Copyright battles going too far

[adaher]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/109/1091294p1.html

The fight against sale of used games?

THQ is the latest publisher to join the fight against the sale of used games.

The company confirmed PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions UFC Undisputed 2010 will require players to entire a one-time use code to access the game's multiplayer modes and features.

The code is available with all new copies of the game. If the game is bought used and the code has already been redeemed, then a $5 access fee is required.



Now I realize that as it pertains to music, when you sell a used CD, the artist gets exactly as much money from it as if the buyer had downloaded it illegally, but I think most of us would agree that a CD is your property to dispose of as you please. I know copyright holders have been saying forever that you are only buying a "license" to use the product under certain circumstances, but it sounds like BS to me. And it damages their credibility when they complain against real threats like illegal downloading.

 

[Savage Pumpkin]

Actually the dispute over the sale of used games goes as far back as 1991 when Funcoland started selling them.


I disagree to a certain extent. I understand what you are saying and realize your frustration. But when it comes down to bare bones this is a consumer product. A product in which multiple people have put work into and need to recoup production, marketing, and distribution costs. However there are two sides of the coin here. On one side is a game say, like the Super Mario or Halo series, which recoups multiple times the cost they put out. On the other side are independent releases or games that just dont sell. The same goes for music and other consumer products. Its a hard thing to regulate and would be impossible to put down one without having to put down another. Computer games have been using key codes for years. It all comes down to that these companies feel they are losing money. Is there greed involved? I'm sure there is. But just think of that band that puts out a killer killer disc only to be copied and copied and copied and unable to come out of the red of a $25, 000 recording debt. It translates the same.

 

[AngraRULES]

That's bullshit.

Plus, there's a big difference between video games and music when it comes to that. A CD DOES NOT COST $60.

I buy 90% of my games used. Do I feel bad for the big greedy developers? Definitely not. Lower the prices of your games and then we'll talk.

 

[AMBR]

I always buy used games. First rounders are over priced. I hope this doesn't seriously limit the used game supply.

 

[Savage Pumpkin]

That's bullshit.

Plus, there's a big difference between video games and music when it comes to that. A CD DOES NOT COST $60.

I buy 90% of my games used. Do I feel bad for the big greedy developers? Definitely not. Lower the prices of your games and then we'll talk.

Bullshit? um....no. That is your opinion of course. I have a little knowledge in the video game business so I am not speaking out of my rear. The cost of a CD versus that of a game is totally different. Look at computer games for instance. A lot of games have multiple dvd's and/or cd's, HUGE booklets and require powerful hardware (ie graphics cards) which means the developers need to have the same if not better hardware to insure cross utilization. You cannot compare: its like the apples and oranges analogy. Are used games a good idea? Absolutely!! It just needed to be done correctly from the beginning or a new regulation needs to be implemented, plain and simple.

 

[booB]

Bullshit? um....no. That is your opinion of course. I have a little knowledge in the video game business so I am not speaking out of my rear. The cost of a CD versus that of a game is totally different. Look at computer games for instance. A lot of games have multiple dvd's and/or cd's, HUGE booklets and require powerful hardware (ie graphics cards) which means the developers need to have the same if not better hardware to insure cross utilization. You cannot compare: its like the apples and oranges analogy. Are used games a good idea? Absolutely!! It just needed to be done correctly from the beginning or a new regulation needs to be implemented, plain and simple.

"Bullshit" comes into play when you realize that the game company did not spend a dime in the process of getting that USED game to its new owner. Why are they *entitled* to an extra fee?

 

[Yippee38]

It goes back to cost vs. volume. Right now the video game industry and the music industry are stuck in the "we have to charge a lot to recoup our costs" mindset. That's the way it's always been done. They have no idea if they could reduce their prices, which might possibly increase their volume, leading to better margins. Because they have no idea, they won't try it. They'd rather try to increase their margins other ways. Of course, with the economy as it is now, and consumer's not spending like they have in the past, lower prices just might entice more people to buy the game new.

 

[AngraRULES]

Bullshit? um....no. That is your opinion of course. I have a little knowledge in the video game business so I am not speaking out of my rear. The cost of a CD versus that of a game is totally different. Look at computer games for instance. A lot of games have multiple dvd's and/or cd's, HUGE booklets and require powerful hardware (ie graphics cards) which means the developers need to have the same if not better hardware to insure cross utilization. You cannot compare: its like the apples and oranges analogy. Are used games a good idea? Absolutely!! It just needed to be done correctly from the beginning or a new regulation needs to be implemented, plain and simple.

I never said you're speaking out of your rear. And to be fair, I wasn't the one who first started the comparison between games and music CD's.

A lot of CDs nowadays have booklets that are as long (if not longer) than many games. I can think of a few games I bought in the last year that had a booklet that was less than 10 pages long. Plus, the use of computer games may not apply here, since they already have serial numbers and wouldn't be affected by this change if I understand this correctly. Even if it was the case, remember it's easier for a big developer to have amazingly powerful hardware than for us, average people to have the most powerful system out there.

I think it's a fair comparison. Not exactly alike, of course, but not totally off either. I will repeat and firmly stand my ground: lower the price of the games, and then we'll talk.

 

[Corsair]

One thing we have to keep in mind is that it does cost a *lot* more to develop a video game now than it ever has. As hardware gets more and more powerful, the artistry and programming required to make use of all that power...Takes a long time to program game engines, moreso with advanced physics, super-realistic 3d meshes and textures... Game companies want to see a return on all that investment of time and cash. That's not evil. Lowering the price of games developed under the "Bigger, better, badder" just simply isn't an option. Sure they might sell a few more copies, but these prices aren't arbitrary; they're price pointed to be as expensive as possible without sacrificing profit by overcharging.

I think what we're likely to see, as game production costs become increasingly astronomical, is a trend for major developers to stagnate in terms of graphics and pretty but ultimately useless shit like ragdoll physics. They might even scale back - and have: Look at megaman 9 and 10. That wa a litmus test, I think, to see if they could scale back and still sell decently. and they did. Prices may drop as the market demands it, and as companies realize that they don't have to dump a bajillion dollars into development to turn a decent profit.

Even so it's not like we can really say that games are more expensive now than they've ever been: When the n64 was launched, a game cart could set you back 100 bucks - same thing when sonic 3 was released for the genesis.

I don't see the big deal that companies have with used game sales. No, they don't directly profit from used sales, but in order for a game to be used, it has to be purchased in the first place. The person buying the used game isn't looking to pay full price for it - and won't. They're freaking out over practically nothing, and hurting the aftermarket in the process, which is dickery at it's finest.

What kills me, is how silly console manufacturers are with copy protection, when completely sane and effective methods of protecting one's IP exist.

 

[nomisofsiman]

I always buy used games. First rounders are over priced. I hope this doesn't seriously limit the used game supply.

They most certainly are.

As for my opinion on this, this is a very slippery slope. If more video game companies decide to do this, they are going to be met with the same decline in popularity, sales, etc. that the music and film industry are facing. People have every right to sell their used stuff, and this is just corporate greed. I know a lot of production is being spent on these games but $60+ is just ridiculous. Some games are lengthy but then again, some games are ridiculously short. Just for some comparison. DVDs for example have a lot of production values involved with featurettes and such. The length on these ultra special editions, at least some are a LOT of extra hours and (usually) for the most part are $30. Some do go overkill, i.e. Bladerunner (but then again that was a collector's item). Also in terms of films...a lot of them are as expensive if not more expensive than games, so this nonsense on them not making enough money and that used games are hurting them, is just nuts.

Also, from what I've seen, the game industry isn't that fucked really. I mean the last COD Modern Warfare set a record in sales, and they didn't do this bs with that game. Another problem here is that this will damage the rental industry even more so than it already has, so basically people will not be able to try these games out. What these companies truly need to do is lower the price a bit. I'm not saying a huge cut but by like $5- $10. Whenever I've witnessed companies inflate the prices, it usually has a negative effect and not as many people buy.

Bottom line, our economy isn't doing well, but it seems the video game industry isn't doing too bad from where I sit. Honestly though, while this has happened with this title and some will follow, I don't see this trend sticking. Just a gut feeling. There will be some backlash.

 

[adaher]

As with music, the business model will just have to change to account for the fact that anything can be digitized is essentially "free".

I think that's why those massively multiplayer online games are so hot, not just becuase people love to play them, but because the fees are bigger moneymakers for the companies than selling the physical software.

 

[modernwizardry]

I pretty much only buy used games because the new ones are some expensive.

Or if you can handle waiting, the games get significantly cheaper new on amazon a few months after the release.

 

[Kimavir]

I sell used textbooks... and basically my entire job is to out smart the publishers, who are constantly trying to come up with ways to require the sale of new books. If we can figure out ways to sell used books when a teacher requests an unbound book with a one-time use passcode; then the used game companies are going to just fine with this crap. It's just another fight between two business models. In the long term, the customer will do just fine.