THQ: Buying used games is "cheating".

[greylord]

I don't know anything about Elemental. What issues does it have?

 

For many it won't even start. That's pretty bad. Other's who can get it to start get a white screen, or the computer controlled enemies don't do anything, or don't expand...and only 1 in 5 battles work for some reviewers. Part of the reason is that some retailers broke the sale date and started selling early so Stardock released a gold master version of the game on site early. They patched it pretty quick to try to bring it up to version 0, and that first intermittent temporary patch actually was okay for fixing some of the problems. Then they released another patch and that one seems to have recurred most of the problems of the original release. They have come out and theorized that some of the problems are from a mix of 64 bit Win 7 and Ati cards, which they have been able to reproduce. They are listening to the reports and trying to reproduce the problems, so hopefully should have it all good pretty soon. It means that you probably will get the better copy if you have downloaded the copy from them rather then the hardcopy version in the store that was released early?

 

I had forgotten the game released this week, otherwise I probably would have been in the pre-release trying to get the game to work as well. However, with their stance on Gamer rights, as well as their talking to the fans and buyers of the game (which is always a good sign when you have the developers and designers intermingling with the others, which is also a good thing about Obsidian) keeping them informed what they've found and what they are working on for the patches, means that I'll still support them despite the buggy original release.

[Hassat Hunter]

Game publishers, and software publishers in general, seem to think they're above the free market. They've already diluted the concept of ownership in a way no other industry has managed to do.

You haven't heard of the "Music Industry", right? They want to put tax on HD's, DVD's, MP3 players and the like because "They will be used for illegal music anyway". The games industry isn't nowhere near as diluded as these guys.

Another great invention was making CD's that wouldn't work in car radio's, your PC(!) and such. Brilliant! ****ing coaster indeed.

and libraries can buy your book once and then let people borrow it for decades.

I am pretty sure libraries, as well as video-rental-shops have to buy more for their copy. Games rental still doesn't do this though, so there's an additional loss post right there.

I think EA/BioWare was very smart in the way it

[Oner]

Game publishers, and software publishers in general, seem to think they're above the free market. They've already diluted the concept of ownership in a way no other industry has managed to do.

You haven't heard of the "Music Industry", right? They want to put tax on HD's, DVD's, MP3 players and the like because "They will be used for illegal music anyway". The games industry isn't nowhere near as diluded as these guys.

Another great invention was making CD's that wouldn't work in car radio's, your PC(!) and such. Brilliant! ****ing coaster indeed.

My favorite case was when they wanted to sue an elderly store worker lady, because she sang in the store, thereby letting people listen to copyrighted songs for free.

And that was after they threatened them into not using a radio in the store.

[Nepenthe]

Then you can just import them from Estonia, problem solved

 

What? They sell other products than booze and cigarettes in Estonia? Why was I not told

 

You'd probably be unhappily surprised by all the stuff you can get from Estonia you can't get from Finland. I know I've been

[Amentep]

and libraries can buy your book once and then let people borrow it for decades.

I am pretty sure libraries, as well as video-rental-shops have to buy more for their copy. Games rental still doesn't do this though, so there's an additional loss post right there.

 

Actually from people I know who work in Libraries for books they pay the price set by the vendor, which is typically the MSRP.

 

Right now, I'm told, the big money is making Libraries pay for online databases which seem to be the popular resource for research at least and for which the companies charge more for.

 

Actually for college there's big money in textbooks; the textbook companies don't try to put the used textbook stores out of business, but what they do is release new books every 2-3 years and hope the universities follow suit of adopting the book, ensuring that there's a limited shelf-life in a particular edition.

 

It seems that this was the approach that had been used in the past, updating Madden or Smackdown vs Raw every year, but now for some reason that's not enough for the game publishers.

 

Still not sure the expense of producing a game means one has to be forced to use the disc as a coaster because the game publishers decided that the used game market was affecting their bottom line (which I should add, I'm not sure is actually the case; I think the majority of people who buy used games wouldn't have bought the game if it wasn't used so I don't think they'll see the upswing in consumers from killing the second hand market for games.)

That was probably the idea until it became just clear how much money GameStop is making out of this.

I am sure if libraries make millions of bucks a year booksellers would want a slice too. But I don't think libraries do financially *that* well...

 

I'm not sure what GameStop making money has to do with this - I don't see Ford, Chevrolet, GM, etc trying to shut down CarMax.

 

And its not like Used Games is an easy money-making proposition; I remember the late box-store Media Play had great failure with their used game initiative.

[Walsingham]

**** THQ. I've never liked them, for the prosaic reason that I've never even had a civil, let alone competent, interaction with their customer services.

[Purkake]

Then you can just import them from Estonia, problem solved

 

What? They sell other products than booze and cigarettes in Estonia? Why was I not told

 

You'd probably be unhappily surprised by all the stuff you can get from Estonia you can't get from Finland. I know I've been

You have Mountain Dew, so we're even

[ginji]

I could be wrong but I think the solution is incredibly easy.

 

I NEVER buy day-one. I hate Gamestop but i do a lot of videogame shopping via online stores. Why? Because I can't afford 60 Euros.

That's it.

 

I buy games, NEW (so my money should go to THQ too... actually, I don't have or like any of their games, but this is another story) for 20-30 Euros, by waiting a couple of months. The only game I've bought day-one in this generation was Ninja Gaiden 2, because it was close to my birthday (and because i love it). If games were sold for 40€ instead of 60€, i could buy day one much more.

 

The used-games market is so simple: people buy used because 60 bucks for a game is a crazy price. That's it.

They make it sound like I'm pirating games I'm not stealing anything, but I don't have a money tree in my living room. If that means I have to wait for 5-6 months before I can play with a game, I'm happy with that. They're always selling, after all, and even a sell 6 months away from day-one counts.

 

 

 

To make this very short: dear THQ, want the gamers to buy new? Lower that damn price.

Edited August 26, 2010 by ginji

[Wrath of Dagon]

A book takes may be 6 months for one person to produce. A game could take years and a team of 100+ in addition to outsourcing. The economics are just completely different.

 

I don

Edited August 26, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Nepenthe]

Then you can just import them from Estonia, problem solved

 

What? They sell other products than booze and cigarettes in Estonia? Why was I not told

 

You'd probably be unhappily surprised by all the stuff you can get from Estonia you can't get from Finland. I know I've been

You have Mountain Dew, so we're even

 

Looks like I can be surprised by the stuff you can't get in Estonia, either.

[Calax]

and libraries can buy your book once and then let people borrow it for decades.

I am pretty sure libraries, as well as video-rental-shops have to buy more for their copy. Games rental still doesn't do this though, so there's an additional loss post right there.

 

Actually from people I know who work in Libraries for books they pay the price set by the vendor, which is typically the MSRP.

 

Right now, I'm told, the big money is making Libraries pay for online databases which seem to be the popular resource for research at least and for which the companies charge more for.

 

Actually for college there's big money in textbooks; the textbook companies don't try to put the used textbook stores out of business, but what they do is release new books every 2-3 years and hope the universities follow suit of adopting the book, ensuring that there's a limited shelf-life in a particular edition.

 

It seems that this was the approach that had been used in the past, updating Madden or Smackdown vs Raw every year, but now for some reason that's not enough for the game publishers.

 

Still not sure the expense of producing a game means one has to be forced to use the disc as a coaster because the game publishers decided that the used game market was affecting their bottom line (which I should add, I'm not sure is actually the case; I think the majority of people who buy used games wouldn't have bought the game if it wasn't used so I don't think they'll see the upswing in consumers from killing the second hand market for games.)

That was probably the idea until it became just clear how much money GameStop is making out of this.

I am sure if libraries make millions of bucks a year booksellers would want a slice too. But I don't think libraries do financially *that* well...

 

I'm not sure what GameStop making money has to do with this - I don't see Ford, Chevrolet, GM, etc trying to shut down CarMax.

 

And its not like Used Games is an easy money-making proposition; I remember the late box-store Media Play had great failure with their used game initiative.

Well A) not every game runs with SvR or Maddens formula, nor can they.

B) As I mentioned before, Ford, Chevy, and GM all have a parts market that the used cars play into so they still get a profit return from the movement of used cars even if they don't get any money from the sale itself.

 

And I don't know Media Play's model, but Gamestop at least gets almost a 50% return for reselling a game (buying it brand new from a customer for like 25 bucks, and then selling it for 55)

[Hurlshort]

Geez, folks are really jumping on THQ for this. Let's look at the actual quote:

 

"I don't think we really care whether used game buyers are upset because new game buyers get everything", THQ's creative director for wrestling titles told Gamasutra. "So if used game buyers are upset they don't get the online feature set I don't really have much sympathy for them".

 

He is clearly answering a question here, although that was conveniently left out of the article. People are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

[Amentep]

He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

 

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't?

[Purkake]

Because people will pay for it and not care.

 

You'll need more than a bunch of whining on the internet to get a message across to a game publisher.

[Amentep]

Well A) not every game runs with SvR or Maddens formula, nor can they.

 

Never said they could.

 

I still don't see that as a reason for nerfing used games (and again, I don't think this will stay at nerfing online content; if this persists its inevitable to this alarmist in me that they'll start doing this to offline content).

 

B) As I mentioned before, Ford, Chevy, and GM all have a parts market that the used cars play into so they still get a profit return from the movement of used cars even if they don't get any money from the sale itself.

 

And I don't know Media Play's model, but Gamestop at least gets almost a 50% return for reselling a game (buying it brand new from a customer for like 25 bucks, and then selling it for 55)

 

The parts is a fair point BUT cars also have a longer life than the average game (as DLC/Expansions for most games still don't seem to be common). It seems to me the appropriate model would be for the game companies to, you know, make stuff that consumers would buy new for their used games as opposed to trying to discourage them buying used games. But that would require work when instead they can just cut out online content to used buyers without having to lift a finger.

 

Media Play's model seemed similar to Gamestops at the time from the outside looking in (but I didn't work at either store so can't really argue the mechanics). Mind you since Media Play eventually failed totally and Gamestop didn't, it could have been down to the companies involved.

[Hurlshort]

He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

 

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't?

 

No, because online content is an extra. If you folks want to stick with the car comparison, think of it as a manufacturer's warranty.

 

There are a lot of reasons for this. If we are talking about multiplayer games with servers, that is an extra cost for the developer/publisher to run. They work that into the price of a new game. They have no obligation to provide that service to people who do not buy the game from them.

[Amentep]

Because people will pay for it and not care.

 

I care...damnit...I care...

 

You'll need more than a bunch of whining on the internet to get a message across to a game publisher.

 

Well given that I think they'll find this policy won't lead to a big bump in their sales, maybe that will learn them.

 

Or I could be wrong and everyone will just go with it and one day in the future you won't be able to play a game unless you bought it new. And if you buy it new and don't like it your only option is to add it to your stack of worthless discs that you use as a coaster.

[Purkake]

Because people will pay for it and not care.

 

I care...damnit...I care...

You'll need to start buying a lot more copies for it to matter.

 

You'll need more than a bunch of whining on the internet to get a message across to a game publisher.

 

Well given that I think they'll find this policy won't lead to a big bump in their sales, maybe that will learn them.

 

Or I could be wrong and everyone will just go with it and one day in the future you won't be able to play a game unless you bought it new. And if you buy it new and don't like it your only option is to add it to your stack of worthless discs that you use as a coaster.

As long as it won't lead to a big decline, the extra income will lead to a nice bump in the profits.

Edited August 26, 2010 by Purkake

[Amentep]

He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

 

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't?

 

No, because online content is an extra. If you folks want to stick with the car comparison, think of it as a manufacturer's warranty.

 

There are a lot of reasons for this. If we are talking about multiplayer games with servers, that is an extra cost for the developer/publisher to run. They work that into the price of a new game. They have no obligation to provide that service to people who do not buy the game from them.

 

Why would Madden 2010 or SvR have multiplayer servers? Seems to me if you're going to use servers and charge to use them, you'd be better off using a MMO model (which I don't have a problem with).

 

But again my BIG protestation over this (just like with EA) is that I don't think its going to just stay on "extra" online content.

[Hurlshort]

I still don't see that as a reason for nerfing used games (and again, I don't think this will stay at nerfing online content; if this persists its inevitable to this alarmist in me that they'll start doing this to offline content).

 

I'm not quite sure how it would even be possible to nerf the offline content. I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, it would be pretty difficult for a publisher to get at it without going into my house and smashing the DVD with a hammer.

[Amentep]

I still don't see that as a reason for nerfing used games (and again, I don't think this will stay at nerfing online content; if this persists its inevitable to this alarmist in me that they'll start doing this to offline content).

 

I'm not quite sure how it would even be possible to nerf the offline content. I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, it would be pretty difficult for a publisher to get at it without going into my house and smashing the DVD with a hammer.

 

By making it so you have to connect online to use it, I'd guess, so that once a disc has been activated for use once it can't be used again and always being online to use it.

 

Again, its the alarmist in me talking. So I may be wrong/crazy.

Edited August 26, 2010 by Amentep

[Hurlshort]

He is right, when you buy a used game, you should not expect to get all the same online stuff.

 

Why not? Because the game company decided you shouldn't?

 

No, because online content is an extra. If you folks want to stick with the car comparison, think of it as a manufacturer's warranty.

 

There are a lot of reasons for this. If we are talking about multiplayer games with servers, that is an extra cost for the developer/publisher to run. They work that into the price of a new game. They have no obligation to provide that service to people who do not buy the game from them.

 

Why would Madden 2010 or SvR have multiplayer servers? Seems to me if you're going to use servers and charge to use them, you'd be better off using a MMO model (which I don't have a problem with).

 

But again my BIG protestation over this (just like with EA) is that I don't think its going to just stay on "extra" online content.

 

Madden does use servers to host multiplayer games and offer extra content like alternate jerseys and junk. It offers them free to people who pay for the game.

 

I have bought Madden used. I honestly have no problem with the idea that I would not be allowed to take part in the online component. That is just one aspect of the game, and if you really want to play it that way, then you should buy a new copy.

[Amentep]

I don't have a way to connect my consoles to online anyhow so its a moot point for me (and probably why I don't pay much attention to the online content of games).

 

Still weird to me that Madden uses servers (I guess it helps keep track of stats so you can compare with your friends/enemies or something)?

Edited August 26, 2010 by Amentep

[Hurlshort]

I still don't see that as a reason for nerfing used games (and again, I don't think this will stay at nerfing online content; if this persists its inevitable to this alarmist in me that they'll start doing this to offline content).

 

I'm not quite sure how it would even be possible to nerf the offline content. I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, it would be pretty difficult for a publisher to get at it without going into my house and smashing the DVD with a hammer.

 

By making it so you have to connect online to use it, I'd guess, so that once a disc has been activated for use once it can't be used again and always being online to use it.

 

Again, its the alarmist in me talking. So I may be wrong/crazy.

 

I am a lot more concerned with Activision's policy of making you always be online to play games that really have no need of an internet connection. You definitely aren't wrong that the idea is out there. I just think that these specific comments by the THQ guy have been blown out of proportion.

[Amentep]

I am a lot more concerned with Activision's policy of making you always be online to play games that really have no need of an internet connection. You definitely aren't wrong that the idea is out there. I just think that these specific comments by the THQ guy have been blown out of proportion.

 

I guess my fear is that this is all part of the same spectrum; that the THQ's guys comments are indicative that they, EA and Activision are going to the same point just at different speeds and coming at it from different directions.

 

I could be wrong, of course.