Second hand sales vs. Piracy

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

Interplay is nothing like the big multiplat publishers of today, they were the kings of the wild wild west of video gaming but much like Lucas Arts they had not secured the power of console gaming and the casual market that games currently cover. The market at that time was even less mature, and you sure as hell couldn't sustain yourself with movie tie in games that could keep you a float if you only published like 10 games a year. Currently though EA, Activision, Ubisoft all want to rape the consumer, on top of their triple A titles they have a lot of filler that continues to make them money mind you the quality or lack of consumer rights these products have, hell Square Enix still pumps out crap ff sequel after ff sequel, my point is Interplay and the current generation of Devs are highly different, their business model is highly different. From a PC gamers perspective the lack of second hand sales isn't that big of a deal, but when it comes to funding my console gaming habit, second hand sales is what makes me buy games, I just can't see paying for single player games especially for full retail after a year and a half after they have come out, and on top of that if i buy used i have to shill out another 20-30 bucks for dlc that would have probably made the game the disc.

EA is a definition to itself, it was big then, and it's big now. I think it's highly flawed to assume most game makers are like EA. Furthermore while EA isn't going to go away any time soon, all it's associated developers are much more precarious. If you don't make $$$ you're still going to be out.

The other big publishers like Activision or Take Two are nowhere near the size of EA, and in fact are not much larger then Interplay was.

And that's also not including all the independent developers, of which there are many, that are not affiliated with a large publisher. Think of Bethesda or Atlus (JP not USA).

Lots of game developers and publishers go out of business every year. Interplay's story is not uncommon, though it was certainly significant for PC gaming, Interplay being one of the most significant PC centred publishers at the time.

Anyway, if you really want a game cheap you can always wait a few months. Usually the price gets slashed pretty quickly, particularly if you order online.

[synaesthetic]

For PC gamers, watch the brick and mortar game stores. I scored a copy of Fallout New Vegas for $20 when it's still $50 on Steam. Same with ME2, I got it for $20 at Best Buy when it was still $40 on Steam.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

For PC gamers, watch the brick and mortar game stores. I scored a copy of Fallout New Vegas for $20 when it's still $50 on Steam. Same with ME2, I got it for $20 at Best Buy when it was still $40 on Steam.

Yeah, I have to say that some online distributors can shaft you a bit. Some are better then others, GamersGate can be pretty cheap for instance.

You can also get good prices from Amazon, that's including if you buy new.

[Jaden]

Online distributors aren't really shafting you, whoever owns the rights to a game sets the prices. And most game companies putting out AAA titles can't afford to permit as much discounts online as the retailers of physical copies, so there's a weird situation where those retailers are actually the ones controlling the prices.

Because right now if, for example, a game developer would give a huge discount on some popular games on Steam, Amazon and other such retailers would object by pulling said games off the shelves. This would hurt the studio much more than it would Amazon.

And since most gamers still go out to the shops to buy their games, said shops are able to control the market like this. And I suppose that's the only way they'll stay in business besides second hand sales.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Jaden

Online distributors aren't really shafting you, whoever owns the rights to a game sets the prices. And most game companies putting out AAA titles can't afford to permit as much discounts online as the retailers of physical copies, so there's a weird situation where those retailers are actually the ones controlling the prices.

Because right now if, for example, a game developer would give a huge discount on some popular games on Steam, Amazon and other such retailers would object by pulling said games off the shelves. This would hurt the studio much more than it would Amazon.

And since most gamers still go out to the shops to buy their games, said shops are able to control the market like this. And I suppose that's the only way they'll stay in business besides second hand sales.

Very true. But buying patterns are shifting. Only 60% of game-related spending are on "new boxed games" in stores. That means that it's still a majority, but it's nowhere near as ubiquitous as it used to be. I can see that really declining in the next few years. Look at how the Vita will only have downloadeable games.

[Nightbat®]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

The other big publishers like Activision or Take Two are nowhere near the size of EA, and in fact are not much larger then Interplay was.

Activision is the parent company of Blizzard entertainment, and in recent years, we've come to notice that
(AV's CEO is anything but a gamer and all businessman)

[Nosauz]

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

Activision is the parent company of Blizzard entertainment, and in recent years, we've come to notice that
(AV's CEO is anything but a gamer and all businessman)

When activision owns, a 13million subscriber base, the creators of COD, Guitar Hero, and the countless other brands, it's obvious that activison is not a bit player, EA and Activision are definitely at similar size, maybe if you said this back in 2000 when activision only had Tony hawk's Franchise, I'd be more inclined to believe Donquigleone, but the numbers don't lie, AV is big

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Nightbat®

Activision is the parent company of Blizzard entertainment, and in recent years, we've come to notice that
(AV's CEO is anything but a gamer and all businessman)

Same applied to Interplay before it went down. Apparently part of the reason for it's downfall was the mismanagement of the guys who bought them out.

Originally Posted by Nosauz

When activision owns, a 13million subscriber base, the creators of COD, Guitar Hero, and the countless other brands, it's obvious that activison is not a bit player, EA and Activision are definitely at similar size, maybe if you said this back in 2000 when activision only had Tony hawk's Franchise, I'd be more inclined to believe Donquigleone, but the numbers don't lie, AV is big

Well COD is certainly big, and Guitar Hero was recently shelved.

Activision may be the wrong one to cite, but my point is that a lot of games aren't developed or published by megacorps. And there is a lot of turnover, particularly with developers. A lot of developers go bust every year, and it's a difficult industry to work in. Look at Activision's wikipedia page and the subdivisions that are now defunct, like Sierra. If your games don't make a profit in the world of games you go bust, and the vast majority of games make little to no profit. Most games are not like CoD or Starcraft, usually they're not doing much more then breaking even.