Used game sales are killing single player games

MOnk said:
Their updated installers make a big difference. Nothing worse than breaking out a golden oldie only to have hassles even trying to install the thing.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for them to acquire the rights to sell Grim Fandango. No matter what I do, I can't even get it installed properly, and when I got it to install I couldn't even get it to run. :(
 
Interesting retort by Jim Sterling over at dtoid; http://www.destructoid.com/braben-used-games-are-killing-single-player-games-224204.phtml#ext

The preowned market has become an excellent scapegoat for unsuccessful studios, especially since there are no definitive numbers backing up their claims. There's only speculation and assumption, which means they can point at something else to escape the many other factors that go into a game's ultimate retail performance. Meanwhile, publishers sell games at high prices, institute anti-consumer practices like online passes and sub-par DLC, then act hurt and confused when such activities weirdly don't harbor undying customer loyalty.
Click to expand...

I say it's interesting mostly because those are my exact views. :) Just like piracy, used games is often 'the thing' people who make shit games like to point at and say "this is why our game didn't sell".

It also seems like Mr.Braben has a history of overstating the negative impact used sales has on the market.
Braben rides the Wahmbulence again: Claims game stores 'defraud' the industry
More bitching about pre-owned games from David Braben
Braben: 'Rawr rawr pre-owned games rawr rawr rawr'

"I think it's really damaging to the single-player experience," whines Braben. "Games like BioShock and Assassin's Creed, where they're perfectly valid games, but once you've played them they go into the pre-owned section.
Click to expand...
Yeah and thanks to used games Bioshock and Assassin's Creed are both dead, damn you used game sales.
 
Last edited:
EA and Valve are only now figuring out how to sell games. Everyone else is still stuck in the past it seems.

Singleplayer games, like it or not in todays age have short live spans. Your gonna want to sell it quick and at different price points so that the majority are able to buy it. For instance EA has a Value Games serious selling games for cheap from 1 year and onwards, but that in my opinion is still too long. Steam is however doing a slightly better job, selling game at more various price points in a shorter time-span. In my opinion the optimal price reduction dateline would be R300/R200/R100/R50 for 30/60/120/360 days.



The current strategy of seeing how long you can sell a game at the premium price point just ain't working.
 
Last edited:
MOnk said:
What is your evidence for this conclusion?
Click to expand...

If they drop the price on titles sooner, then people who don't want to spend 600+ on a game will buy new instead of preplayed.
The platinums already work like this but it usually takes close to a year to go platinum, and the platinum covers are ugly. If Sony spice up the platinum idea it could boost platinum sales at the expense of preplayed.
 
reactor_sa said:
If they drop the price on titles sooner, then people who don't want to spend 600+ on a game will buy new instead of preplayed.
The platinums already work like this but it usually takes close to a year to go platinum, and the platinum covers are ugly. If Sony spice up the platinum idea it could boost platinum sales at the expense of preplayed.
Click to expand...
While I'm not saying you are wrong (considering lots a experimentation and research needs to be done on this topic), I will say your reasoning is flawed.

Selling games is a business and thus people make and sell games to make money. So you can't just say "well if you made games cheaper more people would buy" since you have to then ask HOW many more people would buy, if you made them half price would more than twice the number of people buy the game. Would making them cheaper actually stop second hand sales, if a new game was R300 and a second hand one was R200 wouldn't the same people who already buy second hand just continue to do so.

So to just go and claim that cheaper games would mean more revenue and less second hand is extremely reductive.
 
Last edited:
You guys still carrying on about this :p

There are just way to many variables to consider. The fact of the matter is, 2nd hand sales are not hurting game sales.
Gaming sales are at an all time high, they are just being a bunch of greedy clowns.
 
The Joker said:
There are just way to many variables to consider. The fact of the matter is, 2nd hand sales are not hurting game sales.
Gaming sales are at an all time high, they are just being a bunch of greedy clowns.
Click to expand...

Maybe because there are so many sequels coming out lately and people who have never played any games in that series are trying out second hand options to see if the game series is to their liking. Kinda acting like a demo version as more and more games are starting to not have demos at all or demos come out after game releases like Starcraft 2?
 
MOnk said:
While I'm not saying you are wrong (considering lots a experimentation and research needs to be done on this topic), I will say your reasoning is flawed.

Selling games is a business and thus people make and sell games to make money. So you can't just say "well if you made games cheaper more people would buy" since you have to then ask HOW many more people would buy, if you made them half price would more than twice the number of people buy the game. Would making them cheaper actually stop second hand sales, if a new game was R300 and a second hand one was R200 wouldn't the same people who already buy second hand just continue to do so.

So to just go and claim that cheaper games would mean more revenue and less second hand is extremely reductive.
Click to expand...

I think that's a bit narrow minded. I'm saying that publishers should try capture the preplayed market, not outlaw it just because it's competition. Reducing prices based on age of release is just an idea I'm throwing out as an example.
 
MOnk said:
While I'm not saying you are wrong (considering lots a experimentation and research needs to be done on this topic), I will say your reasoning is flawed.

Selling games is a business and thus people make and sell games to make money. So you can't just say "well if you made games cheaper more people would buy" since you have to then ask HOW many more people would buy, if you made them half price would more than twice the number of people buy the game. Would making them cheaper actually stop second hand sales, if a new game was R300 and a second hand one was R200 wouldn't the same people who already buy second hand just continue to do so.

So to just go and claim that cheaper games would mean more revenue and less second hand is extremely reductive.
Click to expand...

Just go ask valve how much money they make on each of there special compared to normal priced games. I think there some were here on mygaming a artical about it.
 
MOnk said:
How is it being narrow minded by pointing out that your argument oversimplifies a complex situation.
Click to expand...

Because it was an example, not a complete solution. No need to shoot down an idea just because you can't see the bigger picture. Did you expect that someone on this forum bouncing 'ideas' around would have the solution to a supposed problem that multi million dollar publisher's haven't thought of?

Bigger picture, just saying...
 
Weasley said:
Just go ask valve how much money they make on each of there special compared to normal priced games. I think there some were here on mygaming a artical about it.
Click to expand...
Yeah Valve are one of the guys they are really putting effort into exploring the issue of revenue models and game pricing but you have to remember this is happening in the PC space so you're not talking about the second hand market. This is also happening on a digital distribution platform where you can do things like this, when you talking about console games it's still largely a retail market where you can't really co-ordinate and bounce around prices like Steam does.

As I said there is still lots to learn about how to price, market and monetize games and a lot of that innovation has been sparked by the movement towards digital and the growth of indie devs but it's really too early to say definitively what works best.

Because it was an example, not a complete solution. No need to shoot down an idea just because you can't see the bigger picture. Did you expect that someone on this forum bouncing 'ideas' around would have the solution to a supposed problem that multi million dollar publisher's haven't thought of?

Bigger picture, just saying...
Click to expand...
What bigger picture, you just keep saying stuff, provide zero evidence or discussion and then just expect everyone to agree with you. Yes forums are for discussions hence people discuss things, this is an interesting topic and relevant to many people so why wouldn't they throw some ideas around.

Your only argument seems to be "shut up, I'm right".
 
MOnk said:
Yeah Valve are one of the guys they are really putting effort into exploring the issue of revenue models and game pricing but you have to remember this is happening in the PC space so you're not talking about the second hand market. This is also happening on a digital distribution platform where you can do things like this, when you talking about console games it's still largely a retail market where you can't really co-ordinate and bounce around prices like Steam does.

As I said there is still lots to learn about how to price, market and monetize games and a lot of that innovation has been sparked by the movement towards digital and the growth of indie devs but it's really too early to say definitively what works best.


What bigger picture, you just keep saying stuff, provide zero evidence or discussion and then just expect everyone to agree with you. Yes forums are for discussions hence people discuss things, this is an interesting topic and relevant to many people so why wouldn't they throw some ideas around.

Your only argument seems to be "shut up, I'm right".
Click to expand...

What i was trying to say is that steam has proven price makes a difference and PC gamers are probably bit more price sensitive we don't really have a second hand market but we do have piracy to keep price in check.
 
we not really price sensitive it just that south africa is over charging a lot of good game... i really dont mind spending on some good game but just sometime the price they charging dont make sense
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top