Video Game Downloads Harming The Used Video Game Market?
from the well,-that's-a-flip dept
We've had a bunch of articles in the last couple years about video game execs complaining about the used video game market, saying that they deserve a cut of any such sale -- or that the used market should be banned altogether. This, of course, is short-sighted, as studies have shown that a healthy secondary market improves the primary market by adding value to the product (i.e., people may be more willing to buy the new product, knowing they'll be able to resell it later). And, of course, the market has a way of dealing with these things.So, it's a bit amusing to now see sort of the flip side to that story (sent in by the amusingly named "Just Another Moron in a Hurry") -- with some warning that the rise in direct downloads of video games is threatening the used video game market, and that may be bad for consumers as well. Obviously, those games can't be resold (at least not easily), and thus there isn't a cheap price entry point for consumers, as there is with used packages games. Again, even though this is complaining from the other side, I'm not sure it's really that big of a deal either, as the market again should start to deal with this situation. Being able to offer games direct to consumers should lower video game production costs (no more packaging/shipping/logistics/hard goods/etc.) and, even they don't initially, eventually the prices should reflect that, as well.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: downloads, used video games, video games
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
right of first sale
So there is more to this than you may think, Mike.
There has been a huge impact on resale. Look at all the MMO's and find a single one that allows transfers without actually costing the original owner a fee; it doesn't exist for a mainstream game. You can ebay all the acounts, etc for sale, but assuming those are legit is another story altogether.
Transferring with anything EA/Blizzard/Sony/MMO? Good luck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: right of first sale
EA: http://eastore.ea.com/store/ea/search/?keywords=DOWNLOAD
X-Box Live: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live
Steam: http://store.steampowered.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: right of first sale
I was talking about legal downloads too. They are equivalent to DRM in their own way, and trump first sale as mentioned. It's been this way since the days of nintendo though, for people who don't know about wonderswan/other compatibles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: right of first sale
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You mean like how the prices of music downloads reflect the fact that there is no packaging/shipping/etc costs?
Or like how the price of CDs dropped dramatically once the manufacturing plants were up to speed and the initial costs had been made back?
Oh wait, neither of those things has happened...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Full Ack!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If publishers move further away from hard goods and continue to restrict being able to transfer those downloaded products, they will effectively force purchases into a first sale only scenario. At that point they can keep charging as much as the consumer market will allow. What would suck about that is the only way to drive prices lower would be to stop buying games. I think the backlash of that would be a boom in illegal copies of games, more lobbying etc...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And you know, as Rekrul pointed out, the game prices will not be dropped to reflect this change in distribution method and taking away the used game sale.
If Microsoft/Sony started selling 360/PS3 games as digital download in competition with brick and mortar stores, Gamestop and the like will have a huge hissy fit. Imagine, if you will, that Microsoft offers Madden 11 as a digital download for $40 while the disk version costs $60. Just imagine the fallout from the game stores. Honestly though... it kinda needs to happen.
Maybe the track they should be taking is to offer older games as a digital download at prices comparable to the used games. I can drive down to Gamestop and buy Just Cause for $10. Why not offer it up as a download for 800 Microsoft Points?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Scary part about well-done DRM
Steam makes it incredibly easy to buy new games. I can (and have) bought games on a whim that took 1 minute for the purchase and about 2 hours to download, all without leaving my chair. Their massive collection of games, great community, and constant deals that makes it a juggernaut of video game distribution that completely negates any resell of an individual game.
From Steam's "Purchase Gifts and Guest Passes" page: The scary part is: Steam has done so much right that people will continue to use it (like me), which will push the industry in the direction of no second sales. In this case, the market forces are actually moving against second sales because Steam's model is so successful.
P.S. Steam: If my friend doesn't have a toaster, a used one is still a valuable gift ... you asses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know I won't
Or they don't, like me. During a buddy's holiday he lend me his computer so I could play through Half-Life 2 logged in to his Steam account. I had bought HL + Opposing Force before but as with the upcoming Starcraft 2 (no LAN!) I don't see any reason why I'm required to have an internet connection just to play a game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Scary part about well-done DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Scary part about well-done DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
App store cage
I don't think these types of services should be allowed to tell you that you are "buying" anything, because if you don't have resell rights then you don't really "own" anything at the end of the transaction. What you have is a subscription with more complicated terms. At best you have a rental, not a purchase. Valve's Steam service treats their subscribers admirably given the current problems with the market field, but they still don't treat them with the basic respect other more traditional retailers do: they don't admit the truth that their customers are all subscribers, and never owners.
All purveyors of DRMed products that say you can "buy" anything from them should be held liable for false advertising at least. I think it would be more just and honest to call it fraud, and prosecute them all accordingly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: App store cage
Of course, many will argue that click-through EULAs like this aren't valid, that many people are fooled because their two-year-old children end up clicking "agree" and they never find out about the agreement, and so on. Worse, some digital products (music on CD or movies on DVDs, for example) include no such license agreement, and yet they are also licensed.
The license/purchase dichotomy is a funny thing. We make purchases all the time that are actually somewhat complicated arrangements without any formal agreement. Every time I get a Coke at Taco Bell, I've entered into a very weird implicit agreement with them. I don't get a soda, I get an empty cup which I can fill as many times as I want at the self-serve fountain, but if I leave I can no longer return and fill up the cup. I can, however, go outside to my car and grab something, come right back in, and get a refill. So there's some extant but ill-defined grace period in which I can leave and still get a refill. I also cannot bring in my own cup and get refills, I have to buy one of theirs, even though my cup is just as good - this is a form of SRM (Soda Rights Management). I can give or sell my tacos to the next guy coming in the door, but I can't give or sell my cup to the same guy so he can get refills. Clearly, Taco Bell is interfering with my right of first sale. Nonetheless, I have never signed, read, or clicked-through any sort of agreement with Taco Bell outlining this arrangement.
How do you think we should deal with licensing things in a way that seems "fair" to you? If people agree to license agreements they haven't read, and then argue they aren't valid anyway, how are you supposed to license something to someone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: App store cage
They have liquid which requires a container to drink it. They provide that container for money. I purchase it.
If I had my own container, I'd use it. If they don't like it, tough. I'll go eat somewhere else then. It's like... 10 cents cost to them. If they estimate everyone having at least 1 refill (even though most people don't get one), then I'm not making a dent in their sales by having a soda. They're still making a greater profit margin than estimated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: App store cage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: App store cage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: App store cage
Your fast-food examples aren't really applicable here, because they only apply to a type of consumable that is destroyed or diminished with use. Hardware and software don't qualify in the same schema at all. Hardware can experience some small level of wear and aging from extended use, but arguments about that deal in warranty issues and not EULAs so much. Digits don't age. I guess you can try to eat your iPhone or PSP Go to make a point, but I'm not sure what that point would be -- a study of the effects of gastric acid on electronics, and subsequent warranty service?
In general, if any sense of "ownership" is entirely dependent on a "license", I don't think it really qualifies as ownership. They own it. You just lease, rent, or subscribe to it, which all amount to the same thing to me: non-ownership. It's even worse than those rent-to-own schemes, because they make even delayed-and-overpriced ownership impossible. It's just that simple. These DRM companies are the ones intentionally trying to obfuscate the reality of the transaction, and I think they should be held liable for their lack honesty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only problem is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The old days...
Now, since everything has DRM, online registration, 1-use CD keys, and whatever other garbage they try to put on it, you're stuck with whatever game you buy with ZERO resale value.
With Pirate Bay in the crapper, I now purchase FEWER legitimate games because I can no longer try them out before I buy them (unless a friend buys it first and tells me it's decent).
Downloading content (like with Steam) is convenient. I've not purchased a game at an actual store (or purchased anything at an actual store, really, other than food) for a long time. The benefit? Not having to change CDs every time you want to play a different game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is a retailer complaint - not publisher
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So, theoretically, you can't resell music you've purchased (unless its the actual CD and we're all aware that you can resell those anyway).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Controlled market = fixed prices
I've ranted about it in great big walls of text on my gaming blog, but the tl;dr version is: content that's been on the Xbox Marketplace since the day it launched is still at its original price, whereas disc-based games on the open market (for even far less time than those DLC items) are available at much lower prices. You get ridiculous situations where add-on content (expansions or map packs) end up costing five times what the game is actually worth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Geez Mike, what planet do you live on?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Duhhh.
For file-sharers who wouldn't buy anyway -> no impact
For file-sharers who try before they buy -> no impact
This doesn't mean there is no impact from file sharing, and I don't think Mike has said that, but shows it's not always negative.
As for games bought via download, it harms the used video game market because they can't be resold! It reduces the product availability in that market. No product to be sold, no market! It's a completely different question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Short-sighted indeed
However, the used video game market might cause some lost revenue in value priced old games.
I personally hope the used video game market thrives, precisely so direct download prices come down. It makes little sense for games to be sold on Steam, etc, at retail shop prices, precisely because of the cost savings involved. I like Steam, and have bought a few games there, but only old games or during promotions. New games are sold at 50€ just like in stores, and I can order them on amazon.co.uk or play.com saving 15-25€! It makes no sense to me to buy new games on Steam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]