And the used game trade debate rages on...
As reported by gamesindustry.biz, Phil Harrison (left), speaking at a London event yesterday, took a moderate approach to the argument over used game trading. Of the issue, the Atari president remarked:
There's no doubt that second hand games sales has a macro-economic impact on the industry and a lot of people get miserable about it.
But it's no coincidence that the most valuable games, the ones that have the most lifetime as a game experience, are the ones that don't get resold, that don't get traded.
The games that have the embedded community, the embedded commerce, the extended, expandable experiences, are the one's that you would never want to trade, the one's you want to keep hold of. And that's perfectly in line with our future strategy so we're not that concerned about it.
Atari CEO David Gardner made similar remarks at the gathering:
Second hand game sales represent consumer choice and desire. Obviously, it has economically been extremely painful for the industry... the publishers don't benefit.
But as games change and they become more and more network centric, the disc in the box becomes only one part of the experience. As that experience grows then it becomes not such a problem.
GP: Although the used game issue brings out the militant consumer advocate in me, I must give these guys a little credit for moderating their comments (unlike Epic's whiny Michael Capps). Both Gardner and Harrison seem to be saying that digital distribution is the wave of the future, so let's not get too frothed up about used game sales now. And they're probably right.
Still, I've ginned up enough working-class frustration while writing this to be annoyed by Gardner's complaint that "the publishers don't benefit" [from used game trades].
Why is that a problem?
Gardner's comment is typical of the greedy mindset of some game publishers, who already got paid when they sold the game to the retailer. The retailer then made its money when the consumer purchased the game. And when the consumer disposes of the game, the publisher wants another bite of the apple? What is this, the Mafia? Everyone in the food chain has to kick back up to the Don?
Fughetaboudit...
Comments
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
ummm.............. smaller market(digi only) same/higher price = proft loss.......
=================================
Pirates,Shearers,Lenders and downloaders are not a market that can be taped by the mainstream.
---------------------------------
I is fuzzy brained mew =^^=
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.
---
http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I could see a small price break as I said for not having to print cds and whatnot. But the content is the same content regardless of if you bought it online or in a store.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
No, it's not.
You can resell a hardcopy, can't digital. There is less value there, lower the price.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
If reselling is what the company is trying to avoid they aren't going to cut your cost for that sake.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Why should I pay the same when I have less value? They are removing something that I can do (although personally, I don't. I've sold a miniscule proportion of the games I've bought), yet charging the same? That's a price increase. I already think that they are charging too much, why should I support a price increase?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
You don't have to, I am not saying everyone should be all happy sunshine about the idea. But fi you want the game and the option is pay this price or don't, those are really your only options. Sure the price would probably still drop eventually, and if no one bought anythign until prices dropped the companies would probably lower starting prices, but that shiny thing comes in and a lot of people can't help but buy it. People will pay more to get something sooner.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
THe time is not right for it right now it will be in the next 20 years, in the next 5 we have to get rid of DRM as we know it and have a solid foundation of consoles that can fully support whole new game downloads, so the next 5 years this will be dealt with, in the next 5 years we need more people on the net and a overall faster net the more people on a faster and wider spread net the more consumers you can sale to in this time you start weening the public off normal physical media, past 10 years is when more than likely DD will be as common place as 10MBPS connections. People are not going to wait on a film to load, where goes hollywood is where the rest of media goes, phiscail distribution is here to stay for at least 8more years and with discs cable able of holding 500GB-1TB it might well be another 5, but I think flash media might do it if it can hit 100GB in the next 5-10.
=================================
Pirates,Shearers,Lenders and downloaders are not a market that can be taped by the mainstream.
---------------------------------
I is fuzzy brained mew =^^=
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.
---
http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
What the consumer sees as value will have to change I belive with a price drop, easy of use and transfer and share will be the beginning of a new golden age of media but this utopia is not for 10+ years when their will be more people world wide able to buy it, more volume means more profit and a stable profit means a lower price for the consumer.
But without that lower price you will get no where.
=================================
Pirates,Shearers,Lenders and downloaders are not a market that can be taped by the mainstream.
---------------------------------
I is fuzzy brained mew =^^=
http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.
---
http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I think the answer comes more from educating the public about what the developers do, and what involvement they have in a game. The answer to piracy and second hand games is because people don't value their games. I think the problem with using publisher is that it seems like big faceless corperation wants more money, but if your saying developer, it just seems more like 5 people in a room building this game. The thing I hate about the games industry is that no one knows who makes these games. The recognition is either based off of name (Ex, Call of Duty) or at most publisher, (Activision, I like the games from Activision!). I think more attention needs to be put that "this game was made by Infinity Ward, or this game was made by Bioware." and more attention needs to be put in what really goes on when people make these games, a documentry or 60 minutes thing of here's day in life of the offices of Bioware and when it's christmas or 4 weeks before the game goes gold and actually show what these people do.
With that, also encurage the use of buying new games with a slogen of such like "support our developers! Buy new games!" I think that, will solve a lot of piracy concens as well as people start to understand these games are made by real people who love to play video games.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Here's some info, since you asked.
Unless you work for a major company with big bucks like Blizzard, someone working in game design is usually searching for work after or even during every project. Companies don't retain most of their employees because they can't afford it. Before games are even released they begin firing or laying off employees to cut back on costs. They start with large teams of developers and then cut down to much smaller teams for testing and balancing. Then hire people again when the next project starts.
This leaves a lot of people without consistent work.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
what projects have you worked on?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Well those developers (Important ones anyways) are usually tied to one thing like Gearbox, who after their project pick up requests for games or shop for publishers on other game projects. So it's always work on game, find publisher, make game, release and move on. They still get royalties for every game sold from that point even if they are cut from the publisher, keep in mind Gearbox is still making money from the original Halo for the PC. So Gearbox just moves around similar to how Starbreeze works in that one day they are working for 2K, then the next for Ubisoft, then the next for EA or microsoft. The gaming industry for developers is a very inconsistant one I agree if you are one of these third pary developers of third party publishers who are not owned by any one publisher but, if you are part of the publisher like EA Redwood or what was EA Chicago, you only really get laid off after working on at least a couple of games.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I'm not talking about companies, I'm talking about individuals. Level Designer or modeler A finishes project X and gets canned because the developement company can't afford to keep paying him while they';re inbetween projects.
Companies like Blizz are an exception because their stuff sells so well they have grown large enough to just have multiple projects going on at once. They shuffle people around and don't hire any new people unless someone leaves or they can support the new person.
I haven't hit the industry yet, but I'm about 5 months from being in the thick of it. I've already applied and interviewed. I have friends who are working for companies NOW (Cheyenne Mountain - Makers of Stargate Worlds for example) that are either in a hiring freeze or are actually letting people go because the projects they are working on are either in beta or launching. These are people I talk to on a weekly basis who don't know if they'll have a job tomorrow or not.
Edit: Companies last as long as somoene is running them, they can be broke and be alive still. A person doing a job losing that job and having no income can't survive. I would think customers would care but then again we live in the great U.S. of Me country where no one seems to care about anyone but themself.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
90+% of development is used internally.
Why do game devs get a break?
ETA:
And let me elaborate this even further, using only software and my personal experience.
* I wrote software that enabled people to switch long distance carriers. Do I get a cut of each phone call? Why not?
* I wrote testing software. Do I get a cut of the software it was used to test? Why not?
* I wrote financial planning software, do I get a cut of each transaction it suggests? Why not?
* I wrote security software that protects bank transactions. Do I get a cut of each transaction? Why not?
* I wrote security software that protects online auction transactions. Do I get a cut of each transaction? Why not?
* I wrote software that accelerates network connections. Do I get a cut of the cost of the bandwidth savings? Why not?
All of this is copyrighted software, just as games. Why are game devs special?
Hardware contains software. Does that mean hardware can't be resold?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Yes, a lot of people: consumers, politicians, conglomerates, employees, they all care about theirselves first and someone else second. Those people aren't going to put food on the table for you. Welcome to the real world.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I don't expect anyone to put food on my table for me. But it's going to suck when I put in hundreds of hours on a game and my company can't afford to pay me because people bought used instead of new. How fair is that?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Nothing is fair, and the time frame for the game market is short. If someone comes along who will do your work but demand less pay, is that fair? Not at all. If you put hundreds of hours of work and you can't keep the job, tough luck. It isn't a stable busines, especially with the climate as of late. Just because you demand to have your title only sold new, won't mean you'll likely stay with the same job, companies love to cut costs to equal more profit. Also, be aware that whatever you develop won't be yours anymore with that publisher, they can have you make a big idea and keep the IP and cut you from the costs.
I rather hear from someone like EZK than some person who feels they deserve every sale, because it seems you're not in the business.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Once again, I'm aware of how the industry actually works. I think it sucks and I hope it changes. Doesn't mean I won't work under the current system. How ignorant is it for you to say "Tough shit deal or get out."
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
We all hope it changes, but simply asking for all used titles to go away won't get anything done. If there's no money to squeeze it won't pop out magically. I'm saying it is "tough luck" because no one really makes progress with changing it, they just immediately assume all used titles are the problem and it'll make everything for the better for the developer and publisher. In this scenario, this means the consumer will be hurt, since publishers won't budge on their cuts. However, developers will still be hurt since every company loves to cut costs.
Since you'll work for the current system, aren't you feeding into the problem instead of trying to change it? I really wonder what your plan is besides just cutting off used sales.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Personally if I ever get into a position that would allow me to make these decisions I would:
1. Only sell through DD. Whether that be my publisher or my dev company.
2. Attach each CD (because I would be willing to print and ship CDs to customers who wanted them) to a code that is attached to an account, similar to how an MMO functions. I wouldn't limit installs, but you would have to log-on to play, even a single player game. This way people would be less likely to resell since the log in to play and the account with the company/publisher DD would be linked.
The only downside is you would need an internet connection to log on, I'm still trying to figure a way to work around that, maybe linking the CD directly to an account, rather then to a code. But then you could never allow the user to change passwords.
As for what I will do, I will continue to only buy new games. I will also continue to keep all the games I buy. Unless I ever get a position of power in a company, there's not much more I can do.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Purely through DD with optional hard copy, how would you plan to advertise and how much would you spend to do so? How fast would these hard copies arrive? Would you tack on insurance to the package or would they be parcels and would they require signing or anything?
Is there really a point to having a hard copy when an online-log-on key is required to play? Personally, I'm not interested in having a constant connection, I like to turn off my adapater from time to time or when it isn't in use. I try to limit my power usages, but not everyone is like me.
You have fun only buying new copies, it is really nice having that fresh seal with lovely manuals (not many are great these days) and the typical warranty with a warning that a 1:1 copy isn't "necessary". I'd have to point out that not every potential customer is like you though, it is a minority view.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Games are made for minorities, they're called genres. Like I said, my games probably wouldn't appeal to everyone, but I don't think it would concern a majority of the market either. Your problems with it (not wantign constant connection, etc.) are a minority view as well.
As for the hard copy, some people are just more comfortabel installing from a disc then a download. I figure why not give them that option.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Limiting and limiting to pure minorities is a problem if you want to stay afloat unless you're a very small team and self-publish. Yes, I'm a minority since I don't like constant connections, but what if that beomes a majority view in the future for people that don't like online-connections for X reason? Would you listen to your paying customers at removing the lock or would you damage the customer relations for future titles? I don't think you'd try to keep up relations since you already got your money from them. I can only hope that money lasts for a while over time.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
My response.
1. you've already limited who can or will play your game. Not everyone has the internet, but just about everybody can get access to a store to buy a copy of a game.
2. Wonderful. So if your company goes under (and don't say it isn't possible..because it sure as hell is a posibility for ANY company), what happens if the registration or log-on servers are turned off. Or I travel somewhere without internet. Or hell...play the game in my CAR on a trip. (yes..I have an LCD we hang in my mother in laws van for long family trips and some of us stay in the back playing games together). Plus I would be less interested in buying the games if I knew I was locked into a log-in for all of the games together and couldn't remove or even give away a copy to a family member or friend without letting all of them go. Same reason that, while I love steam, I am VERY limited on what I buy on there.
3. What happens if you get into a situation that you need to sell your games? I've had to do it once before. It hurt doing it, but I did what I had to do to take care of my family when we were having to travel between multiple hospitals for over several months while my pre-mature daughter was trying to survive. We would have been in real trouble if the option to sell my games and movies had not been there.
Zen aka Jeremy Powers
Panama City, Fl.
Zen@Zenspath.com
Zen aka Jeremy Powers
Editor and Host of the Zenspath Podcast (now on iTunes)
www.ZensPath.com
XBL: "PsychoticZen" PSN: "Zenspath"
Nintendo Network: "Psychoticzen", 3DS: "0860-3238-7260
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Spore still made record sales even with their insane DRM which is much worse then what I proposed. Would I appeal to all gamers? Of course not, but I wouldn't be concerned with the players who didn't want to follow those rules.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Your right, it did sell well. They made their money, and I got screwed. I bought the game...new..., I bought the book with it for my kids to use to help make creatures, and I even bought the damn DS game (which was ok). The day after I bought it and installed it I started having issues with the PC, and still do to this day because I can't get the damn DRM off of here without reloading the entire PC..but then I lose one of my precious few chances I get to play Spore (which I had bought NEW). So here's how this worked out for me.
1. Bought game new, along with portable version of the game, and guide to help support the developer because I have always enjoyed Maxis games (specifically the Sim City series).
2. Load the game on my PC and find that, after paying full price for it and not being able to return or sell this game to someone else if they wanted it, messed up my PC and has caused me nothing but trouble. Also found that I could not load it on my wifes laptop and play it on there without using another download code, even though I had a log in showing I had purchased the game and was just going to move my game save around on an SD card for portability. (They said I needed to buy ANOTHER copy of the game to play it on her laptop.)
3. Developer made their money and I didn't get my product. Period.
4. FIVE people I work with had the game days before it was officially released, didn't have any issues, played it on their home PC's as well as on their laptops and such. And never paid a dime.
So with these steps in place to make it where this game couldn't be copied or played by more than one person, the only one that got screwed and is now quite bitter about PC gaming in general is the one that paid the company the money they thought they deserved.
If this is where you want gaming to go, please get off your high horse and realize that the gaming world doesn't revolve around your pompass rear end. Yes there are "genres" of games, but that is only a small part of gaming as a whole. Games are made for all people, of all tastes, of all ages...not for the "chosen few" that want to play the game your way. You can't say that books are only for "certain" people because some people may not be able to enjoy new books.
What about people that have trouble paying for college and pass using used books? Should they be locked out of an education because they worked hard, but had to use used books to do it? You said earlier that ALL media should be this way, and books count as well. Books, movies, and even games, can be educational...but are all still a form of media.
Zen aka Jeremy Powers
Editor and Host of the Zenspath Podcast (now on iTunes)
www.ZensPath.com
XBL: "PsychoticZen" PSN: "Zenspath"
Nintendo Network: "Psychoticzen", 3DS: "0860-3238-7260
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I'm saying people enjoy different types of games. There will NEVER be a game that appeals to EVERY gamer's tastes because people want different things when they go shopping for games. Someone who predominantly likes Halo is probably not going to be as interested in Final Fantasy unless they also like roleplaying games. Trying to create a one size fits all game is asinine, it's common practice to create games for a "target audience" just like every other product. I'm saying if I ever owned a company I would be geared towards people who wanted to support the industry, and screw all the people that don't. I KNOW there's enough of a market of people buying new that it wouldn't make much of a difference. I cited Spore as an example, a LARGE portion of the hardcore gaming community knew what that program would do to their computer and they bought the game anyway.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I preordered Spore. I sent it back unopened and got a refund. Your point fails.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
This goes back to things I've said before, in the DRM threads.
For computer games, I *REFUSE* to have that computer on the net. Valve lost a sale for years because of that (finally bought Orange Box for the 360, would've had boxed HL2 the day it came out if it weren't for the online requirements for single player). I also don't have an XP computer because of those activation requirements. I've bought less than a handful of computer games in the past decade, but bought hundreds of console games. Yes, some of those were bought used. I wouldn't have been driven to the console without nonsensical restrictions like what you propose, and all of those would've been new comptuer games. They lost a good chunk of money because of ideas like those you espouse.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Good for you. As a developer I refuse to lose profits so people like you can play. That's my right. Like I said, games are not a right they are a privlidge. I will work under whatever decisions my bosses make, but those are the decisions I would make if I was in charge, and I wouldn't be concerned with the small loss of players like you.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Thank god you don't make those decisions, then. Your company would be out of business in the blink of an eye.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Small loss?
I buy 70-100 games a year. Am I the type of consumer you want to alienate?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
In the scheme of things considering most of those are probably used sales and wouldn't benefit me a lick, yeah small loss.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Where do you think 2nd hand sales come from exactly? They are when someone trades in games for new ones, which correct me if I am wrong means a SALE for you that you wouldn't have gotten otherwise. The only difference is that the games shop recooperates the money by selling on the used games rather than taking cash. If the 2nd hand games were not being sold then you wouldn't be getting trade ins which means those that trade in for new titles wouldn't be generating a sale for you. So in short, you are fundementally WRONG. The 2nd hand market directly feeds the New games market.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Only about half, so no, it's not small.
The last several hundred dollars has all been new. Keep trying to rationalize away alienizing paying customers.
ETA:
The attach rate is what, 7-10 for most consoles? I have bought *NEW* 23 in one trip. Why do you insist I don't do anything for the industry?
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
No doubt. Hell just today I spent over $200 on titles from Valve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
You really think so?
Used games sell for so little (at least when you do trade in which is the way MOST people sell their used games). I have lots of friends who sell back to gamestop and they NEVER buy new copies, if the store doesn't have a used copy they take the little reciept and go back and check a few days later.
I'm really surprised by how blind people on this site are. Yes the publishers (and more importantly the developers) benefit from the first sale, but they get nothing from the second, third etc. sales. So let's assume half of the games sold are then resold once, just to be easy.
Let's keep the numebrs small, let's say each game costs $50. We'll assume (althought it's WAY off the mark) that 50% of the sale price goes back to the devs. So 25$ on each sale.
100 copies of the game get sold, that's $2500. Then 50 games get sold back to the store and get resold. Let's say they resell at $20. The devs get, nothing.
Had the resell not been available the devs would have made 150% of the money they did.
And you all wonder why game prices keep getting higher? The price of making a AAA title is in the tens of millions now. Then add on the puiblisher's cut and costs. That means for a AAA to even pay back the money it took to make they have to sell several hundred thousand copies (the exact amount depends on exact numbers going back to the devs which I do not have anymore.) With resells I doubt most games that aren't absolute hits do much more then pay the company back. This is why you see more companies doing casual games then AAA titles. The AAA market is just too volitile to be a good risk.
I'm honestly surprised that GP has been posting his opinion without doing any research into the actual effects this has on game developers. Why not do some journalist stuff and come up with the real numbers. I bet you'd have a better chance of finding them then me. I'd be interested to see what the actual numbers of used sales versus first sales, and money going back to devs is.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I really only have one question… so what? What gives these companies the right to think they get a kick-back for the resale of games? Literally no other industry has ever had the nachos to ask for that before, because the idea is preposterous and is fundamentally incongruent with capitalism. Once a widget leaves the hands of the company that made it, its not theirs any longer. In the case of media it is protected from being edited and reused in other works, but not resold. You don’t see book/music/movie industries trying to pull this garbage, and they feel the pitch from the resale market as well; it’s the price they pay for competing in these markets. I know the US is heading headlong to a fully socialist economy with the $4.6T bailout, lets not hurry it along by entertaining these notions.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
That's your opinion, and that's fine. I disagree. I think all media should only have a first sale and that's it. Or at the very least that whoever created it should get a cut of future sales. If you don't agree fine, fight against it.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
BTW: I think a huge part of the "tens of millions" of dev costs for a triple A title is the marketing cost and in some cases A&V talent. When companies release real accounting numbers, then, my opinion will change but not before. All the developers I have ever heard from claim to work long hours for so-so pay and they don’t own the rights to anything they produce to boot as far as I understand things. So I don’t know where all the money is going except for executive pay and the afore mentioned "development" costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
It costs several million dollars to license the Unreal engine for use in a game, plus royalties on your next 3 games regardless if you use the engine in them all or not.
That's part of it. Now for companies who don't license an engine, yes marketing is a big chunk, but so is salary and rent for 3-5 years. Games don't get made quickly.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Again it is the industry hurting itself. So why should the consumers pay for this bullshit over, and over again. Just let it melt down like a similar industry did recently because it got everything it wants the past 30 odd years (Reaganonics) and finally imploded due to naked greed and entitlement issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Royalties on the next 3 whether or not you use the engine? There's more ethical problems with that than the used sales.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I don't disagree, but thats why some companies don't license it.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
I can agree that used sales are probably more detrimental, but without them, the industry would die out.
As you claim, it costs millions to make a title. While that is true, I say a majority of those expenses are squandered instead of truly being necessary. There are tons of publisher fees and such, especially from the big 3 that raises the prices so they can get their cut, not the devs. Devs don't necessarily get bonuses until their title hits a high amount of sales, typically 1m+. These days, it isn't common to hit such sales, even if your game is awesome, it may end up as a sleeper.
When used titles aren't available, then they must have a new copy for your "theory" to work, yes? This isn't always the case, and Gamestop knows this, which is why they have customers show their demand by making pre-orders. If this demand isn't shown, then the demand would have to out-strip the supply, and gamestop would have to refer to another store nearby that may have a copy. The consumer, likely wouldn't like this and go to another locale, but what if they don't find their new title still? A lack of used & new copies, what would a customer do? Probably forget about the title, go seeking for a copy to borrow or worse, pirate. Not every customer will buy a new title, even if there are no used copies.
Customers are picky and do like deals, but they weigh their option on buying new vs used. The problem is that gaming is barely hitting mainstream on a scale of like movies. If they take away the used sales, some of those budget consumers will likely make even less purchases,since they can't trade in to make some more back on the previous purchase.
If you go seeking old titles, you'll have a hard time finding some specific titles, and I'm sure many won't bother with damaged used copies, so they may just pirate it. Squeezing money out of customers won't always yield more money, it may turn them off of buying new entirely.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
If GS couldn't sell used copies, I would assume they would do like most stores selling most products, they would stock enough to handle their standard demand. Order more when stock gets low before it goes out.
Stores are prefectly capable of this, GS and EB just don't because they make more money from sued sales then they do off new sales, because they don't have to pay anyone for the used game.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
If they couldn't sell used copies, GS may not exist and we'd only have Wal-Mart and probably Game-Crazy. There aren't many other retailers that buy tons of new stock, and if GS died out, there'd be a difficult way to asses how much stock should go to which store in Wal-mart, I can't be certain of how they allocate or how much they order but it probably would only order more if there's empty cases, which is rarely the case for most games in Wal-Mart. When you order, you place it, and it can take several business days to arrive, by then that customer may have sought another retailer. It isn't that beneficial to leave a customer hanging like that, they'll likely seek another retailer out.
It isn't necessarily greed, it is supply and demand. Yes, they do make more sales from used titles, but very few stores rarely force the purchase on the consumer. Some just can't simply wait or want to save the $5 for a physical copy that won't be in perfect condition.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
Exactly, but if the used games weren't there to buy, and the consumer went to another store to buy the new copy, the money goes back to the developer. Regardless of where the new game is purchased form the money goes to the same end. I don't care if GS and EB close permanently and I only have Best Buy and Walmart to by from. GA and EB don't offer anythign unique except the used game sales, which I feel are wrong, so I'm not concerned with them surviving over any other store.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
This doesn't mean they'll have the copy. If they don't know the demand, they probably don't have enough supply. This doesn't mean they'll get a new sale at all, there is no copy left! This leads to used sales or they'll try ebay or perhaps an illicit thing.
I'm not saying you should care entirely about GS/EB but that means you won't be getting as many sales as you likely would. Not everyone goes to each store and cutting off a large chunk of new sales isn't necessarily healthy for the industry at large. If GS/EB goes under, it wouldn't surprise me if sales hit an all-time low and used game sales spike up in other places.
Re: Atari's Phil Harrison Weighs in on Used Game Trade Debate
You do realize that some Best-Buys sell used CD's right? Should they be shut down because of this heinous action? Or what about the items that someone bought new (like a controller) and returned because they didn't like it? Best Buy already paid the maker of the controller for it, so when it gets marked down to sell since it was already opened, they are taking that hit. Sold twice though.
Zen aka Jeremy Powers
Editor and Host of the Zenspath Podcast (now on iTunes)
www.ZensPath.com
XBL: "PsychoticZen" PSN: "Zenspath"
Nintendo Network: "Psychoticzen", 3DS: "0860-3238-7260