody wants it free. But you have to consider people within different economic classes. Because you can afford such things and another does not, doesn't mean something is wrong with the person. Eventually gaming will be a part of the elite. Yes I do agree gamers are selfish but your argument is misguided.

[ajax17]

You don't belong on this site.

[rainslacker]

Elitist attitude is elitist.

Here ya go...according to this study, the number one buyer of used games, is also the number one buyer of NEW games. Should those people get out too?

http://interpretllc.com/_do...

[theaceh]

I bought God of War 1 used, since then I have purchased every other GOW title new, on day 1, even the psp ones. See how it works!

[kupomogli]

@Mika

No wonder you've got one bubble and people bash you.

I personally have more than enough to pay for gaming as a hobby, but like most people, I pay for games I'm interested in.

The generation may pass and there are some games I may have assumed I wouldn't like or might not have ever heard of the game. With as many games that come out, there are going to be some that slip past. I'm sure I'm not the only one who passed on Dokapon Kingdom only to find out how fun it is when playing it at a friends house later. Let's say that XBL and PSN are no longer available when we do come across these games. We're screwed out of playing them because there would be no way to transfer the license over to our system.

[Aceman18]

hey Mika since you're such a huge supporter of the hobby i love, and seem to have crazy amounts of money on you how bout you pay my

mortgage
credit cards
cable
cell phone
buy groceries
and any other little things that's needed in ones general life

when you can do all these things for me i'll start buying every game from here on out new. if not shut the hell up, you are one of the worst people on this site spouting nothing but garbage everytime you speak on a topic here.

if the industry wants people to buy every game brand spanking new well they better lower the price of these games to about $30; if they can't well not every game i want can be bought new as i have other responsibilities in my life.

talk about selfish i can't believe 13 people actually agreed with your crazy a$$ post.

[jlemdon]

@Mika, you pissed a few people off...smh I agree with the people that are in college and have bigger things to spend their money on, you can't be serious with the way the economy is still going.

IMO, launch titles should only be $60 and the next wave should be back to 50 bucks again.

[bangshi]

@Darrius Cole no you are wrong.

Sliding scale. He buys one, trades it in.

I didn't say he bought ten, traded them in then used total sum of money to buy new.

You don't buy 10 games at a go, you buy them on release.

Because in your scenario his own money spend is actually $600.

You have misunderstood what I have laid out, and it can be confusing so I don't blame you, but trust me. I have it correct.

[MuhammadJA]

I agree with you. People will do anything just to save a few bucks buying used.

[nypifisel]

@Mika. Well you're wrong. There's actually been studies of this.. Yes so we got FACTS.

Blocking used games sales would cut profits by 10% unless there's an incentive to lower the cost of the games by 30% which would actually increase income by 19%.. So yeah. Also it's not about being selfish. It's about the fact that in no other business does a manufacturer demand that resale of their goods would gain them profits. If I buy a used Ford car Ford won't get a dime, they do not own that product any more.It would be ludicrous for them to forbid people from reselling their cars without them getting some of the profit. ITS NOT YOURS TO HAVE!

[travelguy2k]

I believe most consumers keep their new vehicle longer than a few months... If developers gave incentive to the original buyer of the games, such as free DLC for first time buyer, then we may see people holding on to their games longer and not getting rid of them so fast.

If they can give a good enough reason for people to not want to sell then their will be no issue.

[nypifisel]

@travelguy2k

That's a much better solution, they should come up with better business ideas if they want to make more money, don't restrict consumers! I'm all up for that!

[ijust2good]

PS4 will dominate, possibly

[nukeitall]

I'm off the opinion that if you talk strictly about this being good for the industry, I believe it is. Of course this is under the assumption that used games still exist, but each used game sales is a profit for the publisher/console manufacturer.

That said it would be pretty detrimental to GameStop and similar business it. Well not completely, but they will have meager existence.

For consumers, the questions remains what benefits will this bring to offset the loss in freedom?

That is the real question.

[Blank]

Lol same here I agree with him for once also I think he trying to get brownie points with us lol

[rainslacker]

I agree with him...kind of surprised at that.

Gonna hijack your post to post this link which has a study on the effects of used games on the market.

http://interpretllc.com/_do...

[Gamer Muzz]

Normally, I don't agree with the man. but he's spot on in this case.

[Majin-vegeta]

Thank you captain obvious.I'll use an example i used yesterday.

I bought Red Dead used since no game stores in my area had new copies.I loved the game.I ended up buying all the DLC Bam R* just made extra money back from all their DLC i bought.

[hazelamy]

same here, except i just didn't have the money to buy new at the time.

when i did buy it preowned it was a fiver from a private seller, some guy at a car boot, so no greedy store.
and i ended up buying a full set of dlc for it.

[cyguration]

WTF kind of moron disagreed with you?

So in the mind of the disagreers it would have been better if Majin-vegeta didn't buy Red Dead or the DLC at all? It would be better had he not contributed some sort of revenue to Rockstar or his local retailer since they didn't have new copies of the game?

Are you people freaking serious?

Man...the logic deficiency in here is deafening.

[arronax-1]

Hell no. I want to keep my used games. They do have a right to exist.

[brbobcat]

Wow, is the world ending? Am I actually agreeing with Pacther? Then again, you'd have to be real dumb to think otherwise.

[Roper316]

Gamestop & other retailers are not better off without used games.

There I fixed it, used games takes money out of the developers/publishers pockets which to me is bad for the industry. Or did GS start developing games that I don't know about.

How is taking money away from the people who make & create the games we enjoy not bad for the industry?

[kma2k]

gamestop also give over 1 billion per year in used game credits with 70% going towards new games. Taking away used games automatically takes away over $700,000,000.00 out of the market!

[Roper316]

proof please

[rainslacker]

Here ya go Roper

http://kotaku.com/5932099/g...

This was backed up in their annual report to investors. You can dismiss the actual quote, but not the report to investors. You can't really lie to them about this stuff.

Took me less than 30 seconds of googling, and going through the 70% of people hate gamestop reports.

Also in response to your OP. You think the industry would be better off without gamestop or the other game stores all over the world. GameStop is the number one seller of NEW games in the world, even surpassing Amazon. You take away the areas where they actually make profit, and all they're going to focus on is smart device trade ins. That sounds like a great future for all of us.

[crazysammy]

Your argument is the one that I think we see most anti used gamers use. Here are a few things to consider.

What kma2k is referring to is that GameStop reports how much trade in credit is applied to new game sales. See this link:

http://www.joystiq.com/2013...

Secondly getting your product into the hands of the consumer is the biggest challenge any company has. Used games are a form of advertisement for that company and its products. I have seen many times that someone will borrow or buy used, and then buy the game or its sequels new after knowing they enjoyed the product.

Thirdly, the secret to keeping your game from being sold and resold used is to make a quality product that people want to keep playing. The first month Skyrim was out there were hardly any used copies in my area as everyone who bought it felt it was worth keeping (and eventually buying the DLC for) thus forcing everyone who wanted it to buy it new.

Lastly, (and I want to stress this point the most) is that don't just focus on the money, and think that the only reason people buy used is because they are cheap or want to save money. Have you been to a GS recently? The used sections are about 3-4 times larger then the new sections. Note this is not because they are focusing on used, but because they lack the titles to have that large of a new section.

New games are often discontinued 3-6 months after production. (Unless you are a huge title like COD or Skyrim etc) So say I want to buy a game that came out last year because I just now heard it was great. I cannot buy that game new anymore because it is not physically available. If there are no used games then these games do not get played.

Many games find a second wind because after the initial small print that stops early (due to many reasons such as bad marketing and low budgets) many gamers found the game used or cheap and decided to give it a chance.

I respect if you do not buy used, and I applaud you trying to support Devs and Pubs. Used games are part of the equation and a healthy market of new and used helps the industry more than anything.

[Unicron]

It's all one big gray area. Used games are good for gamers, but bad for developers. Other industries allow used stuff, but gaming is slightly different.

Developers need to change their production model, publishers need to check their wild expectations, and gamers need to actually, you know, support the titles they love talking about.

[Swiftfox]

When you look at it, the situation with used games isn't gray at all—it's a very natural part of a consumer market. Developers are more upset at people enjoying their work without compensation. When people simply play with no intention of reimbursing anyone or showing any further support, then it's bad for developers and publishers alike.

In the event of making a game, I would be perfectly fine with people taking the game and reselling—it's their right as a powered consumer. If someone didn't like what I made, they shouldn't be forced to keep it. They could sell it back to a place and the game can be exposed to someone else—someone who may enjoy it more. They may even buy some DLC for the game or even become a fan and buy my next game new. All of this because they could actually afford the game used.

I agree, developers need to change their production, but the reasoning is more directly linked with quality of product by planning and proper spending. I agree with publishers needing to drop expectations of performance and allotting money only to games they think will sell the most. I do disagree with your final statement, however. Gamers can show support apart from spending $60 on a new game—only $15 of which the developer will see. Gamers give feedback, buy DLC, spread the name of the game through recommendations, and help convince publishers to invest in the developer's games.

Used games are a healthy and important part of the entire system.

[Hicken]

They're not bad for developers. They're actually good for them. I can't tell you how many follow-ups I bought new because I bought the first one used and loved it.

Hell, my whole love of ATLUS is because I picked up Persona 3: FES used one day. Since then, the only used ATLUS game I've bought was Nocturne; on the other hand, I've gotten six games new. Bought the first .hack used, got the next six day 1.

Just on those two alone, that's about $500 bucks from about $50. And I know that's not all the series I've done like that, nor am I remotely close to being in a minority.

And then there are situations where someone buys the game used and winds up getting the DLC.

No, there's the IDEA that it's bad for devs, but that's all it is.

If it's bad for anybody, it's publishers, who make the most money anyway. But since they're pulling in so much cash, it's not like it hurts them, regardless.

[Unicron]

Great point Hicken. I'd really love to see some kind of study done to see if your buying style is the majority, not knowing actual trends is what I meant by gray area. A used copy isn't necessarily a guarantee of a sequel buy, then again it isn't necessarily a guarantee of a lost sale either.

I guess I just miss $50 games!

[rainslacker]

You make a valid point.

I would also like to add, publishers aren't about trying to eradicate the used game market, they are trying to control it, and profit from it. The publishers know the value of used games, they just want a piece of the pie. It's monopolistic in nature, and all this stuff right now is just trying to skirt around those anti-trust laws.

If all this comes to pass, I have no doubt it'll eventually go to a court somewhere. It'll probably start in the EU, as this whole idea of controlling the market is against the spirit of the laws they already have about this stuff.

[tiffac008]

This is the point a lot of us are trying to make. In my case I would never have been a fan of Uncharted and InFamous if my friend never lend those games to me, now I have all the parts of the series in my collection, purchased brand new.

Sure they want a piece of the pie but if less gamers are able to experience what they offer, then how can that be a positive in the long run. If they only look at this in a regional point of view and not internationally then there will be a lot gamers that will be alienated with their moves.

[iceman06]

I'd also add that the publishers are the ones to blame, if anyone, for the devs success or lack thereof. They control the marketing, price point, when the game releases, and the accessibility of any game that releases. In fact, they control (in a manner of speaking) how much the dev will make. Most devs make a deal with the publisher for a set percentage of total profits BEFORE the game releases. It's based on number of units sold and whether or not that point is reached by the dev. Now, if the game doesn't reach that unit number it's blamed on the devs. Sure, there are some crappy games released. However, there are some good/great games that release at the wrong time, are limited in scope of release, or just go without the marketing needed to succeed.

[Errefus]

Ya I agree with patcher on this one as well, I hope used games stick around.

[HyperBear]

I think everyone can agree that the gaming industry is better off without Pachter...Am I Right?

OT: And I agree, You take away used games, you take away console sales and business. Game shops like GameStop/GAME, etc will have to close stores down and lay off numerous employees. It's just a bad investment to stop dealing with used games/second-hand market and going completely digital.

[GusBricker]

I would be more in favor of used games if gamestop, etc. actually paid more for them.

As of right now, it's a massive ripoff.

[HarryMasonHerpderp]

"Used games have nothing to do with studio layoffs; rather, poor decision-making is the reason."

Exactly, Patcher is actually talking sense for a change.
The used game market is just a scapegoat because the publishers want more money money money.

[cleft5]

Think about it, Gamefly must buy at least 10k games for one or two of the more popular games that come out for the consoles. At $60 that is $600k before taxes. No used games means that developers and publishers just lost out on $600k. There are some games that I would never buy, but Gamefly has to buy them because there consumers want to play those games. So that a lone is thousands of copies of games that normally would never sell, selling to Gamefly.

They cut out the used games and then they cut out all of the money that they make off of places like Gamefly. On top of that I think places like Gamefly pay publishers a percentage of the money they make off of used game rentals. Having no used games will kill a lot of money for publishers.

As for gamers, well this just means we buy a lot less games and when the average gamer does buy games it will not be for that $60 price tag. If used games actually hurt the industry, you would think that Activision wouldn't make so much money off of CoD, especially considering it has no online pass.

[kma2k]

i am a gamefly member & have been for about 3 years. I remember reading some article a few years ago that didnt give the exact number but stated gamefly has to buy games at much more than retail as well as pay a royalty type system to be able to dispense there games. It stands to reason that xbox/playstation might work out some type of deal for rentals.

At least that is what im hoping, i have played every new game that has come out for the last 3 years & dont want to go back to playing a new game every couple months.

[cleft5]

I have been with Gamefly for over a year and half now and I love the service. So I hope they work something out as well.

[PigPen]

Don't tell us Patcher, tell Microsoft.

[goldwyncq]

Sheesh, does this guy states the obvious for a living? I agree with him completely though.

[SOULJER]

He talking for everyone to hear. Mostly to those X-anything drones that go with everything Microsoft does. Even you sony think your superior to everybody goofs.

[GusBricker]

Doesn't Gamestop only mark down used games 5(ish) bucks or so for newly released titles?

I think the bigger problem is renting games, not used games. How and CAN you rent games on the new systems?

[rainslacker]

GameStop's trade-in policies aren't really the issue here. They're just a scapegoat to get these kinds of things onto the consumer. GameStop doesn't restrict your choice in what you can do with your property. It's a deflection to try to prove what isn't true. There are many outlets to sell or trade your games, GameStop just happens to be the biggest purveyor of it.

@Divine below

Not true. If people stand up for their principals then it could have an effect. Long term effects could have the complete opposite effect than what was wanted. The masses don't tend to do things that are complicated for them. Nor will most of them "Deal with it" for the long term, particularly over something seen as unnecessary and a luxury.

[DivineAssault]

Theres really nothing that can be done about which direction this all goes.. If the industry does this, no petitions or anything will change it.. Lets jus wait til E3 & see what happens on sonys end..

[rowdyBOY]

These greedy multi billion dollar companies are deluded if they are thinking it will save developers going bankrupt .
If people dont want to buy a game , then they almost never will .
If they can't afford or don't think it's worth more than $20 off eBay , then what makes you think they will ever buy it for $60 .
These draconian laws will not stop at used games . It will continue until the industry crashes and resets again .
Next thing to phase out will probably be YouTube walk through . Because developers want some money for that too .
I'm gonna laugh so hard when the gaming industry gets worse and the bIg companies have ?????????? On their heads in amazement and why these new laws aren't helping . You simply cutting one of the avenues of gaming .

[Terror2k9]

No matter how this is sliced for someone to tell you how much you sell your product that you paid 65 dollars for,is not a good thing some games are beat in 1 day. You mean it is cool for you to beat a game in one day then realize it has no replay value. So you you want to sell it in this draconian system even though gamestop is no better,lets say they give you 25-30 bucks for the said title.It is already a loss for us then if you want to use this for another new title you need to shell out another 35 bucks for the new game you want.Did the developer care that the game was to easy? Hellz to the no,they will not price the game any less than the full retail price.The only way you see these games go down to the bargain bin is if and only if the title does not sell as expected. To worry about these developers is stupid if you think about it super nintendo made a killing on cartridges and never made a cent on used games and every other console after that when we sold the games to video game stores sure they made a killing selling them back to other kids who never played them,but you did not see them crying like they do now because they made their money off the sold copys. How can you worry about people who are already rich crying that they don't make enough money please,I have seen 5 million copys of a game sold in 1 week of some games. That is something like 325 million dollars right of the bat. Some games have sold over 15 million in the full life of a system.Seems like all we hear is excuses why they have to do this but in reality it seems like total bull.

[Kietz]

So, firstly, you feel entitled to something extremely close to retail price for a game, once sold back, even though you have already played it?
No. That is now a used product and the store you are selling it to is also looking to make a profit from the transaction. The first part of your whining can be beaten by simply selling it yourself online.
Secondly, you make an argument stating that publishers and developers are pretty much all rich. Far from true, especially for developers. Truth is, most developers live paycheck to paycheck, game to game. You can have a large history of great releases, and even one failed title can put you out of business.
Another point to that is you defending a case where pretty much every person involved in the development of games is well off by stating that you have seen games sell millions upon millions in their first week and fifteen or more in their entire lifetime - a best case scenario that isn't true for probably 95% of games released.
Just wanted to put that out there.

[mochachino]

I never buy used games but I frequently trade in games to get new ones. Without that ability ill end up buying 4-5 less new games a year.

[kma2k]

Take the way you do that & multiply it by about a 100,000,000 others that do the same thing & there goes $250,000,000 to $300,000,000 per year in game sales!

IMO what this is going to lead to is AAA only games meaning we will only get 7 to 8 games released per year, i dont mean quality games & there will be other i mean total!

[DJMarty]

Sony & MS not after stopping used games, they after stopping other companies making cash from them at ther expense. Any monies made should go back to the industry, like publishers/developers.

Don't get why gamers don't get it.

[MadLad]

This doesn't bother me. I feel that the developers/publishers should be entitled to something for their work. This is the reason I was never really against the idea of online passes. Allows people to still enjoy most aspects of the game but, if you wanted the entire thing, you had to throw a bit of cash towards the people who created it.
Hell, even when I was on console, I made a point to never buy used.
I did however sell the games that I finished with and had no interest in playing again. That is the sticky part of the issue. Spending $60 on games that you might only want to play once. Especially when many games nowadays go for the six hour thrill ride, offering almost nothing in terms of replay value.
If consoles can actually take on fair pricing like it does on PC, where the lack of used games factor into deep sales on the games themselves, then that is the only way I see things benefiting both sides. More gamers have access to the amount of games they may otherwise have not, and the creators are still getting paid something for their work. That, however sad it may be, probably won't be the case anytime soon.

[SpinalRemains]

This is my impression of Mika

"I got mine so screw you guys."

That attitude is what is ruining the US economy. How much did Microsoft put back into the system in taxes? I pay 30%! When I call them a Indian dude picks up. SMH

I wouldn't be surprised if he supports supply side economics.

Had to get that off my chest.

[metalgod88]

I enjoy supporting the developers and publishers that make playing a game I like possible. So buying the game new is absolutely no issue for myself. I understand a lot of people are angry about this, but I think people have to realize that game companies are closing down because they aren't making enough money.

Granted some of the companies made poor decisions, but most were working hard to make the best game they possible could but still couldn't cut it. I think the whole used games market has something to do with that and it's really unfortunate.

[Gamer-Z]

Even Patcher agrees that it would be a mistake to block used games and he usually sides with the industry. Microsoft is clearly in the wrong with this One.

@metalgod88

The used game market contributes only a fraction to why Studios are being shut, publishers tend to ruin successful franchises on their own by simply being too greedy and catering to the casual cell phone app playing market.

#PS4NoDRM

[dmonee]

I agree and have faith, that this will get figured out. There Are so many ideas floating around on how to fix this problem without restricting pre owned games. I like the idea of downloadable exclusivity. Let DLer's have the game a week or two before anyone else. If the game is great, people will break and buy it. I know I will!

[Theangrybogan]

I collect games, I buy the vast majority of my games new and on pre-order (collectors eds) but I also enjoy hunting retro games and rolling the dice on used games I didn't really think looked interesting at the time they came out. I wouldn't have bought them at full price anyway and they're so old I can't find em new. I've bought so many sequels new on release after playing the used game original. I've bought many games by different developers based on games they made and I bought used previously.

What worries me is the impact these used game restrictions will have on a large aspect of my hobbie, collecting. What's the point of building a collection of Xbox one and ps4 games if they're all just fancy coasters as soon as they decide to turn their servers off? Not even the "just keep your old console" anti-BC arguement (which is BS BTW) can apply then.

I spend a lot of money on games, too much for me to want to think about and I know people like me are a small portion of the market, but I'm the high end of the market and I won't buy any console with used restrictions I won't buy any console with mandatory online (even if only once every 24 hours) if I want to put up with sh!ty drm I'll by games on PC off steam, for a hell of a lot less, with better graphics and mods-a-plenty.

I've got a feeling I'm going to save so much money next gen..... and I'm really pissed about it.

[mochachino]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I have to agree with Patcher, I only buy new games but often trade in games to partially fund new purchases. Without that option, I will buy about 4-5 less games a year or wait for even greater price drops before buying to create a back log of cheap games instead of being an earlier adopter like I have been this gen.

Although now, most games already feel last gen and I feel don't warrant $60.

[fsfsxii]

Thanks for stating the obvious Mr. Patcher
I can afford a 60$ game once a month, and just hope its long enough, i started buying used games in 2011, well, because most of games nowadays are 4-6 hours long or a re-hash with nothing new, also, my financials aren't that good for a school student.
Now i only pay 60$ for a fighting game, because i know it would last for years with me

[Kidmyst]

I buy most games new because I want them day one or wait till the price drops if I don't feel the game is worth $60.00 I bought maybe 2-3 used games last year and that was because I was waiting for my wife in the mall browsing a Game store and saw games I never heard of and wanted to give them a try. I never bought a newer title used, for 5 bucks more I could get it new and rather spend the extra 5 bucks.

[SonyPS4]

Finally, something sensible from Patcher!

[Tong]

Thats why developers should stop wasting money focusing on graphics and do focus more on gameplay. Thats how nintendo keeps its company strong.

[liquidhalos]

If it wasnt for second hand games i would never have bought COD4 MW and Assassins creed 1, luckily i did and as a result all subsequent games were bought new on release. (all apart from ass creed 3 and blops2) Greed is a nasty thing and those responsible should feel ashamed.

[Thomaticus]

If Pachter says it, then it shall be regarded as LAW!

[Sh0ckWav3]

@ mika

this is the real reason...the ceo are over paid and the actuall programers are under paid!
and they have to nervers to blame the use market

http://www.ign.com/articles...