Game Retailers Not Liking EA's Project $10 Tactics

[fishyfish]

I love all those arguing "that's a good excuse to pirate games".

Well, I can't afford 60inch plasma. They're too expensive and yet makers generate huge profits. Therefore it is a good excuse to steal one screen.

Not to mention Aston Martin I can't afford either. I should steal one then. Car makers are rich enough and owner is certainly insured, so we have a win-win situation here.


Get over it folks.

 

[tapnick]

Not sure that i agree with this, but i certainly dont agree with game stop selling used games for 5-10 bucks cheaper. Most of the time its worth the extra 5-10 bucks to just buy a new copy.

 

[swamprat]

[citation][nom]rantoc[/nom]Why not add additional benefits for that cash instead, you buy retail. Register it for additional content and if the person who purchases the title from you wants thoose additional item they have to pay that fee. Additional income from resales market done right IMO.[/citation]

I might be reading this wrongly but it could be what I was thinking - is the DLC (if for PCs rather than consoles) entirely non-transferable? If you can sell access to the DLC as well as the game then it won't make any difference - EA could still try and sell more DLC to the second buyer but they'd still get access to the things bought by the first owner.
I've no idea if it's blocked by EULAs or something else, an example would be setting up a new Steam account for each game and selling the account with the game, i.e. including any rights to the DLC - it'd work unless it's illegal...

 

[gorehound]

I would just stop buying any games from them.If I played that much I would and I would also pirate any game I wanted to play.
This is a perfect example of corporate greed.I hope the gasming community gets them back.

 

[Regulas]

I wonder if this is even legal?

 

[ltgrunt]

The primary problem with used-game sales isn't the fact that they occur, it's the fact that Gamestop and other companies like Gamestop have built a market position that relies almost completely on being a glorified pawn shop.

Think about how hard it is to just walk into a Gamestop and buy a brand new game, especially when it first comes out. Their corporate policy is to supply barely more the number of pre-orders (if they even fill all of those orders) and to hassle customers who don't pre-order, and then immediately thereafter offer used titles as the only alternative.

Their business model basically revolves around ordering only enough brand-new supply to satisfy a very small fraction of customers, then buying back those games for very low prices and selling them for practically brand-new prices. Most Gamestop stores don't even update used games' prices with any reasonable frequency, which leads to situations where two or three months after a game comes out most customers can walk into a Best Buy, Target, or Wal-Mart and buy a brand new copy of the game for less than Gamestop is selling a used copy.

Do I have a boatload of sympathy for publishers? No. But I have even less for Gamestop and similar companies whose existence is predicated on being leaches who screw over their customers and the publishers whose products they pay for once and then sell over and over.

This is actually a major part of why I buy PC games via Steam whenever possible.

 

[Guest]

I would much rather 3 people give 50 bucks a piece to EA for playing their game, instead of EA getting only 50, and GameStop getting the other 100.

 

[ArgleBargle]

If EA had their way, every one of their games would ding your bank account each time you played it.

 

[Guest]

When I buy a used car does the manufacture get a cut?

When I buy a used sofa does the manufacture get a cut?

When I buy a used house does the original construction company get a cut?

When I buy a used ANYTHING else, does the manufacture get a cut each time?

NO!
Of course not, so why the hell should EA?

 

[Guest]

Gamestop and the like don't buy back PC games. so this is a mute point. Who cares about console games? o-wait... everyone 🙁

Still, i'd rather give my money to EA then Gamestop. And buying used games for 5 bucks off is stupid. How about we support the game developers that make us wonderful games. not the pawn shop that rips us off.

 

[Rorick]

[citation][nom]tapnick[/nom]Not sure that i agree with this, but i certainly dont agree with game stop selling used games for 5-10 bucks cheaper. Most of the time its worth the extra 5-10 bucks to just buy a new copy.[/citation]

If I have a decent idea about corporate America, this is why EA games have decided to do this, not saying I agree with it, but that's the business model. This isn't to get into the used games market, it's to force game buyers to get a new copy. If it's only sold used $5 cheaper, then wouldn't it be cheaper to buy it new and get the DLC free?

As for those saying that the fact is DLC isn't required to play the main game, while true, isn't the reason behind the outrage, When bought new, from what I'm getting at, the DLC is free, but when bought used, it'll cost you $10. Why? Because there are those stupid enough or just don't give a care and will pay that extra money to get the DLC. The fact is, when bought new, the content is included free, why should you have to cash in more to get it?

They say the used game market is costing them money, and rightly so. Only, it's not truly costing them anything, why? Well the thing is, on those used games, they already have earned a profit on it; it was bought new at one point, and as such the developer was paid in full for the game.

To those saying they are going to pirate, first and foremost, I call you an idiot. You have clearly posted that you are intending to perform and illegal action. Most people want to keep something like that a secret.

Second off, do you know why developers put crap like DRM on? Because people pirate the games. If pirating didn't exist, they would have absolutely no reason in hell of putting things like that on the games. Why people think that if they pirate the game, they'll remove the thing used to try and stop it is a mystery to me. Here's a news flash: It'll just bring more anti-piracy features! In the end, pirates have no one to blame but themselves for all this crap put on the games.

What? You became a pirate because they put thing like DRM on the games? You're still to blame for that being on there, by supporting the pirate way of life. Again, if people stopped pirating, there would be no need to put anti-piracy features on the disk.

And to EA, going by this business model, should I have to pay to read the last three chapters of a used book? Should I have to pay to read the glossary in my math book if I went and bought it used? Should I have to pay to see the pictures in the encyclopedia if bought used? No, why? Because the money had already been made on it. Simple as that.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

They should just do like vivendi and offer all sorts of old games for next to nothing on steam - that way people can purchase a game as cheaply as from gamestop, but without risk of missing parts or scratched discs, and the publisher collects revenue from it. There'll still be a bunch of people who demand retail boxes for games and thus will buy used games from retail, but imo unless it's a collectors edition it isn't worth having a phyiscal box except for fear of the gaming service becomming extinct.

 

[drksilenc]

wait wait wait they want even more money for there games now even though there second hand? what about the billions they get for every game as it is? heck modern warfail 2 was in 350 million in one day... and only actually made a dx9 based game for the 360 then ported it to the pc... you cant tell me that the game cost more than the movie avatar. so in other words they recouped the cost of making the game advertising distro in one day. after that the company has pure profit. not to mention they arnt even really making a complete game most of the time because most companys just rent an engine from another developer... so there just sandboxing and making an outrageous ammount of money

 

[rantoc]

Well, I can't afford 60inch plasma. They're too expensive and yet makers generate huge profits. Therefore it is a good excuse to steal one screen.

Not to mention Aston Martin I can't afford either. I should steal one then. Car makers are rich enough and owner is certainly insured, so we have a win-win situation here.

I think its a huge difference between making a copy and a theft, both are crimes but the impact is wastly different. A carmaker can't sell a stolen car while a publisher can still publish their work even if its pirated.

Note that i in no way defend piracy but have some understanding why some people choose that path (like the above, insane drm schemes wich only legit customers have to bear the pain from ect)

When the publishers alienate their customers the sadly promote piracy in the end...

 

[ltgrunt]

Rorick, I think you're missing the fact that day-one DLC extras like "The Stone Prisoner" for Dragon Age: Origins that is given away free with brand-new purchases isn't part of the base game. It's extra content, given away as a bonus for buying the game brand-new.

Your used book comparison isn't quite accurate. What's more accurate is saying that it's like buying a used movie and not getting the free movie theater ticket/voucher that some DVDs come with for a new movie in theaters made by the same company as the movie on DVD you just bought.

If you look at the packaging for Dragon Age: Origins, the description on the back of the box doesn't claim the content in "The Stone Prisoner" as part of the base game. It's a freebie, given to customers who buy brand new, partially as a way of saying "thank you."

Of course, it's also a lure and a way for publishers to make money on people who buy used, who would otherwise be a completely lost opportunity for generating income.

Look at what happens when a game is sold, traded in and bought used. What ends up happening is that two or more people get to play this one single copy of a game, despite the fact that multiple transactions have occurred. EA is getting paid once and only once, despite the fact that two or more people are playing the game.

 

[Parsifal57]

Wow, as far as the Game Producers are concerned none of you are paying customers, they see NO revenue from the used game sales.

One could argue that you and the game stores are performing acts of piracy. If another person is buying a copy of a game to play (other than the original purchaser) why shouldn't they have a cut.

Perhaps your ire should be directed at the retailers, if they are in fact making so much money from used game sales, then perhaps they should take the hit and still charge the end user the same as they currently charge.

You can be sure that if the publishers continue to perceive lost revenue from the used game sales model there will be other more draconian methods of limiting resale.

The issue here is really about sales, if the number of legitimate sales that may be made of a game is damaged by the secondary market to the point that costs are barely being met, then why would the publishers even bother producing games.

And to everyone complaining about the high game costs thinking that the publisher gets every penny, perhaps you need to research the cuts everyone in the distribution chain get, from manufacture to retail.

 

[tommysch]

Its about time we bankrupt EA...

 

[Vampyrbyte]

To Everyone saying "Oh its just bonus extra content as an incentive to buy the game new!"
Well okay thats all fine and dandy, most of us probably wont really give a damn, its not nice, but im not fussed about 1 level, or a multiplayer skin or whatever.
But What about when you have to pay this extra $10 to access the game at all when you buy it used? How long before a used game is nothing short of a demo until you buy the "Unlock DLC"?

More shitting on the legit customers. Makes me sick.

 

[Guest]

G R E E D

causes NERD RAGE!

They might as well only distribute through Walmart. Screwing over Gamestop isn't a good idea imo.

 

[ltgrunt]

[citation][nom]VampyrByte[/nom]To Everyone saying "Oh its just bonus extra content as an incentive to buy the game new!"Well okay thats all fine and dandy, most of us probably wont really give a damn, its not nice, but im not fussed about 1 level, or a multiplayer skin or whatever.But What about when you have to pay this extra $10 to access the game at all when you buy it used? How long before a used game is nothing short of a demo until you buy the "Unlock DLC"?More shitting on the legit customers. Makes me sick.[/citation]

The reason that slippery slope arguments are considered argumentative fallacies is that the rely on generating outrage or other negative reaction based on something that hasn't happened, isn't happening, and typically isn't reasonably expected to happen.

Sure, you can talk about how bad that fictional, make-believe scenario might be, but that's not the situation we're actually looking at right now. Right now, what we have is publishers trying to make a buck by charging used-game buyers a small fee in exchange for the same content that they give away to new-game buyers as extra freebies.