Lets talk more about game replay ability and selling digital games

[garthvater111]

if you havnt watched the wan show yet you should, but the basic topic i really want to continue is that digital copys of games should (or should not) be re sell-able. Also i think luke and linus did a craptastic job of representing single player games worth going back and replaying, so to prove them wrong lets list a bunch.

 

to start however, i think that its really simple. There is no solid answer, and the ability for companies to allow digital copies of games, and software for that matter, should be clearly laid out that yes it can be sold or no it cant. It could be a selling feature of a game or platform, for example epic could allow you to resell games bought on their platform as a selling feature to get people to use said platform. It should not be a forced feature however. This also gives more value to purchasing a hard copy of a game. I for example still buy hard copies of Nintendo games for my switch. That said, i think forcing companies to disclose exact details of the terms of use should really be what is being fought for. also, there is 0 reason for a company like Dassault Systèmes to be allowed to sell solid works license for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars for some companies, and only thousands for others. imo that is proper bs, but that is a different issue altogether. 

 

 

also games i think are totally re-playable.

- literally every pokemon game, infact the only one i havnt played at least twice is lets go (mostly because im not a big fan of the catching and leveling system). most pokemon games ive played more times than i can keep count

- the elder scrolls games. ive only played skyrim and oblivion, but both ive played several times not even counting the times ive gone back with mods.

- cod zombies, so many freakin great maps i cant even remember them all

- literally every mario game ive played. sunshine, galaxy, odyssey to name a few favs ive replayed

 

 

im sure i have more but these are the most notable examples of single player games ive gone back to

[TempestCatto]

The way I see it, if it's going to hurt the devs, I'd rather then stick to what will help them in the long run. If that means I can't re-sell a game, so be it. I'd rather devs not go under just because people could re-sell their digital copies of games. Yeah sure, they can make a new game. But it takes lots of time and money to develop one before you can even release a public beta. So we have to help them stay afloat somehow. 

 

I am reminded of Game Stop, and how they'll buy back a game for pennies on the dollar but then sell it back for almost half (if not more) than retail price. If it were on Ebay, for example, people would start undercutting eachother and eventually you'd see the value of a game drop so much that you could buy a few copies just cutting your neighbours grass.

 

Idk, I personally thought they explained the business/logistical side very well. Maybe they didn't choose the best games for examples, but honestly I think they're right in what they said. If you build a dollar, you have to earn back two dollars. If you can't do that, you can't continue business.

[TetraSky]

Console games reselling hurt developers and publishers. (It's no secret that if Gamestop stopped selling used games, they'd be throwing a party)

PC game resell hasn't been a thing for the longest of time now due to DRM and online activation.

PC game resell will hurt the small indie devs who can't just take the hit from people buying cheaper copies, that, mind you, haven't "degraded" in any way and are 100% the same product they'd get if bought new... Because it's digital.

 

The only way I could see this working out, is if the devs get a portion of the money from you reselling the game, essentially double dipping for the same copy... Overall, that ain't a great solution for any party involved (You as the seller who'd get back less money, Valve/other store as the middleman that has to handle the server side of things and the bandwidth cost associated, the devs/publishers who get less money...)

 

 

I get wanting to recoup a bit of your money on a product you've bought... But it's digital. If you want to resell something physical, it's easy, its value changes depending on how well you've taken care of it (just see the price that some comic books have sold for)
With digital, it's always like-new. How do you give value to a digital product? According to the current price? To the lowest price it ever went down to? Do you get 100% of the money or is it split between you, devs and store?

 

The way I see this, if devs don't get any money from "second hand" digital games, we'll see a lot less games from indie devs. Why would anyone buy their game new, when the people who've finished the game put it up for sell right away, for cheaper. Maybe they pay you a tiny amount and they just take the game away... after a while they can have things like a flash sales with "limited number of copies" that are essentially all the returns and are final sale only?
Then there's publishers who will just run away from Steam, making their own stores much like EA and Ubisoft have done, to avoid this crap until they get sued by some French court as well.

[Suika]

Think back to times where you'd buy a physical game and it'd come with a code for cosmetics, but had you bought it used, you wouldn't have gotten it. Now imagine that being significantly more impactful and in an online platform format. That's what I imagine happening, developers locking content to accounts linked with some sort of token affiliated with the license to the game. Sure, you could buy the game used, but I think developers may lock content behind new purchases somehow or another.

 

As interesting as this sounds for consumers, I don't think it will be all that beneficial for the industry as a whole.

[Mihle]

I want it, but I would be totally happy with the developer getting for example 30% of what it is sold for.

[Guest]

The main issue is that second-hand Digital copies would be identical to first-hand, so what would be the point in buying first hand? its effectively undercutting themselves. 

[harryk]

I agree that reselling digital games is not a good idea and will only hurt developers and the industry.

 

But here's an idea. What if you could 'sell' the game back to the developer or platform (i.e. Steam) for some fraction of the original or current sale price? Then apply this value to the purchase of a new game.

 

For example, I could buy a game today for $20 and play through it. Next year the same developer releases a new game also for $20. I could trade-in the first game and get say $10 of credit which I then use to purchase the new game.

 

Consumers can get some value back for games they're done with and will be incentivized to spend money on new games. Developers won't be undercut by a second hand market and will have some incentive to make new games since consumers will be looking for new games to apply trade-in value for.