Used market cost Heavy Rain 1m sales

By Robert Purchese Published 12 September, 2011

Dev lost "between €5 and €10 million".

Heavy Rain developer Quantic Dream believes it lost one million customers, and "between €5 and €10 million", to second-hand sales.

"I can take just one example of Heavy Rain," Quantic Dream co-founder Guillaume de Fondaumiere told GamesIndustry.biz. "We basically sold to date approximately two million units. We know from the Trophy system that probably more than three million people bought this game and played it.

"On my small level it's a million people playing my game without giving me one cent. And my calculation is, as Quantic Dream, I lost between €5 and €10 million worth of royalties because of second-hand gaming."

At the heart of the argument, believes Fondaumiere, is price.

"Now, are games too expensive?" he asked.

"I've always said that games are probably too expensive, so there's probably a right level here to find, and we need to discuss this all together and try to find a way to reconcile consumer expectations, retail expectations and also the expectations of the publisher and the developers to make this business a worthwhile business."

Fondaumiere believes the global recession gave rise to the second-hand video game market. He understands that without it, less games would probably have been bought, due to the removal of trade-in discounts.

But, at the moment, "we're basically all shooting ourselves in the foot", he declared.

"Because when developers and publishers alike are going to see that they can't make a living out of producing games that are sold through retail channels, because of second-hand gaming, they will simply stop making these games," he said, or move exclusively online.

Heavy Rain, a PS3 exclusive, was released in February 2010. In his Heavy Rain review, Tom Bramwell called the game "a thrilling mystery, cleverly composed and unlike anything else you will play this year".

"It may also be the only game you play this year where pulling the trigger makes you really feel something, and I can think of no greater compliment."

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (163) Latest comment 5 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • gooner77 #1 5 months ago

    I think it was more to do with bugs and glitches. i took it back because of the constant freezing. a bit more qa testing could have helped with the revenue

  • Oh-Bollox #2 5 months ago

    Guessing FTW!

  • crimsoneer #3 5 months ago

    There is a solution here: make a game with replay value.

  • joedix88 #4 5 months ago

    No, A crap game cost Heavy Rain 1m sales. :p

  • Khosrau #5 5 months ago

    Wow, since when does 1 million second-hand sales equal 1 million first-hand sales?

    And yes, generally games ARE too expensive.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 09:56

  • J0rdan_KZ #6 5 months ago

    ... Jason?

  • masterson #7 5 months ago

    Boo hoo hoo - I wonder how much second hand car sales cost the automotive industry?

    On second thoughts - I don't care.

  • Tomahawk #8 5 months ago

    Before people come in and say BS they wouldn't have all bought it, the truth is some of those second hand purchases would have translated into retail purchases. Not nearly as much as this guy is quoting though.

    I agree games are expensive at the moment, it's up to the leading franchises to lead the way and cut their prices. All companies see though is that initial payoff they can't see ahead and think if I cut my games price in half wouldn't it result in more sales overall and therefore higher revenue and competitors would be priced out of the game war.

  • King_Edward #9 5 months ago

    Alternatively, the second hand market has given you 50% larger install base for the next game you make.

  • bad09 #10 5 months ago

    "lost one million customers and "between €5 and €10 million", to second-hand sales"

    No they didn't completely , fabricated, untrue, made up, la la land, absolute bollocks. 1 million people bought someone elses copy just as people buy and sell their goods all the time. Money you were not entiled to as you had already sold the product to the original buyer.

    They have the cheek to say gamers have self entitlement issues but the industry puts us to shame.....

  • Rizo #11 5 months ago

    Hey if me and my bro play on the same PS3 but different accounts does he consider that a loss sale?

    If he does he's a muppet.

    Does my girlfriend pay when shes runs a song from my iTunes? I don't think so!

  • Liquidoodle #12 5 months ago

    Don't forget people borrowing copies off each other ;) why buy when you can just borrow... in fact what about video game rental too?

    I borrowed both Dead Space and Batman Arkham Asylum... the sequels of both were and are on pre-order.

    These are just the normal perils of a pure single player game if you ask me. But by all means knock the prices down, we won't argue :)
    Edited by 2 at 12/09/11 @ 09:58

  • Pocketgrandpa #13 5 months ago

    You don't see the film industry moaning about secondhand DVD sales, do you?

  • Kill_Crazy #14 5 months ago

    2 or 3 mates borrowed my copy at work. will see if they fancy paying QD but i suspect not!

  • parablax #15 5 months ago

    I don't really understand the argument people make about games being expensive.

    25 years ago the standard price for a game was £14.99 for the home computer market (cartridges even more expensive).
    Nowadays, on-line prices average out at £29.99.

    Compared to food, housing market, etc. there is nothing to complain about.

  • kingcrowbar #16 5 months ago

    So they assume that everyone that has a console just for themselves? Might as well tell Sony and MS not to bother with multiple users on one console and do it like the handhelds then.

  • kassmageant #17 5 months ago

    i'm insulted by that kind of attitude - if i bought your game, i got goddamn right to launch it into space, feed it to my dog, ditch into the ground next to ET carts, put in microwave, make frisbee out of it, or SELL IT - if that hurts you mr. Guillaume de Fondaumiere ( even his name indicates that he's pompous douche!), then make a game that i will NOT want to part with

    you greedy twat

  • Meho #18 5 months ago

    On the other hand, I purchased it twice. First the normal edition and later, when my PS3 died and I got myself the slim one with a Move, I bought the Move edition. Happy, David?

  • RodHull #19 5 months ago

    Whilst in the past I've sympathised with developers who are missing out on royalties through 2nd sales, his accusatory tone directed towards the consumers comes across as petulant and slightly cunty.

    Actuality I'm being unfair. Very cunty.

  • menage #20 5 months ago

    I admit I bought it second hand, one of the few games in a long while.

    Reason behind it I wasn't going to spend 60 bucks on an interactive movie which I would juts play once. And the demo didn't convince me either.

    In the end I was glad I didn't jump in for full price. The story was so full of holes and the surprise reveal wasn't well written, you were just fooled into it by the cheap tactics of the dev.

  • Sikosh #21 5 months ago

    You didn't lose it, you just didn't make it

  • DavidBoring #22 5 months ago

    they should have added a jason-team deathmatch mode

  • midnight_walker #23 5 months ago

    "Yes, games probably are too expensive, but I'll be buggered if MY game is going to be the one to launch at a sensible price!"

    -Quote from pretty much every dev asked about how games cost too much.

  • chrisjm #24 5 months ago

    what about the people that leave it on a shelf and never play it again despite it having more value to sell, are you going to give them a cookie to stop you losing made up figure x2.

  • Zomoniac #25 5 months ago

    You don't see the film industry moaning about secondhand DVD sales, do you?

    No, because they make up about 2% of sales, not 45%. They would if it was on the same scale.

  • HornsDino #26 5 months ago

    But 2m is really good right? So he should wind his neck in. On the other hand, he does have an inkling of the solution if he really wants to kill the 2nd hand market - cheaper games.

  • Mr_interesting_2011 #27 5 months ago

    A large number of second-hand sales are to be expected really with this type of game though...

    Once you have played through the story-line (5-8 hours) there is little incentive to play through again with no additional modes or multiplayer etc.

    What else can you do with it but sell it on or lend it to friends?

    Cheaper games won't change anything - people will instead have the option of say £20 for a new game or half that for a functionally identical 2nd hand copy.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:10

  • captain_Carl #28 5 months ago

    Maybe if you'd made that DLC you promised, you'd have got some of that money back

  • CloisterBlack #29 5 months ago

    That's a load of barnacles.

  • winstoninabox #30 5 months ago

    First off, Heavy Rain is an excellent game. In my opinion 10/10. Well done.

    But to believe that you lost 5 to 10 million pounds of royalties due to second-hand gaming means that you have little understanding of the very system that you're making your money off. Most of those who played the game second-hand were never going to be your first-hand customers to begin with. At best you can expect some DLC sales off them. If you're factoring them into your profits, then believing that you've lost money, you really need to reevaluate your business projections.
    Even moving to a download only system just shifts the goal posts. Gamers (or any consumer) will only shell out at the price point that they feel is worth it for them. Download only means that more consumers will wait for the price points which balances their desire to play the game versus the zero resale value it will have. And that sounds like it will be an even lower price point than before for those second-hand gamers.

  • Crea #31 5 months ago

    People should recognise that, cunty as this guy may sound, this thinking is changing the industry. Rightly or wrongly, devs and publishers perceive second hand sales as a major threat, and they are changing game design to compensate. The stand alone, single player only box release is doomed. Multiplayer & 'services' tacked onto everything, free extras bundled with new releases (kerberos content on ME), everything on the PC going MMO or online-DRM.

    It's not that I begrudge second hand sales, hell I pick them up occasionally myself, but I'm at least aware of how they and piracy are changing the industry, probably for the worse.

  • Spooke #32 5 months ago

    I think we should pay for games by the level... so you only pay for the amount of game you play. I have numerous games with a third at the end unplayed.

  • mr_pink #33 5 months ago

    Cry me a river Monsieur Fondaumiere, you've done pretty well out of it so stop being a greedy, ill-informed p****.

  • irve77 #34 5 months ago

    Hmmm , so the people like me that didn't see more than £10 of value in heavy rain cost them 5 - 10 mil euro

    Trouble with season passes and their like is that there is a market that won't see the value it in

    1200ms points is more than i paid for many games in my collection i certainly wouldn't buy a game second hand for £5 and then shell out another £10 for extras.

  • MaoZedong #35 5 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:40:08 17-12-2011

  • whoyouknow #36 5 months ago

    >mfw second hand sales = lost retail sales

  • Nova1977 #37 5 months ago

    I bought 2nd hand as well, at the time PS3 games were extremely overpriced here in South Africa R 600,00 to R 700,00.

  • bad09 #38 5 months ago

    "What else can you do with it but sell it on or lend it to friends? "

    From what I can gather from the industry you should send it back to the dev with another 20 quid and a thank you letter thanking them for allowing you to play their game and thanking your god for the devs very existence...as well as another 20 quid.

    What you certainly shouldn't do is sell on goods you no longer want for someone else to enjoy while making some money back to spend on other new games. No that's evil I mean what if someone played their precious game with paying them? Heaven forid we ever see such evil, those devs need shelter and a hot meal for gods sake!
    Edited by 2 at 12/09/11 @ 10:16

  • svenjl #39 5 months ago

    Bad09 - Agree. People buy, sell and even trade goods and services of all kinds. Some devs and publishers seem to be dreaming of a totalitarian utopia where the means and methods of sales and distribution are highly restricted and regulated. Not going to happen. They ought to pull their heads out of the sand. I buy an equal mix of new and used games. I can't afford to buy 15 new games a year at full RRP in stores, so I buy new online, and trade-in in store for pre-owned games. Probably complete 10 games a year and only buy games that will go 15 hours + with replay value unless I get shorter ones super cheap.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #40 5 months ago

    Absolutely nothing to do with people renting the game because it was a specialist game and probably not for them?

  • M_of_the_sys #41 5 months ago

    I can see not many of you read past the first paragraph or three.

  • FireMonkey #42 5 months ago

    Why are people moaning about what he says here? He isn't actually bitching about lost sales though second hand, he is just expressing how much they 'potentially' lost. He pretty much goes on to say that it is the industries own fault for having prices too high which is what most of you guys say.

    He also sounds like he wants to look into how to reduce that loss in the future and it sounds as if he'd like to get the games to be better value for the consumer.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:20

  • varsas #43 5 months ago

    It's interesting to read these comments because aside from the headline quote he makes a balanced comment regarding the need to address retail pricing.

  • toa_boa #44 5 months ago

    bad09 wrote;

    "1 million people bought someone elses copy just as people buy and sell their goods all the time. Money you were not entiled to as you had already sold the product to the original buyer. "

    Personally, I think this is the best summation of why pubs and devs need to stop picking on second hand sales.

    Well put bad09, very well put!

  • MyBigToe #45 5 months ago

    maybe it should have been longer than 5 hours and had some kind of replay value. Or a coherant storyline

  • Goodfella #46 5 months ago

    I think what he's really having a pop at is Game/Gamestation etc. They make millions out of traded games by doing pretty much fuck all.

    Lets face it, you're a bit of a prat if you trade your games there too when you can get much better prices selling privately or even using something like Amazon marketplace.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:26

  • SuperFanBoy #47 5 months ago

    So, uh, why don't they release their game on other platforms if they want more sales instead of grasping at straws?

  • Mr_interesting_2011 #48 5 months ago


    Price won't make a difference .The 2nd-hand copy will still be cheaper and people will still want to trade in games whether they pay £20 or £40 for them
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:27

  • loveless #49 5 months ago

    Twat.

    If you've had a million people purchase second-hand, then that's an extra million people that might buy the DLC.

    Cut out the second hand market, and fewer new sales will be made - because the people that make the new purchases often use trade-ins to fund them.

    Those that buy second hand aren't suddenly going to spend 2-3 times as much to buy all the same titles new.

  • linea #50 5 months ago

    The solution? Make digital copies affordable, and sort out the PSN/XBL systems so they work as well as Steam, so I can play on multiple systems (and ideally cross-platform but that might be a bit far).

    I don't mind buying digital versions of (indie) games on Steam, because they're a) reasonably priced and b) I know I'm not tied to having one copy on one system, I can access my games and saves wherever I am. I lose out on being able to lend/swap the game disc with friends, but hey, I don't mind all that much as the other advantages outweigh this.

    But at the moment for large publishers' games I'm expected to pay a considerable premium for a version which is basically crippled in many ways compared to the disc version.

    The solution is pretty obvious and in almost everyone's interests but you have to make the digital alternative attractive enough!

  • anthonypappa #51 5 months ago

    i wouldn't pay full price for a movie. so a game like this has no chance.

    doesn't strike me as very re-playable, a sure candidate for second hand purchase. if you want your game to be an 'experience', that's fine. just remember it's a specialised genre - don't expect mega sales that FPS's get. from what i heard, they done well.

  • Farstarbuck #52 5 months ago

    So the same argument raises its head again. The only sensible part of this article is when he suggests the industry looks at the price of a game. I'm sure we can all agree that there are games out there which are worth the majority of the RRP we pay, whilst others that really should be cheaper based on the limited longevity the game has. Price structure is a whole other argument and not one I'd like to get into.

    However, the point this guys missing is how many second hand gamers of your product are more likely to invest in a first day sale of your future product?

    Let's say I've just got an xbox 360 and I've been told Modern Warfare 2 is the game to get! So I get it from Game second hand for 14-20 quid. I play it love it, can't get enough, I've now met some decent people online to play with, they're all ranting about MW3 coming in November, I now too think I'll buy that on day one with my new mates. Activation although didn't see a penny of my MW2 purchaser are now gonna get me for MW3 and possibly future titles.

    So whilst this guy didn't get anything for Heavy Rain 1, isn't there a chance if I liked it enough you'll see me again as a first day purchase for your sequel? It's just a thought and wonder if when they say they're losing money do they account for the revenue they gain from second hand gaming from a brand loyalty point of view on future releases?

  • banjo21 #53 5 months ago

    This really annoys me. Imagine buying a car and someone saying you can't sell it on at s later date. Youd ask for a 50% discount. So give us the discount or stop moaning.

  • Mr_interesting_2011 #54 5 months ago

    Agreed...

    How many of the 2m people traded in or sold some games to buy heavy rain new in the first place? Without the 2nd-hand market fewer copies would have been sold originally.

    Also, assuming there was no way to sell on games who would pay £40 for a game that is over in 8 hours with no replay value?

  • jamieleng #55 5 months ago

    This guy is Quantic Dreaming.

  • PaletteSwap #56 5 months ago

    So the only thing we know here is that at least half the copies of the game were either: played on several accounts in the same household, lent to friends, resold and reresold. That's kind of the normal life of a product.

    IIRC the game was part of console bundles, this might partly explain that? (people primarily buying a console and reselling the game that came with it)

    Also, the trophy number doesn't seem to take into account "offline only" PS3s, which means the number of different accounts who have played the game is bigger than 3 mil. Rather than hold onto a fantasized bottom line, they should take pride in the fact that a load of people played their game. It doesn't directly put bread on the table but a strong mindshare can eventually translate in a bigger marketshare.

    Faulty though his metric is, he does have a point in that a digital release would prevent all these multiple users for a single copy. At least in the current state of the digital marketplace.

  • Bennicus #57 5 months ago

    But they don't know how many of those plays are rental copies from lovefilm etc, which cost a whole lot more than regular retail copies (to compensate for the fact that many people will be playing a single copy).

  • sideeye #58 5 months ago

    Do they not take into consideration the rental market as well? A game like Heavy rain would be straight on my rental queue.

  • jaguarwong #59 5 months ago

    "You don't see 'X' industry complaining about second hand sales"

    Way to prove you don't understand the issue guys, why not just throw on a pointy hat with a 'D' on it and be done.

  • azic #60 5 months ago

    @masterson
    Second Hand car sales are not the same, as money can still made from parts and servicing.
    And there is a big difference between 50 Pounds & 1000's of pounds.

    On topic, I don't think he is bitching, but he has a point. He gets paid once for his work, retail get paid as many times as it bought then traded in.
    Maybe Stores that do trade ins should pay more for the games, or maybe games should be non transferable or possibly non transferable for up to 6 months after release with the caveat that all games with this system cost £29.99 and no more.

    GAME sell games for 3-5 pounds less in most cases so you are not saving that much. Its only when the game is out of the lime light do you pick up a pre-owned bargain.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:45

  • FireMonkey #61 5 months ago

    I think people need to read the entire article and not just the headline.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:47

  • sideeye #62 5 months ago

    I agree tho. I think if they halved the price of games I'd definitely buy more games. Lack of funds makes me very picky.

  • Ginola14 #63 5 months ago

    Such a miserable bunch of losers on this site you really are.
    Heavy rain was awesome, all you guys ever do is complain about everything.
    Most of you should kill yourselves.

  • captainrentboy #64 5 months ago

    ''I think what he's really having a pop at is Game/Gamestation etc. They make millions out of traded games by doing pretty much fuck all.''
    On any specific launch weekend, thousands of customers are only making that initial new release purchase, because they can trade in their unwanted shite towards the cost though. :/

  • Ryze #65 5 months ago

    I believe that Gamestation sold me a used copy of Heavy Rain when I bought my Move wand.

    I simply wouldn't have bought it for £30-£40odd, so they've not missed out on a cent, as far as I'm concerned, unless the game dropped to £15 the next day.

    I'd not have bought the game at any higher a price.

    They need to realise that people have limited budgets for games, and that they WILL use the rental and 2nd hand markets in order to TRY other games.

    I for example, still have LA Noire on rental from Lovefilm. I WASN'T GOING TO BUY IT for more than £20, and even at £20 it would have to wait in the queue behind other games.

    They can put whatever DLC and online pass locks they want on these games, they wont make more money unless the price of the games drops, AND there's an affordable way of simply HAVING A GO of the games.

    ARCADES, allowed us to pay a small fee to try a game without having to own it outright. There are films that I'd see at the cinema, that I'll NEVER buy on DVD or BluRay.

    Sort out your business model, and also create a means of us renting games directly via download.

    Silly really, that he's using the trophy system to guess how many copies he didn't sell. I have 4 PSN accounts on my PS3, plus I took Heavy Rain to my friend's place to demonstrate PS Move.

    Without that 2nd hand copy of Heavy Rain, GameStation wouldn't have sold me a brand new Move controller and NavCon. I also wouldn't have bought Flight Control, Start The Party, The Fight, Resi 5 Move edition... ALL BRAND NEW, but discounted. I haven't bought Sports Champions yet, as the price is too high for the amount of time I'll play it (no online modes to speak of).

    So, Sony made a LOT of money from that 2nd hand copy of Heavy Rain, as it encouraged me to buy PS Move and other games.

    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:58

  • Dyason #66 5 months ago

    This is so untrue it hurts. There's many other calculations that aren't even considered.

    As people said there are those with multiple users on 1 console. There are also those who lend the game out. No money trading hands.

    There's also the issue of those, like me, who bought this game at full price. Then there are those that waited and bought it new at half of that price. How does that add into the calculations?

    I'd be more interested to hear a figure of how many bought the DLC compared to copies bought. That will show you how much money you could have made extra, not making up numbers in your head!

  • iwantmynameuk #67 5 months ago

    surely games don`t cost enough? If the sales aren`t meeting the costs of making them (so we`re told, plus all the devs closing left right and centre) then they are too cheap. but if people keep crying about the cost (even though the price hasn`t risen for generations and actually gone down while production costs have rocketed) then who`s fault is project ten dollar, and missing sections sold as DLC?

  • funkateer #68 5 months ago

    It's still a bit of a weird notion that you sell a boxed product but you feel entitled to revenue from second hand sales. I can somewhat understand the reasoning, but this is never going to fly with the big public unless you simply stop selling these boxed games at retail.

    What would it do to your sales if you lock it down completely and make it impossible for your buyers to sell it on? It's just too easy to quote a number potentially lost sales.

    It was also mentioned that games are too expensive. It depends on how you look at it I suppose. Considering the number of struggling studios and the skyrocketing production costs and underpaid developers, the problem might be more that the market is stil just too small to consider a lower selling price.


    "I think it was more to do with bugs and glitches. i took it back because of the constant freezing. "
    At first it was appalingly rough around the edges, but after an update I never had a problem anymore to be honest.
    I recently played through it with the move without a hitch.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 10:49

  • Silent-Hal #69 5 months ago

    Oddly enough, Heavy Rain is one of the few games I've bought in the past couple of years that I felt completely justified paying full price for. I've played through it at least four times now, sometimes to see the different outcomes and sometimes to just enjoy the story again. I can't see how anyone can say it doesn't have replay value, considering how much you're able to change on any given run through.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 17:07

  • homerbert #70 5 months ago

    I really enjoyed Heavy Raid, but I only took the gamble on it because it was 12quid second hand. It had a lot of stuff I don't generally like, primarily a focus on cutscenes and QTEs. At 40 quid there's no way I'd have played it.

    It's one of my favourite games of the last few years, but I have no urge to replay it and it wasn't that long. I look forward to their next game. Hopefully by the time it's released, games prices will be less mental.

  • gooner77 #71 5 months ago

    @EddieMink I was saying the bugs and glitches hurt sales before it was patched, learn to fucking read

    if there were no freezing issues then i wouldnt have traded it in. it was patched several weeks later by which time I had already given up
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 11:04

  • sheldipez #72 5 months ago

    They would of sold even more had they not went Sony exclusive and released it on PC and X360 too. There are many gamers that played and enjoyed the hell out of Fahrenheit on either Xbox or PC but can't pick this up because they don't have a PS3. Just a PC version would be nice.

  • 32768Colours #73 5 months ago

    "Now, are games too expensive?" he asked.

    Yes. Films and even some music can be just as expensive to produce, distribute and promote so there's really no excuse to charge up to 3 or 4 times more than these mediums do.

    And right here's the reason why. I haven't paid full retail price for a game in years, simply because I know that if I wait a fortnight I can pick it up (still new) for two thirds of the price or even less. The most ridiculous price drop I've experienced lately was when I bought Dungeon Siege 3 for £17.99 about a fortnight after release. Okay the margins are probably small on such deals, but even so, if ever there was proof that the initial price point is over-inflated its this trend.

    Fondaumiere believes the global recession gave rise to the second-hand video game market. He understands that without it, less games would probably have been bought, due to the removal of trade-in discounts.

    Then he doesn't fully understand. The industry is generally quite (wilfully?) ignorant to the realities of the 2nd hand market.

    I've been trading games in since I got a Master System in 1989. The rise of the 2nd hand market comes from greedy retailers who want to sell used games for £1 less than full price. The fact remains that whilst I love gaming, I'm not a collector. Therefore I see more sense in trading games in while they still have some residual value. Only very few old games are worth more than they were than when they were released so unless you're a collector or love them there's no point in keeping them.

    If I didn't trade in, then I wouldn't be able to buy as many games, and guess what? 99% of the time I trade in for new copies. Now I don't know the the end to end process for new sales, but I would've thought that a sale's a sale, regardless of whether I pay in cash or in used goods. If I'm mistaken, I'll stand corrected. However, based on my assumption, surely preventing 2nd hand sales entirely would be even more damaging to games sales, as people like me would buy even less games leaving publishers to hope that those who previously only bought 2nd hand would suddenly buy new instead.

    The same thing applies to digital downloads. If the industry seriously thinks it will be able to charge £40 and up for games in a digital-only market, while maintaining the sales levels it currently enjoys I think they're in for a shock. For starters there's the perception that digital content is worth less anyway, then there's the fact that we've got used to paying £20 for games shortly after release, and finally, there'll be less money for people to invest back into games as purchases are a dead end in respect to residual value.

    Sadly, I think any changes in pricing will only work in our favour once companies realise they're losing millions because people feel ripped-off. Until then, the discussion will probably remain the preserve of daft project ten-dollar initiatives, and the more thoughtful individuals in the industry.
    Edited by 3 at 12/09/11 @ 11:04

  • metallicol #74 5 months ago

    funkateer: yeah, I agree, it'd be interesting to see what happened if a publisher locked a game that made it impossible to play second-hand. i wonder if pubs have considered this? would it be illegal? kind of an interesting scenario. i'd love to see what happened if they tried it. hang-on, just thought this thru actually - you'd have to be online for the pub to check, so everyone would just unhook console from the net. doh. answered my own question. i'll go now. carry on.

  • -cerberus- #75 5 months ago

    If the seller thinks the game isn't worth keeping and the buyer thinks the game isn't worth the full price then there's something wrong with the game itself.

    EDIT: And yes, games are too expensive.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 11:05

  • Ryze #76 5 months ago

    I was simply never going to pay £40 or even £30 for Heavy Rain.

    I can't say 'it's not worth £30', only that they'd have never got £30 from me for it, considering the other games that exist in the marketplace, that would get my money first.

    I WOULD play a token price, like a couple of quid, for a couple of hours of play, however. That's what used to happen in the Videogames Arcades before they died a death.

  • Seoh #77 5 months ago

    If the games were cheaper then there would be more initial imperative to buy the game new and less to sell it afterwards (since its worth less to begin with).

    Another method to reduce resale would be with DLC that comes included with the initial copy, this DLC should not be the exclusion of something intended for the game.

    The best example i can think of is dawn of war 2 which has constantly had new maps and modes added throughout its life.

  • 32768Colours #78 5 months ago

    @-cerberus-

    You're right, but it depends on the style of game a bit though. Stuff like Mass Effect is worth keeping because of all the permutations the game holds, Street Fighter games are worth keeping because they're inherently designed to be replayed. But I've played plenty of games that are lot of fun first time but thanks to a linear (even if brilliant) story they don't really encourage repeat play.

    Bioshock 2 is a good example for me. I really enjoyed a single play through, but there wasn't much left to want to play it again. But then, because I only paid about £20 for it I didn't feel so bad. If I had no choice but to pay £40 digitally I probably wouldn't have bought it at all. Certainly, I'd be far more wary of what I bought anyway, that's for sure.

  • RevanNL #79 5 months ago

    It's also possible that some people rented the game or borrowed it from a friend or roommate...

  • Redeye #80 5 months ago

    @azic: "Second Hand car sales are not the same, as money can still made from parts and servicing."

    And money can't be made on second-hand game sales through DLC and content?

  • bad09 #81 5 months ago

    "yeah, I agree, it'd be interesting to see what happened if a publisher locked a game that made it impossible to play second-hand. i wonder if pubs have considered this? would it be illegal"

    Why do you think they've waited until the back end of this gen to start demonising 2nd hand? They are priming consumers for account tied, DRM controlled console gaming. They need a hook to gain the heart strings and support from the apologist worshippers the industry has amazingly landed as customers to argue with the rest of us consumers with brains. Used the same tactic on PC, where the demon is "piracy", now PC gamers are locked down in every possible way to "beat piracy". Now piracy isn't a good hook on consoles as it's not as big there so 2nd hand is used, trust me next gen you won't be trading anything in and if a friend or family member wants to play your game they're out luck and can be damn sure they'll have to pay.

    Gaming is about control of you on their "services" now, controlling you the endless wallet they dream you are paying them over and over, just wait until the only way to game is streaming a game you don't own in any kind of way and they can turn off "your" singgle player games. Bleak future the money men have planned for our hobby, bleak future indeed.
    Edited by 2 at 12/09/11 @ 11:28

  • anthonypappa #82 5 months ago

    something not gained in the first place, is not something lost...

  • des #83 5 months ago

    Good.Hopefully your next game is totally destroyed by used sales.

  • Kano-11 #84 5 months ago

    I get games which are guarenteed to give me at least around 20 hours of play and then more on replay's, basically games with multiplayer modes or massive open world games. Why? It's really all down to cost. Gaming is an expensive hobby, i think we all know that. Asking someone to pay full whack for a non-mainstream, experimental game is asking a lot.
    If the pre-own market is such a burden on the industry then why doesn't the industry start lowering the RRP for games to a much more affordable model for the average consumer? I'd love it when Brand new AAA games are sold £10 cheaper then what they are at now.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 11:45

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #85 5 months ago

    Even though I hate developers banging on about this (innacurate) point of view, I hate the likes of Gamestation even more for turning what was a useful scheme for the individual into a mass money making idea.

    Honestly, they're as bad as fucking Estate Agents.

  • eviroboy #86 5 months ago

    I bought it pre-owned, sorry. Snagged the Limited Edition in mint condition for under a tenner.

  • Eisenstein #87 5 months ago

    @parablax: 25 years ago the standard price for a game was £14.99 for the home computer market (cartridges even more expensive).
    Nowadays, on-line prices average out at £29.99.

    Every decade prices rise by about 1/3, which puts game prices right into the usual inflation pattern. However, you get less for it (digital copy instead of physical), and - more importantly - games compete with a lot of other forms of entertainment, making the budget someone is willing to spend on games usually smaller than it was.

  • JHo #88 5 months ago

    @bad09,

    That's about the scariest, most sobering thing I've seen posted in a long time. Scary as hell because I think you are spot on. Will the day come when you can't even loan a good book to a friend or relative once everything is on an E-Reader and digitally locked?

    You gave me chills sir. Think I'll keep all my games from now on so if my internet goes down I can still play a few single player games that aren't fucked by DRM.

  • silversun #89 5 months ago

    my calculations may be way off so sorry if it wrong.
    They made before wages and other costs if they sold 2 million at 45 euro each (not sure how much euros it sold for)
    about 90 million euros.
    the real question is not how much they lose from second hand sales but is the game breaking even or making a profit for them , if its not then i can understand there is a problem.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 13:09

  • pkclavain #90 5 months ago

    "You don't see the film industry moaning about secondhand DVD sales, do you? "

    Movies generally recoup costs at the box office and then later through tv rights. Its the same with music, cd sales make up only a part of the revenue.

    Of course we should all be free to buy and sell second hand but really, is it that much cheaper? Most of the SH stuff in Game etc can be found cheaper new online anyway. I know who I would rather give my money to.

  • bionic #91 5 months ago

    I picked up Heavy Rain new the week it was released. Worth every penny. The DLC was good too.

  • geox30 #92 5 months ago

    Just keep in mind that one of the reasons people pay 50£ for a single player game is because they can sell it after completion.Second hand gives you first hand customers.

  • Tyronne #93 5 months ago

    Someone else made money off the car they bought from me when they sold it on...that is £££`s I have missed out on but do you hear me crying?

    Anyone who tells me what I can do with products I have bought get exactly the same answer...F&*k OFF, its mine, I can do whatever the hell I like with it.

  • Daeltaja #94 5 months ago

    Well I can think of 3 people that myself and mate lent the game to, and those 3 people would never have bought it anyway.

  • silversun #95 5 months ago

    "Movies generally recoup costs at the box office and then later through tv rights. Its the same with music, cd sales make up only a part of the revenue. "

    Get games on more download services could be anwser to this.
    Next gen could be a big leap for this i think , maybe a reason to get new consoles out now.
    Problem though is the closed networks , steam seems have right idea.
    Atm on xbox live there full games but im not going use up space on my tiny 120 gb hardrive compare to pc with over a terabyte hardrive.

    not crazy about streaming games , i like a physical hardform copy , if that on a hardrive or on a disc but some people might like the streaming of games , it just not for me at all.

  • Steve2911 #96 5 months ago

    I reckon major retailers shouldn't be allowed to accept trade ins for the first two months of a game's release. In this period, not only are they taking a ridiculous amount of sales from the devs, but they're also undercutting the original price by no more than a pound or two. Walk into a Game store the week after a new CoD game and the shelves are lined with second hand copies for £42.99, next to new ones at £44.99. It's ridiculous, greedy bullshit.

    On a side note, triple-A games are too expensive, yes, but in the last couple of years, the market has seen a huge range of price levels. I'd say it's the vast minority of games that sell for £40 now, if you include indy titles, Steam, XBLA, PSN, budget titles, HD remakes, etc.

  • INSOMANiAC #97 5 months ago

    Maybe if the suppliers gave small indie shops like mine the new games cheaper so we could actullay make a profit on them we might be encouraged to buy and sell more. Im afraid I'm not interested in selling a new game for 3 pounds (possible) profit, or having it sat on the shelf while it rapidly decreases in value, when I can make a fiver off a second hand copy.

    Oops I forgot, if you're not Tesco or Asda no one gives a fuck.

  • BonzoBanana #98 5 months ago

    I think the fact is games are too cheap for the cost of development. The trouble is people are spoilt for choice what they can spend their leisure time doing. Games need to be £70-80 but this would shrink sales considerably. Game publishers need to realise that they have to lower development costs due to the competitive nature of gaming nowadays.

    The heavy discounting of games is ridiculous too. A £50 game that fails to sell well is often discounted to something like £10 pretty quickly like 4 months. They really need to set game prices at the same level and make less of the less successful titles. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are fools to themselves they often force publishers to buy a huge amount of games and when they don't sell well it forces heavy discounting. Game publishing should be more flexible so that maybe only 100,000 are produced and if demand exceeds that another 50,000 is produced etc. They need to keep introducing free downloads for games to stop people selling their games. If they produced an extra free level every 2 months after release many would hold onto their games waiting to play the free levels etc. At the moment you play the game and are motivated to sell it as soon as you have finished. You need to reward people to keep games longer.

  • Timbercottage #99 5 months ago

    "less games would probably have been bought..."

    FEWER games!!!!!

    Sincerely,
    Grammar police.

  • Lucodeath #100 5 months ago

    Ask Guillaume de Fondaumiere Fauntleroy how much money he earnt from it? Most likely shit loads thats why games are expensive. Id say 50% of my collection is 2nd hand but the other 50% of new stuff cost shit loads
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 12:31

  • silversun #101 5 months ago

    @Insomaniac (have makeclear this my own view/ thought i not representing anyone else -lol dont ask)

    Stores like yours i like because i can find older games that are no longer on sale.
    I just wondering what your view on new vs older games that are sold preowned?
    do you sell just newer stuff, because i think older retro stuff would be better for smaller stores that are not like the big supermarkets.
    Edited by 3 at 12/09/11 @ 12:41

  • Timbercottage #102 5 months ago

    Games aren't too expensive! They're cheaper now than they have been for ages! I remember getting Starfox on the N64 for £60! This is 10 years ago when £60 was closer to £100 at today's prices. Everything else has been subject to inflation but the cost of video games has decreased whilst most other things have gone up (beer is a very good example!) Stop moaning about the cost of video games, they're priced perfectly.

  • Gearskin #103 5 months ago

    Developers should see some return on second hand sales. The industry is seemingly more cutthroat than ever, every penny counts. Studios get closed, people lose their jobs.

  • silversun #104 5 months ago

    @Timbercottage
    I think game prices might be ok atm.
    I not sure but, i remember the n64 games cost so much because the catridges, there been many price models over years. streetfighter 2 when it came out did what modernwarfare is doing atm and charged alot more for it.
    older amstrad commodore and speccy games had two low price points that where under £13 and something like £2.99
    games price are always changing so not sure what is right for prices , the high cost of making big budget games may mean the prices atm are right.
    Again i not sure of this?
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 12:42

  • Spungles #105 5 months ago

    Its not about legal right to sale, its not about pricing.

    Its about whether you want a healthy industry or not, with creative people creating or business people shifting units of the latest trend. The former WILL cost us a few quid more each but lead to much better games.

    BUY NEW!

  • secombe #106 5 months ago

    How does the rental market work? Surely Blockbuster, Lovefilm etc have to pay a much higher price per unit than you or I would in the shops?

  • Bravestinsane #107 5 months ago

    In other news.....

    A cumulative number of over £1billion was lost by car manufacturers last year due to second hand sales.
    Used DVD, and CD sales accumulated a loss of £1billion to each respective industry.
    Second Hand PC sales cost Microsoft over £4billion world wide on the potential sale of their newest operating systems..


    Oh wait what am i saying, only the games industry keeps crying about this.

  • Xboxfanuk #108 5 months ago

    Just sell games direct to the customer for half the price! Instead digital delivery stores like Games on Demand charge 3x retail avg price. Consumers don't want to be jacked for buying digital.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 12:54

  • Aradiel #109 5 months ago

    "Fondaumiere believes the global recession gave rise to the second-hand video game market."

    I'm pretty sure the second-hand market existed before 2008.

    Plus, I wonder about the following:
    "Because when developers and publishers alike are going to see that they can't make a living out of producing games that are sold through retail channels, because of second-hand gaming, they will simply stop making these games,"

    That may be the case for some games, maybe. But generally, is it the case that the devs really not making enough to eat, or not making as much money as the possibly could?
    There is a pretty big distinction to be made there.

  • RandolphScott #110 5 months ago

    I love how this interesting questioning of the pricing of games has generated so much vitriol.

    His argument seems to be heading towards making games cheaper so that more people get them 1st hand and the publishers and devs can remain healthy and creative. If you sell more 1st-hand copies you can reduce the cost of each copy and make more money - so isn't everyone a winner.

    The "I can do what I want with games I've bought" and "you didn't lose sales because I wouldn't have bought it" arguments couldn't miss the point any more if they tried.

    Sorry for the above points. My real point is "What an utter bastard!"

  • DozyKipper #111 5 months ago

    JASON!

  • optimusprym8 #112 5 months ago

    You cannot say it is because games are too expensive when places like GAME, GameStation and CEZ sell 2nd-hand games for a mere £1 or £2 cheaper than buying them full price new - at least for the popular titles anyway. I expect in Heavy Rain's case, and probably LA Noire as well, a game that is only single-player will get traded in once completed (neither of these games were particularly taxing either) and then the market will be flooded and the 2nd-hand price will drop. What they should at least appreciate is the fact that people are playing their game when they may not have done so they could at least have potential future customers.

    I don't buy 2nd-hand games, especially when there is little price difference and 100% goes back to places like GAME. I do trade titles in so I guess someone has to buy them afterwards.

  • mrblonde #113 5 months ago

    Like most sony exclusives this made a loss, the ps3 just isnt the right machine if you want to make big money. Even the ps3 big guns dont draw back much more than dev costs, sonys marketting is terrible and the ps3 just not a gamers machine.( usually like myself 2nd to a 360)

  • KDR_11k #114 5 months ago

    So you make a game designed to be played exactly once so you have your personal, unique experience with it and you wonder why people sell it off once they're done with it?

  • pkclavain #115 5 months ago

    When i used to trade games in years ago i actually found it diminished the whole gaming experience. First of all you have to go into one of these dreadful shops and stand there whilst some snotty arrogant shit scans your game and offers half the amount you know they are selling it for, so you walk out feeling liking a complete mug.
    When you actually play the game you feel you have to plough through it as quickly as possible before it loses too much value.
    Nowadays I simply wait for them to come down to a reasonable price and buy new. I can take my time and actually enjoy the games.

    The best way to change peoples habits though is to incentivise them, which is exactly what the industry is starting to do. Expect more online passes and project 10 dollar type schemes in the future.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 13:08

  • RobTheBuilder #116 5 months ago

    Well drop the price or arrange a deal with retailers then. Why do companies bitch about this constantly and yet never try to broker a solution?

  • matt27 #117 5 months ago

    I'm so sick of hearing this.
    Do you think car manufacturers cry about all the used cars being sold instead of their brand new shiny ones.

  • xuiton #118 5 months ago

    so stop shafting the customers and make a deal with the retails to get a cut of second hand profits then.

  • Widge #119 5 months ago

    /in before the "iphone app store shows that games should be 69p"

  • foxski #120 5 months ago

    @Ryze So YOU are the reason I cant get LA Noire at Lovefilm for weeks at my only high rated item!!

  • retr0gamer #121 5 months ago

    What about all the people getting a lend of the game from their mate that would have also contributed? It's what I did. Had no intention of buying the game.

  • eltonpr0n #122 5 months ago

    Good work at assuming how people played your game.

    p.s. Next time make something a bit more satisfying and I might give you some money.

  • Subdominator #123 5 months ago

    I am wondering if he is driving around in a used car.

  • kosigan #124 5 months ago

    @Tomahawk: "it's up to the leading franchises to lead the way and cut their prices"

    Or, as Activision see it, put the RRP up by 10%, as they have with COD.

  • Quak #125 5 months ago

    > 25 years ago the standard price for a game was £14.99 for the home computer market (cartridges even more expensive).

    I have no idea where you bought your games from, but 25 years ago I was paying a maximum of 3.99 for my games. Some lower budget ones were available for 1.99 while the occasional box-set (They Sold a Million etc) would cost up to 4.99.

  • Folant #126 5 months ago

    Didn't read all the comments, so dunno if this has been said, but games shouldn't have 1 set RRP, I think. Prices should be set by how much you get out of the game, content wise.For example, Heavy Rain, a 7-8 hour game, should cost less than say, a 50-60 hour RPG, or a game with online multiplayer. There's replayability in all 3 of these types of game(mostly, New Game Plus or different classes on a many RPGs and, well, online multiplayer, and the different scenes in Heavy Rain) so that shouldn't be a factor of the pricing, just the initial content. I'm happier paying full RRP on a game with a lot of content than I am with something I'll likely spend less time with than a full working day.
    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 14:26

  • RawNinjaKid #127 5 months ago

    I sort of can understand his point of view; though I don't think anything should be done about it!

    There will always be a market for big budget games. (Like luxury cars!) Heavy Rain was a good example of this; however the bugs should have not existed at least on the day of sale.

  • jonc24 #128 5 months ago

    @ bad09
    This is EXACTLY what is happening. I'm so glad to see some people actually have their eyes open here. If anyone here condemns second hand sales in any way you either work for the industry or are an idiot. Why would you allow a company to restrict your consumer rights and ring mote money from you? It's like the last star wars movie where everyone is cheering on emperor palpatine as he'll "sort everything". In the end you'll be to blame when these companies destroy if all too.....

  • Valland #129 5 months ago

    I bought some used books the other day, am I a bad person?
    Actually, libraries must be costing writers a fortune.

  • Pwnsweet #130 5 months ago

    You know what, this guillotine guy is right.

    I bought the game second hand because in my country games cost about US$105 (Australia) when they're first released. As far as I'm concerned, that's bullshit. I bought the game used for US$30 just 1 month after it first released. Whilst it is a good game, as far as I'm concerned no game, which is an unessential luxury item that's way below rent, food, fuel etc on my priority list, is worth more than $US30 to me and I make it a personal rule of mine not to buy a game for any more than that. If that means buying second hand, so be it.
    Edited by 3 at 12/09/11 @ 15:50

  • Obli #131 5 months ago

    The car market is different though. A year old copy of a game that I played to death is going to be exactly the same to the next owner (providing the disc isn't scratched up, but it either works or it doesn't). Cars degrade and wear out through use and age over time.

    Just wondering, if I go to a shop to trade in three month-old games for the latest and greatest release, does the developer get paid the usual price by the shop? If so, what about the poor consumer that just lost three games from their collection to indirectly purchase a new one?

    Something needs to be done though, if developers are hurting that bad (rather than being greedy and imagining what they could have made). What about shareware? I guess skimpy games with DLC are basically shareware Oexcept the first, core piece isn't free).

    Digital distribution could be the solution but with the same (and often higher) prices compared with the physical copy, there's no way I'm buying the digital version. Digital needs to be cheaper.

    Edited by 1 at 12/09/11 @ 15:37

  • Broken_Hands #132 5 months ago

    I don't see why people support second hand sales unless the game in question is out of print. It's perfectly possible to get plenty of good games at £10 new and sealed if you shop around and act a little more patiently. For instance, i bought a copy of nier for £8 the other day and a copy of uncharted 2 for £10, both new and sealed. If you want the game industry to learn, don't buy second hand, wait until the price of new copies has reached what you are willing to pay for it; only then will the industry learn what to price their games at, and if they get it wrong you can still wait.

  • MrJihad316 #133 5 months ago

    I agree with King_Edward. From a publisher/developer standpoint second-hand sales "cost" them direct money from initial sales, but the pros far outweigh the cons. Many people who may have not shown interest in your game before could trade in old games and pick up your game cheaply. This means your game is reaching more people than it normally would increasing word of mouth and the number of people interested in the sequel or other games from the developer.

  • Pwnsweet #134 5 months ago

    @Broken_Hands

    Here's the problem with your argument:

    'random new game' takes 25 weeks to go from $100 to $30 in the shops. 'random new game' takes 10 weeks to go from $100 to $30 second hand. Personally, I'd rather go with the second hand option than wait an additional 15 weeks to buy the game at a reasonable price new.

  • Bander #135 5 months ago

    Story-based games just don't have the replay value of most other game genres, so of course people rented it, lent it out, and sold it. This type of game can be entertaining but they are not keepers.

  • Mister-Wario #136 5 months ago

    The problem that I have is that by the time I get round to buying most games they've either been out so long getting a new copy is impossible (I only got a PS3 late last year) or it's something I'm not really keen on spending £30 on. Thirdly, I don't have all the time in the world to play games, and as such I've built up a pretty big backlog of old titles I'm steadily working through. As such, getting new titles around their release is something I seldom do because it takes me so long to finish my earlier purchases.

    I think that the problem is that games, despite the price staying relatively stable over time, are still £30 or so apiece, if not more. How many people can afford to shell out that much money each time? They wait for a price drop or get it used a lot of the time, and can you really blame them? Most people don't think about the wider ramifications of buying used: they only think about the savings they can make. And they could argue it's not really their duty to support developers.

    Pricing is a really tricky issue in my eyes because a game's worth is very different to different people. I mean, I'd happily pay £30 straight off for LittleBigPlanet 2 or Modnation Racers because you can play those games for ages. But paying the same amount of money for Heavy Rain? From what I've seen it's a really interesting title, and I'm glad it got made, but at the same time, it seems to be mostly cutscene and QTE. And I know length shouldn't be a part of a game's worth, but take Portal 2: I wans't too keen on spending £40 on something that, as it turned out, I finished in 2 days. So, I waited for a price drop. So, yeah, not really sure if there's an answer to the issue of game pricing at this point.

  • kangarootoo #137 5 months ago

    How many times will we see the same discussions on this subject. I shall employ a CTRL-C CTRL-V approach.

    1. The car analogy is nonsense. Cars depreciate in a variety of ways, video game experiences do not. Stop making the car analogy people. Please stop. Stop it. It makes you look bad (I'm being polite). It really does.

    2. Price is mostly irrelevant, as second hand will always be proportionally cheaper than new. If you could sell on iPhone ganes for 50p, you would see a thriving second hand market result.

    3. Wanting to make a profit does not make developers lazy, greedy, evil or any one of a number of other bad things. Gaming is a hobby, not a charity.

    4. For the record, I don't object to the existence of the second hand market. But I also don't object to game devs wanting to earn money from each person that plays their game. Is that really so weird, you know, to earn money from each person that plays your game? As a concept, at its heart? Is that so bizarre? The way some people talk, you would think so. I find that baffling.

    That pretty much covers it.

  • jonc24 #138 5 months ago

    @ Broken Hand
    The problem with what you suggest is that if eveyone took that approach the games industry would be long since dead and buried. Yeah the publisher sees all the money but on 8 pound that's about 2 or 3 quid profit for them. I trade most of my games in when finished and keep the greats. This funds me always buying new and day one (cos I'm impatient). Those who day wait till its heavily discounted are nearly doing the dame amount of 'damage" to the industry as those who trade or buy traded.

  • bad09 #139 5 months ago

    @ kangarootoo

    "1. The car analogy is nonsense. Cars depreciate in a variety of ways, video game experiences do not. Stop making the car analogy people. Please stop. Stop it. It makes you look bad (I'm being polite). It really does. "

    No it isn't and I wish people would stop claiming it is different. A car is a product a game is a product. Cars and games are sold first hand and the makers see money. Cars and games get sold 2nd hand the makers see no money. After that manufacturers make money on parts and after sales services, games makers make money after that on DLC and after sales services. When was the last time you bought and old 2nd hand game? The physical object (the game you are buying) DOES depreciate - scratches, torn/no manual, broken box.

    "2. Price is mostly irrelevant, as second hand will always be proportionally cheaper than new. If you could sell on iPhone ganes for 50p, you would see a thriving second hand market result."

    Pure speculation and if we look at cheaper entertainment like music and movies a cheaper price actually means much less need for a 2nd hand market (even though one still exists).

    "3. Wanting to make a profit does not make developers lazy, greedy, evil or any one of a number of other bad things. Gaming is a hobby, not a charity. "

    Well that depends on how the profit is made doesn't it? We all know it's not a charity but there are ways of doing business, good or bad.

    4. For the record, I don't object to the existence of the second hand market. But I also don't object to game devs wanting to earn money from each person that plays their game. Is that really so weird, you know, to earn money from each person that plays your game? As a concept, at its heart? Is that so bizarre? The way some people talk, you would think so. I find that baffling."

    A few years ago:
    Family member/Friend: "hey bad09 that game looks cool can I borrow it?"
    Me: "yeah sure"

    The future:
    Family member/Friend: "hey bad09 that game looks cool can I borrow it to have a look?"
    Me: "No you haven't payed the dev anything you don't deserve to"

    OR

    A few years ago:
    "I don't like this game/I'm bored of this game, I'm gonna sell it on"

    The future:
    "I don't like this game/I'm bored of this game, I'm gonna sell it on...oh wait I can't devs demanded paying for everyone who plays their precious games so I can't sell it on as it's tied to me. Sure won't take the plunge on a game next time"

    Wanting to make money is not bizarre but demanding every single person who comes into contact with a game pays sure is but then I guess we've just been really lucky for the past 25 years to share games with immediate family and friends or sell on the games we no longer wanted and those poor devs and publishers have been really struggling in all that time, how it became the monster industry it is I do not know with all that evil sharing going on..

    Edited by 4 at 12/09/11 @ 17:50

  • waynenot #140 5 months ago

    Having no real reason to play a relatively short game twice probably cost it 1m. I rented it for a week and returned it after finishing it two days later.

  • gandhimaster #141 5 months ago

    i do think the selling on ebay, for example, is not what annoys developers. its places like GAME that have a couple of shelves of new titles and the rest of the store stocked to the brim of 2nd hand.

    might not be, but its a fair criticism i feel.

  • Ahskay #142 5 months ago

    You know, before there were trophies and internet nobody was complaining about 2nd hand sales but it always was around. Now they can track us and all they do is nag nag nag about lost sales. 2 million people thought your game was worth to buy full price. Be happy with that as the rest would never have bought your game if it wasn't for 2nd hand sales. You now have a million extra people to persuade for your next game. Be happy with that.

  • Ahskay #143 5 months ago

    You know, before there were trophies and internet nobody was complaining about 2nd hand sales but it always was around. Now they can track us and all they do is nag nag nag about lost sales. 2 million people thought your game was worth to buy full price. Be happy with that as the rest would never have bought your game if it wasn't for 2nd hand sales. You now have a million extra people to persuade for your next game. Be happy with that.

  • Lonewolf2002 #144 5 months ago

    You can keep your Heavy Rain, I wouldn't buy it full stop let alone 2nd hand, just my opinion after playing the demo and talking to friends who did buy it.

  • king26 #145 5 months ago

    It's a shame such a fantastic and fresh game like Heavy Rain doesn't sell as much as generic games like Gears of War 3 and Modern Warfare 3 will.

  • Kaminari #146 5 months ago

    Second-hand market costs Heavy Rain nothing at all.

    People who didn't buy Heavy Rain brand new would most likely never have bought it if second-hand market didn't exist.

  • zubnut #147 5 months ago

    Recession caused second hand sales?
    Fuck right off you frogging twat!
    When I was a kid, me and some friends used to pick up second hand spectrum/c64/atari games from markets/boot sales all the time. What a prick.

    As for the lost sales- is he a politician or something cos he talks as much bollocks?
    Love-film and it's ilk have rented games since I don't know when.
    Friends have lent games to friends since the days of the VCS.
    Families usually have more than one online profile when there are more than one gamer in the household.
    And for good measure, shoplifters have been around since the fucking stoneage.

    Idiots like this bloke are why I really despair for the games industry. Maybe a crash like atari caused back in the day wouldn't be such a bad thing to happen again - might filter out some of the utter cunts plaguing it, like this twat.

    Ah that felt good!

  • weebl #148 5 months ago

    I'm sure that someone has made this comment, but don't they think that perhaps those that bought the game second hand wouldn't have bought the game new at all?

    Personally? I didn't buy the game because I played the demo twice, doing different things and got the same outcome. I think perhaps I could play Night Trap on the MegaCD and get as much entertainment.

  • KanePaws #149 5 months ago

    Dear Guillaume de Fondaumiere,

    Make your game worth playing for more than a few hours and maybe more people will play it for a longer period of time. Also, you sold so much of your game out in order to place real advertisements and commercials everywhere that you recouped some of the "losses" already.

  • weebl #150 5 months ago

    @spacedelete

    You're aware that none of the cost of pre-owned sales go back to the developer aren't you? Therefore they are arguably as bad as each other, though if you only have a game for a short time it might persuade you to buy it.

    I can see games registering themselves with PSN ID's and Xbox Gamertags and you would have to pay a charge to play for longer than three hours or something. A bit like the rumors were before the PS3 came out and an extension of the online play surcharge that we are seeing now.

    ...which is better than when we get digital distribution and none of us actually own the product that we've payed for.

  • azic #151 5 months ago

    @RedEye
    DLC is not a necessity (at the moment)
    Servicing your Car and Parts are inevitable.

  • Loghorn #152 5 months ago

    BS. All BS. If used sales truly hurt the gaming industry, they would be gone a long time ago. If anything is hurting the gaming industry, it's things like DD, DLC, DRM, & Online passes/Season passes.

    The reason WHY developers are complaining about used sales now unlike back then is because of greed, & capitalism. They want to have full control of the gaming industry. That's why they're purposefully having DLC, Online passes/Season Passes, DRM, etc. in order to force people to buy new games & are pushing those things to go all digital (in which gamers like myself don't like.

    Here are some articles about why DD, & such practices like DLC, etc., are killing the gaming industry.

    [link url=http://www.gamingsymmetry.com/why-dlc-and-dd-are- killing-gaming
    ]http://ww w.gamingsymmetry.com/why-dlc-an...[/link]
    [link url=http://www.gamingsymmetry.com/digital-dis tribution-is-about-to-get-ugly
    ]http://ww w.gamingsymmetry.com/digital-di...[/link]
    [link url=http://www.destructoid.com /digital-distribution-the-death-of-retro-gaming-205862.phtml
    ]http://ww w.destructoid.com/digital-distr...[/link]
    [link url=http://www.destructoid.com/fea ring-the-future-of-digital-distribution-147627.phtml
    ]http://ww w.destructoid.com/fearing-the-f...[/link]

    And here's the article on why used games are helping the gaming industry:

    http://ww w.gamingsymmetry.com/the-witch-...

  • DisneyJon #153 5 months ago

    So no chance some of that 1 million borrowed the game from someone or loaned it via a rental scheme that does give money back to the publisher eh?

    Heavy rain's 5 hours of gameplay didn't equate to £40 of value. Easier for the dev to blame others rather than look inward I guess....

  • Marshall2008 #154 5 months ago

    The trade in 2nd hand games funds purchases of new titles. Unless they start to drop the price of new games then trade ins are a necessary 'evil'.

  • Mentat_Idaho #155 5 months ago

    I bought Heavy Rain and enjoyed it despite the glaring plot holes. I then lent it to two of my friends who were never going to buy it - it just wasn't the kind of thing they would buy. That doesn't mean he lost two sales - it means two people who would never have bought his games may buy the next one he releases.

  • superdelphinus #156 5 months ago

    Alternatively, consumers saved 5-10 mio

  • kangarootoo #157 5 months ago

    @bad09

    I guess a few people buy a game new so they can have a shiny box, but the majority are buying the game experience. And the game experience does NOT depreciate. To try and suggest that the possession of a physical disc is a primary part of the game buying experience is disingenuous, and you know it (do you choose your games based on the gameplay, or the picture on the cover?).

    And what relevance does the subsequent income from servicing or DLC have?


    As for the association between price and second hand markets. Yes it is speculation. Speculation is not a rude word. Speculation based on an understanding of trends and previous record is fine and dandy. Good use of the word "pure" to imply "unreliable", but they aren't the same thing. Almost everything in these threads is speculation, including your own posts. I wouldn't expect it to be any other way.


    We can all come up with anecdotal examples where of course lending a game to a friend is a fine thing to do. I made it quite clear that I had no objection to any of these things, or indeed second hand sales. I am simply pointing out that the reaction of many games to any suggestion that devs should get paid by the people that play their games, seems disproportianate and somewhat delusional.


    I've noticed a trend in the time that I've been on these pages. As soon as any subject goes anywhere near a gamer's sense of entitlement, all reasoned discussion goes out the window, to be replaced with fury and accusation. This thread, like all on this subject, is chock full of ad hominem, feeble anecdote and TERRIBLE analogies (I will go to my grave believing the car analogy is one of the worst culprits). Why can't everyone just discuss the pros and cons, you know, try and see both sides. Instead of just throwing the toys out, sticking fingers in ears and singing "LA LA LAAAA".

  • kangarootoo #158 5 months ago

    Here is a thought, assuming anyone is still reading this thread. I play devil's advocate all the time. Its fun, and its good mental exercise. How about someone else try it.

    bad09, pretend you don't like second hand sales and make a case against them. Just for fun. To see if you can.

    Go :)

  • kevinboyle82 #159 5 months ago

    I tend to gold on top games but I flogged heavy rain because it had zero replay value.

  • tiddex #160 5 months ago

    the reason why so many people play it secondhand is that heavy rain is a game that is not worth playing again after having completed all the threads of the story. after that its just like watching a movie over and over again - having the movie get you food for your child.
    you might keep a classic movie on your shelve to watch it again, but a game needs to offer some kind of challenge to make you play it again.

    dont get me wrong heavy rain is one of the greatest, most impressive games ive ever played, an unseen emotional experience, a masteropiece of storytelling - BUT you just cant get the same thrill after knowing what its all about.

    watching fight club twice reveals a lot, watching the sixth sense twice very little. i dont know if it is inherent to the medium of videogames, that playing a thriller twice is not as compelling, or if we just have to wait for a fight club-like master piece.

    btw im giving god of war 3 a replay by now and it really TOUCHeD something in me i had not realized when i pulled out the guts of that monster the first timee.

  • Leolian #161 5 months ago

    Boo fucking hoo. Deal with it.

  • Lucodeath #162 5 months ago

    Who drives the flash cars, the developers or the shop owners? Developers make shit loads already.

  • agw #163 5 months ago

    lol, gotta love the comments on articles like this. People love to justify spending less money to themselves without bothering to think that it means games as we know them will eventually cease to exist since they are not cost effective, because gamers are not willing to pay.