Money For Old Code – Why Can’t We Trade Digital Games?

"We can trade physical games. So if digital games are going to continue to cost the same price, we should expect the same rights of ownership."

Asa from Gameondaily discusses having the ability to trade digital games

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
rosscoffx1071d ago

I agree it should be something the companies look at BUT it would really harm retailers so I can also see why it's not favoured yet... it's a tough one but it will happen eventually.

Also, there should be a gift option too! If someone is my friend and I want to give them a game I have played I can do that with a physical copy but not digitally. Seems very unfair.

Dir_en_grey1071d ago

You absolutely can give and sell your used digital games. Just give them your account and password.

Volkama1071d ago

Using this method it is even possible to share digital games you don't own. Just leave your payment details attached to the account.

It's a flawless solution!

hay1071d ago

There's no money in maintaining the project for digital game exchange for parties that serve digital distribution and the idea that it can feed used games market scares the hell out of publishers.
Also there's no real point in doing all that when noDRM works well in civilised environment.

Dir_en_grey1071d ago

No you just sell your account.
I don't get why people are so dense in the head about this. Like they want to get money and keep the games or something.

Volkama1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )

@Hay gotta disagree with you there. There is plenty of money to be had in maintaining and controlling a digital exchange. In just the same way as Gamestop make plenty of money from the physical 2nd hand market.

I agree in so far as it is scary talk for publishers though. But even if trading, digital would still be more lucrative for them than physical. They get more money out of a digital sale than a physical one, and they could potentially get some money on a second hand sale. That's a pretty big step up from physical, but some way off their dream of all digital, no trading.

@Dir_en_grey you set up a new account for every game you buy? Or you're an "all-in or fold" kinda guy?

Dir_en_grey1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )

People are complaining not being able to sell digital games, which is not true, it was just people are too dumb to figure out not all media is delivered and transferred the same way.
How you want to market your goods is up to you just like anything else.
Sell your account with games in bulk or whatever.
If you are getting games w/ intention to sell them then create different accounts or however suits how you want to liquidate your property in the future. Don't make it like it's somebody else's fault just because you are a bad planner or too dumb to figure out how things work.

Of course everybody wants more then what we paid for and everything handed free to us, but seriously at least think about how the rest of the world needs to work to keep functioning instead thinking like a kid leaching off their parents in the first place.

darthv721071d ago

Wasn't MS working on something like this?

Clunkyd1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )


LOL thats no where close to a solution.

This is one of the reasons why physical copies are superior in every way.

Grown Folks Talk1070d ago

Yes darthv, they were. And had they not scrapped their original plans, would probably already have it implemented. Still plan on a digital exchange however.

rainslacker1070d ago


Yes. And if they hadn't tried to make retail purchases part of the same trade/sell deal, they probably would have been praised for the idea. A lot of the hate for their DRM restrictions was that they were applied to the retail market.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1070d ago
Eonjay1071d ago

I didn't even consider the retail effect but you are absolutely right about that.\

And another thing... if we could trade digital licenses, it better be free. Also, the fact that DLC exists makes everything much more complex.

And then of course there is teh issue like with The Elder Scrolls Online. Wouldn't you have to trade your digital game license and the online play licence?

Volkama1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )

Is protecting retailers a valid reason to rip off digital customers?

Gifting games should be free. Directly trading games could have a fee in much the same way as using Paypal has a fee. A proper second hand marketplace would definitely have a markup (just like a retail second hand marketplace), and ideally some of that would go to the publisher but that's a battle for them to fight lol.

DLC isn't that hard to address, as it's all controlled with the same DRM as a base game. Why not sell/trade that as well? Again, something you can't really achieve with physical trading.

For something like TESO or Final Fantasy you'd just sell the game. You aren't selling the account or subscription time.

Spotie1070d ago

It may sound anti consumer, but we can't really have the retailers suffering. That means job loss, and eventually prices will go up as availability goes down. If retailers can't make money on software or something outside of gaming (which is why GameStop needs used games and has gotten into a lot of other stuff besides), they'll stop carrying the hardware that they don't make enough on to justify stocking.

Not trying to side with corporations, really, but come on.

Crazay1070d ago

It woudl most certainly hurt retail sales in a big way if they were to undercut them with digital delivery, however, I can't see why they (MS/Sony/Nintendo) can't offer the ability to trade in your digital license for credit towards another digital title. If nothing else, allow people to make offers/bid and if the person who owns the license is ok with what person b offers them then let then do the trade that way.

Volkama1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )

Digital prices need to go down, or trading needs to be possible. I would probably prefer prices to come down as I don't really trade anyway, but either approach is fair.

Septic1071d ago

Well you can actually account share and essentially get a digital game for half price already. That's pretty good as it is no?

Volkama1071d ago

That is a grey area that helps take the sting a bit, but an officially supported change would beat a shady trick that an inner circle of hardcore gamers are aware of.

Besides, what about people that actually use the home console function as it is intended (ie so their family can use the console when the primary account isn't signed in)?

Septic1071d ago

Yeah fair enough, it is a bit of an unorthodox move. MS alluded to some sort of trading back when the digital vision was alive but then again, with Mattrick at the helm, this could have all been complete BS.

I don't think anyone is going to make this a priority until gamers really start demanding being able to trade their digital libraries to be honest.

Volkama1071d ago (Edited 1071d ago )

Yeah but I think a lot of people are very aware that digital downloads are too expensive though, and a lot of people are aware that you can sell and trade discs. So even if people aren't demanding digital trading as much as they could be, announcing a change would get a pretty big response.

It'd go a pretty long way toward getting people to shift to digital, which is still in the publishers' best interests. I think the biggest hold up is that shifting people to digital without making any concessions on pricing or ownership is even better, so if MS/Sony/whoever think that's still realistic then then will shoot for it. Which is why gamers probably should demand changes that work in our favour.

rainslacker1070d ago (Edited 1070d ago )

Publishers will never go for outright trading or individual selling on digital unless they get a cut. They don't even want retail trading as is. I'd imagine their cut would have to be about the same they'd make for a new purchase, or at least pretty close. There are just too many parties which have an interest in the whole idea to really be something that will happen without some sort of compromise or concession or one party being unhappy with it.

MS itself had a good idea in being able to trade/sell digital in some sort of marketplace, likely one they controlled. Unfortunately, it's hard to justify them having control over the retail trade/sell market, so people never gave them the chance to implement it, or at least MS decided to scrap the idea because they couldn't control the retail market as well.

There's actually nothing stopping MS from implementing it's original vision, whatever it was, with their digital market, but they wanted to take their toys and go home when they couldn't get their way.

They could still come out ahead should they decide to do something like this, and it would make digital much more appealing, and remove one more reason why many people do not go digital in the first place.

I haven't heard anything about it in a while, but in the EU, Steam is required to allow users to trade their digital copies. Anyone know how that's going?

hasamalaha1071d ago

Agreed, one of the two has to happen. I will never go digital otherwise (unless forced to). $60 for a game is ridiculous when you can generally get it for half price on PC. I always wait for a sale as I refuse to pay full price. Plus, I sell my games immediately when I'm done with them. After all is said and done I probably pay anywhere from $10 to $20 for the experience. You can't come anywhere close to that digital wise on consoles.

asad1971071d ago

If a digital and physical copy costs the same then I should be able to trade in a digital game just like physical disk.

StrayaKNT1071d ago

This is a good idea actually, these companies should let us do that but I doubt they're kind enough lol

1071d ago Replies(1)
Show all comments (43)
The story is too old to be commented.