Used Game Sales "Killing" Single Player Titles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Kwil:
Prices of Video games for the NES in 1989 ranged between $30 and $70, with most sitting around the $50 mark. See here: http://www.salzmafia.com/uploaded_images/GamePro_Issue006_February_1990-092-791162.jpg. In today's dollars, those prices would be $55 to $128

Yet today, most xBox360 games cost between $20 and $60 if you exclude special editions and the like. That means the most common price today is only a few bucks more than the lowest prices in 1989.

Here's your swords and sorcery game from 1989: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Ironsword.png

Here's your swords and sorcery game from 2012
http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/121/1217313/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings-20120126092508666.jpg

Yeah, game companies are *so* ripping us off when they continue to charge us about the same amount as they were charging for the bargain titles some 20 years ago.

Shush, you're talking sense and presenting facts.

That is like to upset a lot of people who make it their hobby to complain and wave around their self-entitlement.

"DURRRRR WE MAKE 6 HOUR SHALLOW SHOOTERS WITH POORLY MAINTAINED MULTIPLAYER AND NO ONE BUYS IT USED IS KILLING OUR SALES HURRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!1111"

As others have said: Stop making terrible games that a veteran gamer can polish off in less time than it would take to have a night out with friends.

Ralen-Sharr:
or they could just develop for PC, and put it on Steam, have a huge customer base and sell their game for years down the line, not having to worry about used sales

fix for consoles - put Steam (or something like it) with a full library on consoles with good games that work for a reasonable price

not sure if the current online distribution platforms for consoles carry enough games, perhaps offering an alternative to retail purchase is the answer - buy physical copy for 60 bucks, digital for 50, or 45.

As much as I'd love the idea of 100% digital distribution for consoles (I fully embraced it on PC long ago, without ever looking back), the problem with consoles and their market is that many people still prefer their physical copies of their games, heck, even some PC gamers (a minority mind you) still prefer to hold their filthy mitts on some physical copy of the game.

Also, many console gamers don't have their consoles connected to the internet 24/7 like a normal PC user, also, they'd need a bigger harddrive standard to hold as many of their beloved games as they can.

As much as I'd love to embrace the idea of digital distribution on consoles, there's still a long way to see that happen sometime.

Ignorant perspective that does not respect economics is ignorant. The ability to resell a game ADDS VALUE to it, thus increasing the likelihood of an initial purchase in the first place. Not having the ability to resell the game means less value, which in turn makes the consumer less likely to purchase the game in the first place. Perhaps these industry types are frustrated by the difficulty of making a hit game, but then, one can always blame their customers. That worked for the music industry, right? Oh wait, it didn't. As much as gamers have a sense of entitlement, so too do developers it seems.

I see a good load of side-taking on this one for sure. On the one hand we have an industry that feels hamstrung by gaining zero resale revenue, on the other we have people who simply do not have the money to buy new and have to wait months for the used price to drop more than 10 dollars.

I would like to add another side to this discussion, it is sort of my side. I buy games, new or used for my own personal enjoyment (like we all do), however, I almost never sell off my older games. I am an old bastard in the gamerworld and I like to keep shelfs of my conquests, from NES to current.

What I am asking here is, where do I fit in this economical discussion, I don't sell off my games thereby giving no chance for resale, but at the very same time I feel I have to save and scrimp here and there just to afford a DS game (usually 20-30 dollars) let alone a console game almost double the cost.

I also have to point out that because Gamestop and other places track which games get good reception and which games are dead in the water and price the used games as such. Fatal Frame (PS2) and its sequals are STILL $30 at Gamestop, because they are pretty good games. So what disturbs me is sometimes the difference between new and used after months of waiting can still be only $10, which I admit, makes buying a new game enticing because I know for sure it hasn't been handled violently.

RoseArch:
Protip: Don't sell games at sixty bucks, then.

Simple advice. It's just too bad that wouldn't do anything to solve the problem.

Right now the big issue is that a game retails for $60ish and then GameStop sells the used copy for $55 ish. Let's just say that games start retailing for $40. Awesome, right? Except now GameStop, and those using their pricing model (which is pretty much everyone that sells used games), will just sell their used copies for $35. More new copies might be sold overall, sure, but the core problem remains the same. Far too many people choose to pay the barely lower price instead of the full price they could easily afford and GameStop makes the lions share of the money over repeat transactions.

I don't know that I agree at all with what the article says. Games have an established market value that has already largely gone down in price over the years as a whole. The game companies making more money, rightfully or not, isn't going to mean that any prices will be lowered because $60 will still be the market value of a game.

I do, however, see where their math is coming from. Sell 5 copies of a game at $60 and get full profit on each copy, or sell 1 copy and have GameStop sell the other 4 for barely less than retail price and have them pocket the revenue. Not counting the actual behind the scenes numbers and just looking at the totals it's blatantly obvious. Game company makes $3oo or Game company makes $60 and GameStop makes $220 (4 x $55).

Anywho, as for those claiming digital distribution will solve everything, I'm afraid that's not really the case. It would kill the used game market, but selling something online doesn't guarantee any prices will drop at all. Once again, market value is market value. Also, for those who live in places like Canada, where internet usage is soft capped with harsh penalties for going over your monthly alotment, I would imagine forced DD would actually mean less games get purchased as opposed to more.

rolfwesselius:

GonzoGamer:

DonTsetsi:
And why do PC games cost 60 Euros now? There is no resale market on them.

That's an example of why this is such bullshit.
They would never lower prices if there all of a sudden were no used sales. They would still have the same prices and online pass/day one dlc bs because enough gamers will pay for it.
Both the publishers and the retailers will charge however much they can for as little as possible.

They get bullied into not lowering prices by retailers.
If a pc game is cheaper online retailers refuse to stock the game at all.

Then they in turn bully the consumer into taking up the slack.

Realitycrash:

rolfwesselius:

Realitycrash:
So, tell me, why wasn't reselling games "killing the industry" back witht he NES and SEGA?

Because gamestop and giant used only retailers did not exist.
They only stock used games and maybe a few new games forcing people to buy used games even if they want to buy new.

..They do? When I worked in GAME, we stocked both new and old games (granted, this was five years ago), and I remember being able to buy re-used games back in 94'

It worked like this in the nes days

(not real sales numbers)
1:retailer purchases 1000 copies.
2:retailer sells all games stock.
3:buys another 1000 copies.
Rince and repeat until demand drops.

How it works today.
1:Gamestop buys 1000 copies.
2:Gamestop sells all copies.
3:Gamestop buys back almost all the new copies
4:Gamestop runs out of new copies and keeps selling the used copies.

They Kept those 1000 in circulation and when those sell out they refuse to buy any new copies so when you come in for a copy the only copies they have are used copies.

rolfwesselius:

Realitycrash:

rolfwesselius:

Because gamestop and giant used only retailers did not exist.
They only stock used games and maybe a few new games forcing people to buy used games even if they want to buy new.

..They do? When I worked in GAME, we stocked both new and old games (granted, this was five years ago), and I remember being able to buy re-used games back in 94'

It worked like this in the nes days

(not real sales numbers)
1:retailer purchases 1000 copies.
2:retailer sells all games stock.
3:buys another 1000 copies.
Rince and repeat until demand drops.

How it works today.
1:Gamestop buys 1000 copies.
2:Gamestop sells all copies.
3:Gamestop buys back almost all the new copies
4:Gamestop runs out of new copies and keeps selling the used copies.

They Kept those 1000 in circulation and when those sell out they refuse to buy any new copies so when you come in for a copy the only copies they have are used copies.

Fine, so you are saying that games today have far less replay value than they used, is that right? For I never traded my games in, back in the NES-Days, and I sure as hell don't trade them in now either. Almost all games I want to keep in my library. I understand that people DO trade them in, but every single fucking one of them? Really?

I smell an industry that needs to sit down, shut up, and grow up.

Its the only industry (i can think of) thats demanding a cut from second hand sales.

No, you adjust your poxy-arse money grabbing mindset to compensate for us, the comsumer.

VonKlaw:
Sure. And the price of new cars would have dropped if they got a slice of resale.

Oh wait, it wouldn't. Because shareholders would just consider it extra profit.

This. Utter bollocks. I can maybe follow the reasoning of high risk for many games but that line was ridiculous.

I struggle to empathise with an industry in record growth with record sales and record returns. The industry has a flaw somewhere but attempting to punish gamers won't help anyone.

Besides, low budget games still turn a huge dime, graphics aren't the be all and end all, nor is the shooting star approach, try releasing innovative games with a focus on story and gameplay, people still play them and with relatively low dev costs the return should be nice. Besides they'll be smaller which means reasonable to download which means a virtual copy -> no returning to store.

I still don't see why it's such a huge deal for game retailers to give publishers a small cut of used games profits. In return, there could be even more deals cut between the two, like a goddamn symbiosis.

bahumat42:

Baresark:
snip

um where they come from isn't really that important?
do you think oh that came from this awesome industry 100 years ago, so i should support it. No because thats retardeed, the thing is its what your asking people to do for this market.

Its retail, if they can't keep up with the times then they deserve closure, nature of capitalism.

The main point of what I was saying was simply that the retail stores such as gamestop have not changed their business model in a really long time, but it's only this generation that this business model has become a problem. I'm not saying that if they can't change with the times we should make exception for them. The people who can't change with the time is not actually the game stores, it's actually the publishers which are struggling with the changes that time brings.

rolfwesselius:

Realitycrash:

rolfwesselius:

Because gamestop and giant used only retailers did not exist.
They only stock used games and maybe a few new games forcing people to buy used games even if they want to buy new.

..They do? When I worked in GAME, we stocked both new and old games (granted, this was five years ago), and I remember being able to buy re-used games back in 94'

It worked like this in the nes days

(not real sales numbers)
1:retailer purchases 1000 copies.
2:retailer sells all games stock.
3:buys another 1000 copies.
Rince and repeat until demand drops.

How it works today.
1:Gamestop buys 1000 copies.
2:Gamestop sells all copies.
3:Gamestop buys back almost all the new copies
4:Gamestop runs out of new copies and keeps selling the used copies.

They Kept those 1000 in circulation and when those sell out they refuse to buy any new copies so when you come in for a copy the only copies they have are used copies.

I think you are partially right. It's not the game stores that are refusing to buy new stock though. I have never gone to Gamestop and not been able to buy a copy of a game I wanted. The issues seems to be that games come back in so fast. Why would they restock a store when they have that item in stock.

I still believe that if they dropped the prices in half, sales would triple. 60$ is just too much to risk on a shit game, and there are so many shit games.

The publishers always whine about used sales stealing their profits but you rarely hear Gamestop talking about the minuscule margins on game sales. Gamestop makes 10 bucks on a new game, gross, and as soon as the price drops they sell it at a loss. If they didn't make money on used games they wouldn't be able to stay in business. When the Xbox360 came out, all new games went up to 60$, just because. The game industry is trying to milk more money out of the same consumers to make up for their shitty products.

With that said, I fully expect the next generation of consoles to have integrated DRM activation protocols, ala CD Keys like PC games, and that will simply be that. Gamestop will go out of business and Used Game Sales will be something we tell our kids about, and they'll never believe us.

RoseArch:
Protip: Don't sell games at sixty bucks, then.

That.

Sadly, agreeing with someone who said something perfectly already is a 'low content post', so I'll add that Greg Tito should still apologize to anyone who bought DA2 based upon his review.

Grampy_bone:
Gamestop will go out of business and Used Game Sales will be something we tell our kids about, and they'll never believe us.

On the bright side, people may return to the PC in bulk if that happens. No incentive to stay on the console if the used market dies, especially with Steam around.

scotth266:
In before someone denounces this as some greedy fascist corporate statement bluh bluh industry bad bluh bluh consumers are always right bluh.

EDIT: Never mind. Got ninja'd on that one.

While single-player only games are far from dead (Alan Wake for instance), he is probably right that they tend to make up more of the pre-owned market. You're more likely to give a game up if there's nothing to do once the story is done, especially if it's one you don't feel like experiencing again. People may complain about tacked-on multiplayer modes, but in the end, those same multiplayer modes are probably a calculated decision made to try and retain as many consumers as possible.

The whole thing regarding book swaps and yard sales isn't really analogous. From my limited knowledge, movies make their money on the silver screen (mostly) and from DVD sales (a only a little bit) from the fans who want home copies, so they're not really affected all that much by their rental industry. Books in the meantime seem to be doing better than ever, especially with the advent of e-publishing, and book publishers don't really have to compete with a "used book" market. The only thing vaguely similar are libraries, but those function in such a different way that the situation really isn't comparable. And (from what I've observed), book lovers tend to retain their products, even if they don't really care for them so much.

Because videogames make the bulk of their money in the first two weeks of sales, used game retailers have much more of an impact on the industry than their proponents are willing to let on. It's as if theater movies had to compete with their own rented DVDs. Would it kill the industry? Probably not, but it would have a measurable impact on the way movies were to be produced.

All my books are second hand, and I have a rather large collection.

Pandabearparade:

Grampy_bone:
Gamestop will go out of business and Used Game Sales will be something we tell our kids about, and they'll never believe us.

On the bright side, people may return to the PC in bulk if that happens. No incentive to stay on the console if the used market dies, especially with Steam around.

Steam is a really good example of games just plain costing too damn much. What happens every time steam has a sale? They drop the price 50% and sales go up like 1000%.

I also recall an indie dev complaining that his game on XBLA is never allowed to go on sale or have a price drop. Microsoft is too controlling. Any sales are better than no sales...

Baresark:

bahumat42:

Baresark:
snip

um where they come from isn't really that important?
do you think oh that came from this awesome industry 100 years ago, so i should support it. No because thats retardeed, the thing is its what your asking people to do for this market.

Its retail, if they can't keep up with the times then they deserve closure, nature of capitalism.

The main point of what I was saying was simply that the retail stores such as gamestop have not changed their business model in a really long time, but it's only this generation that this business model has become a problem. I'm not saying that if they can't change with the times we should make exception for them. The people who can't change with the time is not actually the game stores, it's actually the publishers which are struggling with the changes that time brings.

But the cost of games development has risen, pre-owned sales were never a cool thing, but now their something that can't be ignored.

And for the record gaming retail shops have changed greatly over the last 25 years, with less and less of the shop being for new titles, and more towards trade ins.

SirBryghtside:

Absolutionis:

DonTsetsi:
And why do PC games cost 60 Euros now? There is no resale market on them.

That is pure greed especially considering publishers pay ~$10 royalties for publishing every console game. Notice that the only companies that are doing $60 games are EA/Bioware, Blizzard/Activision, Ubisoft, and "Horse Armor" Bethesda.

Then again, I can't really think of any more large publishers who actually develop for the PC. Apart from Valve, but Portal 2 was £30 (35?) on release day as well.

yeah but its was 26/27 quid on pre-order. Everyone likes to mention release day prices but steam prices usually knocks off 10-15% for pre ordering a title.

Vault Citizen:

RoseArch:
Protip: Don't sell games at sixty bucks, then.

Exactly. It could just as easily be said that if prices were lower there would be less incentive to buy used games.

Yeah, if new games were cheaper than used why would anyone buy used? Hint: cheaper new games would result in cheaper used games.

"Prices would have come down long ago if the industry was getting a share of the resells," Braben stated.

I am sure that I am not the only one in 3 pages worth of posts to say this, but let me make this clear.

This is not bullshit. This is an absolute LIE. There is absolutely NO way ever that the prices of games are going to go down. Period. End of story.

If you willingly paid 60$ for a game today, and you remove the used market, your still going to be paying 60$ tomorrow, next year, and onward until the price goes UP, not down, because the market dictates it will NEVER go down because the consumers have proven they will bear that cost.

Hell, look at DLC if you need proof to this fact. DLC is used proof. How many times excluding steam do you see ANY retailer be it XBL, PSN, or other DLC platform do you EVER see the price of DLC reduced? Thats right, excluding steam you dont.(steam gets this exclusion because they are smart enough to know that their ability to act contrary to pricing guidelines is the predominant factor of their successes and are unwilling to jeopardize that.) That is the model you would create if the Used market was somehow undone. You would see 10+ year old games still selling for 30$ because there is nothing to drive the price down in that model other than over saturation. That is the quickest way to create industry wide stagnation that would result in another 1982 esque game market crash.

The used market is the best thing for the industry and these people who try to play as victims are absolutely lying to you.

What?! The trustworthy and never faulty game industry is blaming gamers?! Shocking!

Oh wait... No it isn't... The gaming industry is the most entitled thing ever. This is just like pirating a game and the "lost sales"...

Pro-tip; Used games, or pirating, does not equal a lost sale.

Vivi22:

scotth266:
You're more likely to give a game up if there's nothing to do once the story is done, especially if it's one you don't feel like experiencing again.

I own plenty of compelling single player games I've played more than once. Those that stuck with series like Mass Effect until the end weren't doing it because of multiplayer either.

That's not the point I was making. Whether or not a game is "good" is irrelevant here: because even though you kept Mass Effect, there were other people who resold it.

Adding on multiplayer modes is a way for the developer to try and keep people from reselling the game: it gives you something to do that's competition oriented, so you'll keep playing so long as you want to be the best at it. And you're less likely (theoretically) to resell it because you might want to play that with your friends whenever.

It's about adding value to tempt the consumer to keep the game. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

I don't think I've ever seen sales numbers for DVD and Blu-ray copies of movies (I'm not sure they're even widely available) but I doubt they're as meager as you imply compared to ticket sales.

Honestly, I don't know how big the gap is between the two: but my point is that movies have a period of "front time" where the big bucks are made that justify the title's creation. That's the period where it's in theaters: hence the reason people make a big deal about what a movie earns in the opening weekend. Videogames have a similar front time: their first two weeks, for the most part, are where the majority of your "gotta pay off the budget" cash is made (though this has been varying a bit with the dawn of Steam's sale bonanza: you can sometimes make more from deals after release than you did during the full-price release, especially if you didn't have a lot of publicity at the start).

Regardless, used markets for DVD's and books are common. I can regularly go to the flea market every week and buy plenty of both, including an excellent selection of current titles not to mention that there are several brick and mortar stores dealing significantly, and even exclusively, in used sales of either in my area and I do not live in a huge city. The two are directly analogous to used game sales, and the real irony is you used book publishers success moving into the digital distribution realm in an attempt to show how it isn't analogous to games, despite games already moving that way and platforms like Steam seeing the sort of revenue growth that most companies don't even dream of because growth that high almost never happens. If anything games are even better suited to digital distribution than books and movies.

Except digital distribution lies directly in conflict with the used book/game industry. If you buy an E-book/steam game, the only way you can give it to someone else right now is to hand them your Kindle/computer.

Meanwhile, physical copies can be traded as many times as you want. See the difference?

Don't produce shit and charge extortionate prices for it then. I'm not exactly pro-used market, but you can't blame people.

Console game prices are ridiculous - and some of them have the cheek to try and pump PC game prices up to the same point.

SirBryghtside:

Absolutionis:

DonTsetsi:
And why do PC games cost 60 Euros now? There is no resale market on them.

That is pure greed especially considering publishers pay ~$10 royalties for publishing every console game. Notice that the only companies that are doing $60 games are EA/Bioware, Blizzard/Activision, Ubisoft, and "Horse Armor" Bethesda.

Then again, I can't really think of any more large publishers who actually develop for the PC. Apart from Valve, but Portal 2 was £30 (35?) on release day as well.

Practically all of them. And £30 is the normal price point for a PC game.

This is a bunch of Bullshit
With 10 seconds of searching on Google I found an antique Tiffany engagement ring on sale (used) for $12,000.
http://www.etsy.com/listing/94091973/antique-diamond-engagement-ring-101?utm_source=googleproduct&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=GPS
Tiffany&Co, who still makes and sells engagement rings
http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Browse.aspx?mcat=148203
will make NO MONEY off of the sale of that used ring!

NONE
ZIP
ZERO
NADA
ZILTCH
they don't get a penny
Yet I don't hear them complaining like whiny little bitches about that because they DID make money when they sold it the first time in 1925!

and they have a handicap that game makers don't have!
when Tiffany&Co makes an engagement ring they have 1 and only 1 ring to sell which they can sell once to one person who can then do anything he/she wants with it and they have no say whatsoever about it anymore.
when a gaming company makes a game they can sell that game over 40,000,000,000,000,000 times without having to make the game again!

Yet they have the Gaul to complain?

Have they no shame?

Have they no BRAINS?

They are nothing but Pathetic losers

bahumat42:

Baresark:

bahumat42:

snip

The main point of what I was saying was simply that the retail stores such as gamestop have not changed their business model in a really long time, but it's only this generation that this business model has become a problem. I'm not saying that if they can't change with the times we should make exception for them. The people who can't change with the time is not actually the game stores, it's actually the publishers which are struggling with the changes that time brings.

But the cost of games development has risen, pre-owned sales were never a cool thing, but now their something that can't be ignored.

And for the record gaming retail shops have changed greatly over the last 25 years, with less and less of the shop being for new titles, and more towards trade ins.

The cost of Triple-A titles has risen. Now we enter the realm of diminishing returns.

I'm not taking sides on anything. I don't want to make it seem like it is. The reason why there is so much space devoted to resale is simply because they have massive amounts of games stretching back to the beginning of the of this console generation. Which also constitutes games they have taken in, given credit to customers for, and not been able to unload yet.

The truth is that selling games for less appeals to the consumer. As does the prospect of trading in games that you no longer play so you can get a new game that you have not played yet. I have seldom had a problem finding a new game in the Gamestop's near me. And if I can't find it new, it's also hard to find it used, in my experience. I don't pretend to know exactly what is going on within the industry, but until this console generation it was ok to purchase games used. All I'm saying is that what is said in this article is bullshit. Used games aren't making the cost of games high, lack of demand for publishers Triple A titles is what makes them high. It is just excuse after excuse after excuse. The only excuse is that big publishers are failing to make games that are adequate for $60 and product that gamers finish and throw back as fast as they can. I'm not referring to game stores as the Robin Hood's of the games industry. I'm simply saying that publishers are failing to provide more than a throw away product for too much money. That isn't the fault of used games.

Well if games were cheaper then I'd be much less likely to buy the game second hand.

But aren't they making enough money from selling us half-made games and then charging £30 extra for the tonnes of DLC that should've been included originally.

David Braben:
Braben said that having a game sell out the first day is not a good thing anymore. "The idea of a game selling out used to be a good thing, but nowadays, those people who buy it on day one may well finish it and return it," he said. "People will say 'Oh well, I paid all this money and it's mine to do with as I will', but the problem is that's what's keeping the retail price up.

It's an egg-or-chicken problem, then: if they made it cheaper in the first place, there would be less reason to resell it.

Say, I pay $15 for a game. It's not a lot of money, so I might as well keep it, why not.

Say, I pay $60 for a game. It's quite some money, so after I beat it, unless it's absolutely awesome, I better sell it and recoup some of it.

Baresark:

Edit: It all has to do with loss aversion. The publishers get money for their games, so they take any money they don't get that they feel they deserve as loss, which is not explicitly true. It's easier to trade in used games because people who think of things like "traders" think of things, do not experience the loss aversion (that is why getting less for a game than what you payed is ok). They also largely ignore bringing up the sales of the Walmart's of the world because the there is a greater emotional reaction to loss than there is to gains. To illustrate on a scale that is easy: Imagine you have no money. Someone gives you $10, you are happy about it. We'll say that increases your overall utility by 10 points (to keep it simple). Now, imagine if someone then steals that $10. While it seems like you simply lost 10 points of utility and you are simply back to where you started, you have an emotional reaction to that which makes it seem like you are put into a negative utility position. So, now instead of having 0 points of utility, you have -5 points of utility. While it's not true, the reaction is much worse at the loss than it is at the gain.

I'm glad there are other people that understand loss aversion. It's not a "lost sale" it's a "sale you likely wouldn't have gotten anyway."

I have an idea, video game industry. Put your money where your mouth is. Let's implement something that makes games untradeable. In exchange, you drop the price of every new game to $30-$40.

I'm really tired of the "used sales killing games" BS. These guys need to do something about it instead of bitching and moaning. It can't be all that tough.

Possible fix? Slash the prices down and sell the "engine" for $20 with some content. Then they can offer big chunks of DLC off of that same working system.

Oh bull, they would still keep it at 60 bucks now that it has been the standard price for so long.

I suspect that with the next console generation we'll see the beginning of the end of used game sales. So I get his point, but it's a 2007 point not a 2012 one. Between now and 2014 we'll see a huge change in the way console games are purchased.

PC games aside, Sony's Vita made the first substantive move in that direction. Yes, you can buy the games in retail, but by putting the games on the same format as system's storage they're basically telling the consumer to just buy an sd card and download your games for five bucks less. Will I be shocked if they start releasing Vita games online first at some point? Not at all.

They'll also probably start shipping less physical media to Gamestop as well, forcing scarcity that will drive people online to download the game.

The one thing that the gaming industry never really addresses here that I think will shoot them in the foot is what happens with the store credit customers get from thier trade ins. I spend my credit on new $60 games. I use my trade in credit to buy more games. Guess what happens if the market for used games disappears? I stop buying one $60 dollar game a month and the sales of new games drop. I am sure that I am not the only person who does this. I really want the games industry to address what happens to overall sales. Well I am off to trade in Mass Effect Three, may be I should just use it to pick up Game of Thrones or a season of Justifed.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.