Developers Fight Used Game Sales

[FoolKiller]

OK, I know this is more gaming related, but as it has more of an economic corporation vs consumer aspect to it I wanted to get general thoughts on this from people who don't typically visit general gaming stuff. If people think it should be moved I will.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/55084

Developers Fight Used Game Sales via New-only DLC for Gears of War 2, NBA Live and Rock Band
by Chris Faylor Oct 03, 2008 9:31am CST

After years of lamenting that they see no kickback from the extremely lucrative used game market, game makers have launched a counter-attack by packing new games with one-use codes for extra content.

New copies of Epic's Gears of War 2 (360) will include a one-use download code that will rewards with 5 additional multiplayer maps, all pulled from the original Gears of War. According to GamePro, these maps will not be available for purchase through the Xbox Live Marketplace, with Epic claiming they are "special gifts [for] our loyal fans."

EA Canada's NBA Live 09 utilizes a similar strategy. The game's much-touted 365 functionality, which brings daily roster and stat updates to the PS3 and Xbox 360 editions, will only be free for those that buy a new copy and redeem the included code. Without the code, that feature will cost $19.99.

"This information and data is very valuable and it wasn't free for us," an EA representative explained on Operation Sports. "T-Mobile is paying for it this year for all users who buy the game new. This is a very expensive tool to use, and if you don't buy it new, then you'll have to pay for this. It isn't greed at all."

Rock Band 2 and the AC/DC Live: Rock Band Track Pack likewise sport one-off codes for exclusive content. Copies of Rock Band 2 include a code that will allow PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii owners to receive 20 free downloadable songs by the year's end, with AC/DC Live packing a similar one-use code to let buyers bring the expansion's 18 tracks into Rock Band or Rock Band 2.

Meanwhile, others seem to be taking a different approach in ensuring that gamers hold on to their purchase for a long while.

Owners of Criterion's Burnout Paradise (PS3, 360) have been serenaded with free downloadable content that have substantially expanded the game since its early 2008 release. The last major download added motorcycles and new challenges to the racing game.

First off, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this from a business viewpoint.

That said, I am a consumer. I like to think that I am a smart consumer. At least I am smart enough to know how to get used games for cheaper than GameStop sells them. I use Gamefly, get $5 coupons every few months, 10% off every purchase, free shipping, and don't spend gas getting the game. It combines Blockbuster and GameStop for less money than doing both. As such, this angers me. I actually use a rental service to buy my used games from and so game companies still get a chunk of money from me before I buy the used game. So, for being smart and respectful of developers profits I am going to be punished.

That is my initial reaction.

Then I started to think about it. How much would this really affect me? The kind of games that I would want DLC for (MGS, Gran Turismo, Rock Band, Warhawk, LittleBigPlanet) I buy new anyway so that the developers do get my money. With MGS4 they offered me a used copy, but I turned it down. That is when it hit me, I am loyal to the games that matter and all my used purchases are games I didn't expect to want to keep.

That said, I still don't like how they are doing this and treating people who are still buying and playing games, albeit used, on consoles the same way they do pirates on PC.

As the article pointed out some games find the best way to keep people buying new games is to eliminate the consumer's desire to sell the game. Now, I think that is more telling than anything else. If a developer is struggling to keep gamers playing a game over long periods of time then perhaps it isn't the retail business that is the problem?

In short, my thoughts are that this is not a major issue as it does not affect me very much and I understand a developer's desire to pull in profit from every sale.

That said, I think this should be a sign that they need to look at a couple of things:
1) Developers are not putting faith in digital distribution, which would eliminate used sales.

2) Developers don't have faith in their game's long-term playability/viability.

3) If used sales are large enough to affect their business perhaps they need to rethink current pricing structures, especially when a new vs used game price difference is $5 on popular title, but that is enough to motivate a consumer. It is possible they just broke that barrier where many aren't willing to pay the going new price. I know I often see a popular game that is only available new and decide to hold off because I can save 25% by buying it used even if it means waiting.


So what do you guys think? Are the game developers becoming evil? Or is it a sign that the quality has not increased with the pricing?

Would this affect your purchasing decisions? What if this were something non-game related?

 

[Pupik]

First off, I think it's a great idea for developers to create good reasons to keep gamers lined up and excited for new games, and a reason to keep them playing. But there comes a point where the average gamer is going to put $60 + $40 together in their head, and realize that most, if any, games are not worth that kind of money.

Maybe if they made a product that wasn't so disposable, they wouldn't care about the $10-20/each used market. And if the games were better prepared and tested, they wouldn't need much in the way of updating in the first place.

I'm not much a game player anymore; I buy about one new or used game a year. But what's to stop crackers from creating keygens that will enable the used game and/or pirated copy to make a code for the updates anyhow? Maybe I don't fully understand this, but all in all, it's not a terrible idea.

Edit: Come to think of it, I think many of the "upcoming" used games out there are never going to get updates anyhow; if the sales figures aren't impressive, they developers move on to something else. I highly doubt every game based on a movie or TV show is getting any added content in the first place.

Oh, and then comes the underground sales of these unused codes because some game players are utterly apathetic about the game...

 

[TheCracker]

Then I started to think about it. How much would this really affect me? The kind of games that I would want DLC for (MGS, Gran Turismo, Rock Band, Warhawk, LittleBigPlanet) I buy new anyway so that the developers do get my money. With MGS4 they offered me a used copy, but I turned it down. That is when it hit me, I am loyal to the games that matter and all my used purchases are games I didn't expect to want to keep.

Like yourself, the games i really want i'll buy new, so it won't really effect me.

Who it will effect are those people, who are probably mostly kids, who play a lot of games but don't perhaps have the disposable income that the older generation of more discerning gamers with less free time do.

People like this can only buy a £40 game in the knowledge that when they've finished it or had enough of it, they can sell it on (or trade it in) and get some money back to put towards their next game. By stopping this you will alienate casual and sell-through gamers from buying your products. I'd imagine that people in this demographic make-up quite a high percentage of the gaming population.

 

[Tornado]

1) Developers are not putting faith in digital distribution, which would eliminate used sales.

Digital distribution is the first step towards the rampant, PC-gaming-like piracy; and none of the consoles on the market can support the sales strategy anyways.

3) If used sales are large enough to affect their business perhaps they need to rethink current pricing structures, especially when a new vs used game price difference is $5 on popular title, but that is enough to motivate a consumer. It is possible they just broke that barrier where many aren't willing to pay the going new price. I know I often see a popular game that is only available new and decide to hold off because I can save 25% by buying it used even if it means waiting.

This is the real problem I think, which could just as easily be helped by lowering average game cost. Not solved, mind you, but helped.


Personally, I wish the game industry would come up with a way to completely eliminate Gamestop.

 

[Mark T]

edit.

 

[FoolKiller]

Personally, I wish the game industry would come up with a way to completely eliminate Gamestop.

Well, if you've seen some of the comments from Microsoft and Sony they seem to think that digital distribution is the way to do this.

You can already see Sony heading in this direction by making a digital version available on the PSN Store for all first-party PSP titles. However, I think that this may just be a Sony strategy for encouraging more Sony Memory Stick sales. Some of those games are over 1GB.

I do not see myself jumping on digital distribution. I have purchased a couple of movies, but since learning that I would lose them if I upgrade my hard drive I have stopped. Sony makes redownloading a game painless, but if they go the way movies have in an attempt to prevent piracy then I may just stop buying downloadable games as well.

I think game developers understand this aspect of consumers when it comes to console games and as such would rather attempt to prevent used game sales. Console makers are pushing digital just because they then get the share of the sale that the stores would normally get.

I honestly wonder if this will not become a threeway battle between console makers, third-party developers, and brick and mortar retailers.

The funny thing is that this would all be less of a hassle if retailers and developer groups, like the ESA, could sit down and negotiate a percentage of used sales to go to developers.

The way I see this going is that you will have many games that have DLC immediately available at launch, and that kind of thing can turn a gamer off, even if the original purchaser of the game gets it for free.

I intend to watch this closely because it has a new aspect that is not seen in these kinds of business struggles. Typically you have the producer of a product, the retailer, and the consumer. In that normal business model the end result is designed to be mutually beneficial to all parties involved. However, in this case used sales are much more pronounced than in other businesses and you have a fourth party involved in the console makers.

It will be interesting to watch.

 

[TheCracker]

I don't see car manufacturers moaning about used-car sales and wanting a piece of that pie. Perhaps car manufactures (and most other industries for that matter) understand that if their products are good in the first place, people will always come back for more. If you start telling paying customers what they can or can't do with something they own you'll piss people off and they'll stop buying your product. Doesn't seem like a good way of encouraging brand loyalty to me.

 

[Sage]

Digital distribution has to win at some point. I just can’t see how in 50 years you’d still have to go to a brick-and-mortar store to buy something that can be retrieved digitally – that seems insane to me. Every console maker (and any other company that makes digital products) should right now have their best minds looking at how to distribute on the net, work around piracy issues, etc.

 

[buickgnx88]

I think that point would be when larger hard drives/memory space is cheap, and perhaps when high-speed internet can go down in price a bit.

 

[Joey D]

Lame. I pretty much only ever buy used console games unless I know I'm going to be playing it for a long time. Like when GT5 comes out I'll buy it new because it will give me many many many hours of game play, but something like say Call of Duty I'll get used because once I play through it I'll trade it in towards something else.

 

[Sureboss]

Wouldn't it be easier to just increase your selling price for new games to cover the lose of used games?

Then again, I doubt it is something that would bother my boss in the slightest. Okay, the game isn't sold on the level of NBA, etc and I don't really see it 2nd hand, but I don't think it's that major an issue.

 

[FoolKiller]

Every console maker (and any other company that makes digital products) should right now have their best minds looking at how to distribute on the net, work around piracy issues, etc.

The problem is that the best options they have come up with so far has been DRM. And in one hand DRM is OK, but on the other it creates a pain for consumers.

For example: I bought Gattica on the PlayStation Store. I was ready to jump on this digital distribution thing. But, unlike games, movies do not stay in your download list. I knew that going in and did not think anything of it.
Seeing that I liked the quality and the PS3 would do some minor upscaling I started looking at 320Gb hard drives. Then I read the article explaining how when you back up your hard drive on to a new one the movies do not copy over. This is fine when games do it, but only because you can just redownload them. There is no redownloading of the movies.

Then, when my dad said that he had never seen the movie I could not let him borrow it without letting him borrow my PS3 or PSP, and while I have no qualms loaning out a $10 DVD I am not loaning out expensive electronics.

Before digital distribution catches on they have to find a way for me to use it on any of my machines or to let someone borrow it. I don't move my DVD player from TV to TV, no I just take it over to them.

The same thing with digital games. I can't let anyone borrow them or even take it over to their house without movie my system or giving them access to my PSN account.

Sure, I don't drive to the store, which is convenient, but that few minutes worth of time saved risks a much bigger inconvenience if my hardware breaks down.

And I won't even get into the hassle of digital movie rentals on the PS Store.

I think that point would be when larger hard drives/memory space is cheap, and perhaps when high-speed internet can go down in price a bit.

And then there is this. Hard drives will reach the necessary point soon, if they haven't already. But high-speed Internet needs to border on fiber speeds for your average guy to really make this convenient.

Wouldn't it be easier to just increase your selling price for new games to cover the lose of used games?

The issue is that they want less people buying used games. Why do people buy used in the first place? To save money. If current prices have enough people doing it to be an issue an increase will not help. Every price increase will see more people not buying as many games on launch so they can pick it up used. Eventually you would only see the most popular games having good launch day sales.

It is basically the same issue as piracy on PC. When prices have gone up on new games to recover piracy losses the piracy went up too.

 

[magburner]

I think that this will have a detrimental effect on the games industry, just as DRM had on digital music sales, I also believe that it would greatly stifle creativity. I don't mind the one-off codes for game content, they are a good idea, but they WILL harm the grass roots of gaming. Second hand games are as much a part of gaming as the consoles themselves. Denying some the opportunity of buying a second hand game seems like a knee-jerk reaction to me.

Why don't they reward loyal gamers with money off coupons from future releases instead? They could use those money off coupons for their 'nearly' games, yunno, the ones that are not too bad, but have got bad press. There are a couple of games I want to try, but I'm not going to stump up full whack for them.

Anyway, this is a moot point because you can buy new titles for a lot less than the suggested price either on-line, or your local supermarket. I brought Civ:Rev for ~ £29 from Asda - that's a saving of at least £10 on some retailers. Are they going to stop that practice too?

Someone mentioned that downloadable content is the way forward. Maybe it is if you have a terabyte hard drive. How much space would a game like GT5 take for instance? Your not going to fit many games on a hard drive if thats the case! The sad fact is that hard copies of games are going to be around for the foreseeable future, because of Sony's insistence on using the Blu-Ray format. kinda looks like they shot themselves in the foot with that one!

 

[FoolKiller]

I don't mind the one-off codes for game content, they are a good idea, but they WILL harm the grass roots of gaming. Second hand games are as much a part of gaming as the consoles themselves. Denying some the opportunity of buying a second hand game seems like a knee-jerk reaction to me.

I think I see the best encouragement to buy new coming out of LittleBigPlanet. People who have the game week one will get some week one only DLC items. They are just character costumes, but one of them is a pretty sweet costume (spacesuit, for launch....their joke, not mine). I think this kind of incentive is an awesome route to go. If you buy it new and early you get something cool but it does not ruin the game for anyone that doesn't have it, nor is it something that costs extra money to get, because you can't get it otherwise. Although if it becomes paid DLC later is to be seen. They also had a number of fairly cool preorder bonuses. That is another thing I like. By preordering the game I am getting multiple new costumes that not everyone will have, but it won't ruin the game for anyone that doesn't.

Why don't they reward loyal gamers with money off coupons from future releases instead? They could use those money off coupons for their 'nearly' games, yunno, the ones that are not too bad, but have got bad press. There are a couple of games I want to try, but I'm not going to stump up full whack for them.

Or coupon codes for things like small PSN games. Qore annual subscribers are getting Calling All Cars for free. The official PS3 bundles have a free code for Pain.

Or they could even have a mini-game add-on that is only available with a one-time code.

Anyway, this is a moot point because you can buy new titles for a lot less than the suggested price either on-line, or your local supermarket. I brought Civ:Rev for ~ £29 from Asda - that's a saving of at least £10 on some retailers. Are they going to stop that practice too?

They don't mind that because they still get their share. The discount is created by the retailer after they have basically paid the publisher for the game, or it is based on a deal they worked out with the publisher ahead of time. Publishers see zero dollars from used sales.

Someone mentioned that downloadable content is the way forward. Maybe it is if you have a terabyte hard drive.

That is not that impossible of an idea for the next generation of consoles. They are getting fairly affordable as it is now (not affordable enough for me) and so if you figure new consoles will be out in the next three years or so then it could be possible.

How much space would a game like GT5 take for instance?

And looking at this, I think a hardcore gamer will need more than a terabyte.

Your not going to fit many games on a hard drive if thats the case! The sad fact is that hard copies of games are going to be around for the foreseeable future, because of Sony's insistence on using the Blu-Ray format. kinda looks like they shot themselves in the foot with that one!

Don't forget that the Blu-Ray comes with a scratch resistant coating too, so it makes it much more appealing to buy used because you don't have to worry about the physical condition of the BD. I know that I personally tell people at birthdays and Christmas that if they want to get me a PS3 game to look for it used first because the disc quality will likely be fine.

 

[magburner]

Don't forget that the Blu-Ray comes with a scratch resistant coating too, so it makes it much more appealing to buy used because you don't have to worry about the physical condition of the BD. I know that I personally tell people at birthdays and Christmas that if they want to get me a PS3 game to look for it used first because the disc quality will likely be fine.

Call me old fashioned, but I prefer a hard copy of a game. Heck, I still buy CDs from the local shop (never online). Something about holding it, I dunno!

One thing I was wondering, is this. Have these guys done any research on how likely a guy is to buy a game if he only had the option of paying full price?

 

[Casio]

Before digital distribution catches on they have to find a way for me to use it on any of my machines or to let someone borrow it. I don't move my DVD player from TV to TV, no I just take it over to them.

I've been thinking about this, and thought of a possible solution.

Playstation could release their own USB drive, when purchase you digitally sign it in one way or another (Perhaps tie it to a specific MAC address or PS3 Serial ID) so that only 1 Playstation can Read/Write to the Drive, all other PS3s can Read off the drive (ie, play the movies) but not copy/add/delete off it in any way. If done in the propietary PS3 file format, then hopefully their wouldn't be too much of a problem with people reading/copying from PC either.

In regards to second hand games, I think there has been a problem in the market for years, especially in the PC market, because most online games have restrictions on CD-Keys being used simultaniously online. I knew heaps people who brought Diablo II and Warcraft III, just for the install and CD-Key, as soon as they got a working No-CD/Loader off the internet they traded in the game. The game is pretty much ruined for the used buyer because they cannot play online whenever they want to.

 

[niky]

I don't see car manufacturers moaning about used-car sales and wanting a piece of that pie. Perhaps car manufactures (and most other industries for that matter) understand that if their products are good in the first place, people will always come back for more. If you start telling paying customers what they can or can't do with something they own you'll piss people off and they'll stop buying your product. Doesn't seem like a good way of encouraging brand loyalty to me.

Just wait. The US market has been immune to grumblings about used cars, simply because it was big enough that new car sales were good despite this fact, but given the current crunch...

Our country bans (or tries to ban it... intermittently) used car importation... because different tax structures overseas means that a secondhand car, even after local taxing, from another country, will cost much less than a brand new or even comparable secondhand car here. The loca autoindustry claims it hurts sales... but who're they kidding... it's not used cars that hurt sales... it's high prices. And that's what hurts videogames, too.

The issue is that they want less people buying used games. Why do people buy used in the first place? To save money. If current prices have enough people doing it to be an issue an increase will not help. Every price increase will see more people not buying as many games on launch so they can pick it up used. Eventually you would only see the most popular games having good launch day sales.

It is basically the same issue as piracy on PC. When prices have gone up on new games to recover piracy losses the piracy went up too.

To spend brand new prices on a game like Call of Duty or GTAIV, games which you know you can finish and get bored of quickly, is utter madness.

I actually sympathize with the developers (more than the retailers or dorks like the RIAA) because these are the guys who make the games. If the developers are losing money, that means less games for us... I guess it's a combination of more competition, rampant piracy, greater customer expectations and higher development costs.

I like the way they want to go about it... bonus content for brand new buyers. As long as it's just bonus content and they don't shortchange you if you buy the game but never bother to update it online.

----

The best way, I think, to go about it is to implement a personal identification key. One that's cheap to make, easy to replace, and encrypted well enough so that it's relatively unhackable. (give online stores check codes that will raise a red flag the instant someone tries to use a cracker). This would allow the infinite copying, recopying and reinstalling of digital content for the keyholder who has paid for the item.

I mean, if a USB security key is enough for sensitive software costing in the tens of thousands of dollars... why not for games?

 

[Casio]

I've never purchased a game used, I personally don't think the price of games is that bad. When I think about it, sure, a game costs a lot of money, about $100-$119 here, but then I think about the amount I'll play it and it's not so bad. For example, the other day I registered exactly 2 days online play time on COD4, so a $100 game, ends up costing me so far about $2.08 an hour to play. Which I think is pretty good, if I went to an Arcade I'd probably pay $2 for a 5 minute game, or I could spend $15 on a 90 minute movie.

 

[Sniffs]

this seems to not have in mind us retro-gamers who prefer to play the original format with still working original hardware (though some of us would dearly love to be able to do a little cross-platform code hacking). DLC is perfectly acceptable for modern games, and owners of modern consoles. however, the industry doesn't seem to keep track of the fact that there are still people out there who can't afford a modern console.

someone also made the "cheap" argument, here. another thing the industry doesn't notice. I wish these money-hungry morons would listen to the people for once in their corporate lives. it's the consumer that determines which consoles, games, and developers make the money. i think they've forgotten the Big Atari Crash of 1983 when they were glutted with hyper-cheaps, or that's the only thing they remember, and want to prevent that from ever happening again. capitalism may be annoying, but every other ism fails, too, because they tend to get stuck in one time period and not develop.
If only every other system of doing things didn't automatically smack of Communisim to the US Psyche (like listening to their customers), things like this wouldn't happen.

 

[Joey D]

I've never purchased a game used, I personally don't think the price of games is that bad. When I think about it, sure, a game costs a lot of money, about $100-$119 here, but then I think about the amount I'll play it and it's not so bad. For example, the other day I registered exactly 2 days online play time on COD4, so a $100 game, ends up costing me so far about $2.08 an hour to play. Which I think is pretty good, if I went to an Arcade I'd probably pay $2 for a 5 minute game, or I could spend $15 on a 90 minute movie.

While there are some games that are easily worth the price new, or even worth more then the price there are many sub-par games which aren't. I mean I fail to see how a game that lasts maybe 10 hours is worth paying $60 for. If I'm going to shell out the money for a game I want it to last a while, games like Diablo, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Gran Turismo, Forza, and KOTOR are all games I feel were more then worth their price new. But there are several games I've bought and thought "that's it?"

 

[FoolKiller]

this seems to not have in mind us retro-gamers who prefer to play the original format with still working original hardware (though some of us would dearly love to be able to do a little cross-platform code hacking). DLC is perfectly acceptable for modern games, and owners of modern consoles. however, the industry doesn't seem to keep track of the fact that there are still people out there who can't afford a modern console.

Yet, the PS2 is still fully supported.

someone also made the "cheap" argument, here. another thing the industry doesn't notice. I wish these money-hungry morons would listen to the people for once in their corporate lives. it's the consumer that determines which consoles, games, and developers make the money. i think they've forgotten the Big Atari Crash of 1983 when they were glutted with hyper-cheaps, or that's the only thing they remember, and want to prevent that from ever happening again. capitalism may be annoying, but every other ism fails, too, because they tend to get stuck in one time period and not develop.
If only every other system of doing things didn't automatically smack of Communisim to the US Psyche (like listening to their customers), things like this wouldn't happen.

I think you were going somewhere with this but got on a greedy corporation tangent and it seems to have been somewhat muddled.

What I took from it was that you think new games should be cheaper. I agree. I think when they broke the $50 point was when I quit looking for new games first.


I make exceptions though for good games/deals.

 

[Casio]

While there are some games that are easily worth the price new, or even worth more then the price there are many sub-par games which aren't. I mean I fail to see how a game that lasts maybe 10 hours is worth paying $60 for. If I'm going to shell out the money for a game I want it to last a while, games like Diablo, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Gran Turismo, Forza, and KOTOR are all games I feel were more then worth their price new. But there are several games I've bought and thought "that's it?"

I think that's kind of a fact of life though. Somethings are worth more money then others, even though paying $60 for a game that lasts 10 hours sucks, if you could spend 10 hours constantly drinking for only $60 then you'd probably think that's good moneys worth.

They all need to be priced the same otherwise people would go crazy as well, what if games that totally suck and give you 5 hours play time cost $10 and then games that you play constantly to the point of addiction cost $200-300.

 

[Joey D]

I think that's kind of a fact of life though. Somethings are worth more money then others, even though paying $60 for a game that lasts 10 hours sucks, if you could spend 10 hours constantly drinking for only $60 then you'd probably think that's good moneys worth.

They all need to be priced the same otherwise people would go crazy as well, what if games that totally suck and give you 5 hours play time cost $10 and then games that you play constantly to the point of addiction cost $200-300.

Well what I think isn't worth $60 for could be seen by someone else as being worth it. There are games I didn't think were worth buying when they came out because they weren't worth the money, but now that there are used copies floating around I see no problem picking them up...even though the game has been out of a long time. Crackdown being one of those games, I picked it up recently for $15 used.

 

[Sniffs]

Yet, the PS2 is still fully supported.

I'm not talking hardware or software. I'm talking extras for those of us that were from either the one button era or the 8 bit hard as a BLEEP era where you had to use a cheat device to get past the first miniboss.

also, it's been kinda hard to find items, games, equipment, and repair services for older consoles. most of the stuff the need is because of under 10-s (most of the current gamers) beating the crap out of peripherals, games, etc, as they were considered "toys" by flustrated parents.

I think you were going somewhere with this but got on a greedy corporation tangent and it seems to have been somewhat muddled.

actually, i got off on a Political tangent. all I'm hearing is how Obama is seen as a Socialist because it's not the fifties-style attitude being projected by MaCain

What I took from it was that you think new games should be cheaper. I agree. I think when they broke the $50 point was when I quit looking for new games first.

video games have always been expensive. even during the Great Atari Glut, the carts were 30 bucks apiece, and not much lower than 21.95. put that in todays money.

I make exceptions though for good games/deals.

this is why I buy games and consoles when they either hit "Greatest Hits" level or are replaced with the next gen. I've kept every one of my consoles except a copy of the Genesis. THAT was a big mistake opn my part.

 

[FoolKiller]

I'm not talking hardware or software. I'm talking extras for those of us that were from either the one button era or the 8 bit hard as a BLEEP era where you had to use a cheat device to get past the first miniboss.

also, it's been kinda hard to find items, games, equipment, and repair services for older consoles. most of the stuff the need is because of under 10-s (most of the current gamers) beating the crap out of peripherals, games, etc, as they were considered "toys" by flustrated parents.

While I cannot help with repair devices, and my advice may end up being useless to you due to location, but locally some of the independent (read: not GameStop) game stores still have entire sections devoted to Atari, NES, Master System, SNES, Genesis and up to new stuff. They are out there, you just have to find them. Places like GameStop are more concerned about selling the new hot ticket item while the independents run it like a hobby shop. If you can find some of those you may get what you want. My local one even has TVs set up for every system so you can actually play a game in the store before purchasing it. This is great for used because you can make sure it is still in working condition.

And I know I saw an Atari-style joystick new once, but it was more expensive than I was willing to play. I still have my old Colecovision with Atari attachment and my Commodore 64. The drive on the Commodore quit working though.

this is why I buy games and consoles when they either hit "Greatest Hits" level or are replaced with the next gen. I've kept every one of my consoles except a copy of the Genesis. THAT was a big mistake opn my part.

I'm a tech junky. This won't work for me. But I do have to make concessions in other areas. Today my lunch will consist of brown whole grain rice.

 

[Sniffs]

at least someone KNOWS what I mean by "rural". most every other place I go on the net, on sights and in forums, most of the users cannot get the idea that there's life outside of urban and suburban areas, and that conditions are more primitive, or services are not available, here, that they are there.

we do now have a local hobby-type shop. they specialize in older systems and games, but still carry a smattering of new material. the only thing they don't have happens to be used 8 bit consoles. they sell a "compatable" unit, instead.

i was also advised that they CAN do repairs to such systems. they give a professional aura, wear uniforms, have a full color-shceme setup, clean down to their salews bags. they come off as fully professional, and I hope they make a major chain status.

 

[Tornado]

Epic Douchebag (snicker) Mike Capps wants to solve the problem by punishing everyone!

Epic boss Mike Capps has told GI that secondhand game sales are a “huge” issue in the US, and he believes the American development industry will start making moves to combat it.
“I think DLC will be increasing in scope just because in the US we really need to make strides against the second-hand market,” he said.
Capps said that models involving restricting content to those who bought the retail product new are being mooted.
“The secondary market is a huge issue in the United States. Our primary retailer makes the majority of its money off of secondary sales, and so you’re starting to see games taking proactive steps toward that by… if you buy the retail version you get the unlock code,” he said.
“I’ve talked to some developers who are saying ‘If you want to fight the final boss you go online and pay USD 20, but if you bought the retail version you got it for free’. We don’t make any money when someone rents it, and we don’t make any money when someone buys it used - way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it.”
More through there.

Linky.


This could be the final straw that blows up the entire console gaming industry if they are seriously stupid enough to push for it. Capps has said some narrow-minded, completely-out-of-touch-with-reality statements in the past, but this one takes the cake.

 

[niky]

I'd agree for the final boss thing... hell.. that means I'll never be buying any of their games... very few games are actually interesting up to the final boss...

 

[Famine]

Apparently Mr. Capps doesn't realise that people rent games for a couple of days to see if they're any good before they decide to buy them. If more people rent than buy (being generous, let's say 50% of purchases are straight purchases, and 50% are from rent-then-buy, leaving only 1 in 4 renters buying the game) then the game obviously isn't good enough to tempt people to buy it...

If people then can't get any money from trading their old games in to buy the new ones, they'll become pickier about what games they do buy, generating a higher rental rate and a lower rent-then-buy rate.

The solution, Mr. Capps, is to make better games. Games that people actually want to buy without trying first. Games that aren't exactly the same as the last one, but with another weapon, or up-to-date player names, or a new map, or a special guest voice actor.


Mind you, with the games industry press still absolutely bogged down in their 73%-or-higher game scores (unless it's really crap), consumers still couldn't tell what was any good until they tried it...

*wistfully remembers Amiga Power, giving 50% to average games, 30% or less to poor games and 70%+ to good games*

 

[TheCracker]

The solution, Mr. Capps, is to make better games. Games that people actually want to buy without trying first. Games that aren't exactly the same as the last one, but with another weapon, or up-to-date player names, or a new map, or a special guest voice actor.

👍 ...If i see one more third person shooter, set slightly in the future, fighting against humanoid aliens....