Steam item/game trading beta now underway

[MOnk]

Ok maybe fascination wasn't the right word but I think your comparison to books is a good one. With both games and books what you are buying is merely a medium for which to experience the product. The paper and plastic are just there to deliver what you really want.

I think, but I'm speculating, used books aren't as big a problem as used games for various reasons. People don't trade or sell them as quickly, so you don't find brand new books in used book stores the same week they are released. The quantity is far lower, maybe I don't look in the right places but used books seem to be far less prevalent than used games. Also we don't have big gaming stores who actively promote used products versus new products like Gamestop does in the states which is a major issue for developers.

Just like games, I have never bought a second hand book nor ever sold any of mine.

I don't see the 'support the developer' argument as a cop-out I think it's the main thrust of the argument. The console thing was just there since that is were most of the second hand trade happens as PC trade is fairly minimal due to the whole CD-key lock in issue.

but most of my games were bought for <R100 from 3rd party studios.

What's a 3rd party studio?

So I haven't supported any developers as much as I would like to all because they don't seem to have a way of making money unless they charge >R300 for something.

That doesn't make sense to me, you don't give them money because they can't make money off a R300 product?


Look I get the desire to want to own something and have it belong to you but I think that concept needs adjustment for our new digital world were scarcity and entropy are largely irrelevant.

[kaytel]

I don't really understand this fascination with used games, I have never sold any game that I have bought and I don't believe it's some basic right for us to be able to do so.

On a more practical front however are you saying you would prefer the console scenario where you buy a game for R600 and sell it for R350-400 instead of just buying it for R50-150 that is often the case with Steam.

For me buying a game is like purchasing a movie ticket, it's your passport to experience the world of the game for as long as you want and as many times as you want. Like it or not second hand games screw over the developers who make these games that we all love so much. So if I can't afford a game I would rather wait until it gets cheaper and pay R150 that actually goes to the people who made the game rather than paying R400 which at best gets circulated between gamers and at worst goes to pawn shops and second hand retailers.

No you're buying a physical product that just like your TV, car, couch and everything else, you have the right to use until it is defunct or want to sell it. Yes greedy developers whine endlessly about people exercising this right with games. It's not new. Book publishers had the same sob story back in the day. They lost that battle. And rightly so should game producers.

Now when those consumers who must have the latest game as soon as it comes out then resell it they horde that money right? None of it goes towards further games?

All those shops keep all their money in a bank vault? They'd never do anything crazy like have employees that they pay, who then go spend that money elsewhere in the economy, even maybe on a game.

I think, but I'm speculating, used books aren't as big a problem as used games for various reasons.

Why would you think that?

Look I get the desire to want to own something and have it belong to you but I think that concept needs adjustment for our new digital world were scarcity and entropy are largely irrelevant.

And yet artificial scarcity is exactly how the likes of the music, movie and game businesses manage to continue charging gouging prices. Basically these people want it both ways. They want to charge high prices and force you to buy new. That's not surprising since their goal is correctly to make as much money as quickly as possible. It's just surprising how many consumers are willing to give away their rights, so those guys can get richer. It's like a welfare system.

[kaytel]

Except that you are not buying a movie ticket but an actual physical product. I am sure second hand book sales "screw over" writers but none of them are whining about this. Really if developers can't come up with a way to make enough money that is not my problem either and this "support the developers" rhetoric is just a cop-out to me when there has never been a successful argument put forth why games should work differently.

Correct. It's very clever how they have managed to get people to buy into this nonsense. Writers did once whine about this stuff, but they lost their battle decades ago. There are renewed attempts with digital books and it's not clear how this will play out. Particularly as they've already managed to get many people to drink the kool-aid when it comes to games.

[MOnk]

Why would you think that?

The rest of the paragraph?

All those shops keep all their money in a bank vault? They'd never do anything crazy like have employees that they pay, who then go spend that money elsewhere in the economy, even maybe on a game.

Have you heard of Gamestop? They make billions on used game sales and pay their employees peanuts. So that's billions flowing out of the gaming industry and into shareholders and executives pockets.

It's not nonsense, no-one is drinking the 'koolaid' it's just a fundamental paradigm shift of how we treat intellectual property.

[kaytel]

The rest of the paragraph?

I was referring to your entire statement. Even if books don't get traded as quickly that would only be one aspect. But it doesn't matter because books do get sold used. Whole shops get dedicated to it. And there are huge numbers of them in libraries all over, so numerous people can read books without buying them.

Have you heard of Gamestop? They make billions on used game sales and pay their employees peanuts. So that's billions flowing out of the gaming industry and into shareholders and executives pockets.

I know all about Gamestop. They don't exclusively sell used games. And they do pay their employees which is all that really matters. Furthermore the fact is that neither this money nor the company's disappears out of the economy. Frankly you're going to have a hard time demonstrating your case.

It's not nonsense, no-one is drinking the 'koolaid' it's just a fundamental paradigm shift of how we treat intellectual property.

Exactly, these companies want special treatment so they can get richer. They want us to believe their product is somehow a special case deserving a more substantial wealth transfer system being put in place, so they can redirect more of our money into their pockets. You have to drink the kool-aid to go along with it. Give me even one good reason why they should be viewed as so special that we say screw the rest of the economy?

[MOnk]

Furthermore the fact is that neither this money nor the company's disappears out of the economy.

I never said the money disappears from the economy I said the money is channeled away from the gaming industry and away from the people who make games. Unless you're telling me every Gamestop shareholder and executive spends all the money they make on buying games. Sure they don't exclusively sell used games but they do prioritize and incentivize their sale because their profits are higher on used sales.

I don't get this hate on developers, they make entertainment products which we enjoy but do not require. As for being greedy, well we see so many good development studios shut down even after relatively popular or successful games and even more independent developers struggle to break even on quality games. I find it tough to just blanket all developers as greedy blood suckers trying to screw you over.

It would be nice if we had a situation where all the money spent on games, even the hypothetical revenues of piracy, actually went back to the people who made them, then maybe games would be R100-200 and we wouldn't have all this crappy DRM and always on BS.

[Prometheus]

What's a 3rd party studio?

What I call 3rd party studio are the ones like Sold Out that don't develop any of their own games or have relationships with developers but only buys licensing rights for a minimal fee after a game is no longer being sold.

That doesn't make sense to me, you don't give them money because they can't make money off a R300 product?

As I said I would like to support someone making a good product but I simply can't pay R300 or more to every developer for every game. Where the problem comes in, and I have discussed this before, is that developers don't seem to have any idea how to continue making money off their products. Where I can just go into a store and buy a 10 year old movie, often not for much less than when it was released, I have to struggle to find a game that isn't even a year old. There seems to be this mindset that if they can't sell it for 5 times what it's worth for a month or two (hence all this pre-order stuff) it is not worth making.

Look I get the desire to want to own something and have it belong to you but I think that concept needs adjustment for our new digital world were scarcity and entropy are largely irrelevant.

And here we get to the real problem of who owns what. I encourage you to read an article on techdirt for a deeper insight into the whole history and true purpose of copyright. This concept has been defined and redefined so often that it is no longer recognisable from its original inception.

The reason I bring up the book point is because it has been upheld through the ages that even though I don't own the words I do own the physical medium and can give it away with the words as long as I don't make another copy of it. True we live in a different age now where we almost don't need a physical medium any more. The problem here is not that copyright has been redefined but rather that it hasn't and so developers has made us pay for contracts to use their products rather than the right to use them. If I can't resell that right like with a book it actually goes contrary to what copyright is to achieve - it does not advance science and the arts but hampers them.

There is a skewed sense of rights here but it seems like some governments are acknowledging the problem and thinking of changes to address it.

I never said the money disappears from the economy I said the money is channeled away from the gaming industry and away from the people who make games. Unless you're telling me every Gamestop shareholder and executive spends all the money they make on buying games. Sure they don't exclusively sell used games but they do prioritize and incentivize their sale because their profits are higher on used sales.

I don't get this hate on developers, they make entertainment products which we enjoy but do not require. As for being greedy, well we see so many good development studios shut down even after relatively popular or successful games and even more independent developers struggle to break even on quality games. I find it tough to just blanket all developers as greedy blood suckers trying to screw you over.

I get the point you are making. I certainly don't blanket all of them as "greedy blood suckers", but an increasing number of them seem to be complaining lately. What I am wondering is how movies can make a huge loss at the box-office but developers who charge mega bucks for first game sales close down shop at the first hint of trouble. Something is seriously wrong with the business side of this industry. How many of these studios that closed up shop actually continued selling their products until their last day? If they didn't they only have themselves to blame for it.

When I watch a movie I don't have to think about supporting the people who made it. Obviously I am supporting them in some way or I wouldn't be able to watch it whether that's through retail, rental, subscription, or even advertising. If I play a game I'm also supporting them in some way and shouldn't have to think about extra ways in which to do it. You also can't blame companies like Gamestop who are operating in an open competitive industry.

It would be nice if we had a situation where all the money spent on games, even the hypothetical revenues of piracy, actually went back to the people who made them, then maybe games would be R100-200 and we wouldn't have all this crappy DRM and always on BS.

In a perfect world it would be nice. It would also be if I sell this table for R500 and the person who resells it for R300 gave that money to me. I would still sell it for R500 though, win-win all round. Fact is that publishers claim piracy is not a problem on consoles yet charge more for the games and all those failed DRM attempts have probably driven more people to piracy.

[Prometheus]

I was referring to your entire statement. Even if books don't get traded as quickly that would only be one aspect. But it doesn't matter because books do get sold used. Whole shops get dedicated to it. And there are huge numbers of them in libraries all over, so numerous people can read books without buying them.

The library point is a good one and they have existed since antiquity. Was probably before my time as I'm not aware of the book publishers using this same trick. I would think that they have it even harder when their works can be read for free. Yet somehow the industry is flourishing even with major competition and knowledge is abundant. Game publishers compared have it easy in fact and are still complaining.

The economy is much larger than just the game developers. Like for instance that Gamestop employee that even though he may earn just a pittance is making money from second hand game sales to put food on the table, and the shareholder that invested money in an open economy that we think of as greedy because he's expecting a return on investment.

[MOnk]

Movies work quite a bit differently, they don't have a set group of people who always work together making movies. Instead for each movie project the people working on it are assembled once the movie has gone into production. Most movies, unless you are independent, are funded by movie studios like Sony or Fox and they take responsibility for any profits or losses. Plenty of movies have made pretty big losses yet you never hear of anything closing down.

Where I can just go into a store and buy a 10 year old movie, often not for much less than when it was released, I have to struggle to find a game that isn't even a year old.

That's an issue with buying patterns, retailers and to an extent the relatively small customer base games have in SA. I don't it's developers saying "Hey we don't want to sell you our games for more than a month", it's just a reality of how things fit together. I don't even bother with retail shops anymore, who needs the hassle of hunting around, so if I want an older game it's either bought online or through Steam.