Brjahu recently posted an article on games that you "Can't sell" or "Won't sell." "Can't sell" is where the game is digital and there is literally nothing physical to resell. "Won't sell' is where the developer and publisher come up with ways to keep you from selling a game by keeping you attached to it by releasing new DLC over a long period of time or by giving you freebies at launch.
These are both ways for developers and publishers to combat used game sales. 3 recent games have fought this by offering DLC at launch. Mass Effect 2, Dante's Inferno and Dragon Age. I just got Dragon Age from goozex (best site....evar!) and have been having a blast with it. Problem is I got it used and there was free DLC for buying it new. I traded out 2 games to get enough points to get Dragon Age for 1000 points (50 bucks). It's just a bummer now because I spent 50 bucks in points and now I have to spend another 15 bucks to get the "free" DLC that came out for free to people that actually bought the game new.
I don’t regret getting Dragon Age at all, but knowing what I know now maybe I would’ve waited another month and just got the game new for my birthday. This strategy has put a different perspective on me buying games that I’m on the fence about. Take Dante’s for example. I’m on the fence about it and I would def pick it up used, but now maybe I’ll just get it new.
Well played EA. Well played.
Glad to see you...
If the gaming industry is an automobile, and the game designers are the drivers, then that makes us, the players, backseat drivers, and we'll be damned if we're gonna let the industry keep on heading the way it's going (good or bad) without letting them know what we think. So buckle up, feel free to complain about there being no air in the back, and bring your most critical and analytical mind to the open air discussion of the current age, Backseat Gamers!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am a gamer pack rat and never trade in my games... HA! Take that, Gamestop! :P
ReplyDeleteKeep in mind that frequently the free DLC that comes with promotional new copies are sometimes limited and may not always be available, even in the situation of a new game. Those giveaways are more launch incentives. If a store sells all their new copies of a new release title, then they need to order more from the publisher. If a game has been out for a while and no new copies are moving, then the store has no reason to order extras, therefore making the inclusion of DLC that a customer would have to pay for to use otherwise, a loss on their end. It's a careful line to walk to not lose money on it, not necessarily a bash against the second-hand retailers.
ReplyDeleteAlso... If the experience of a game sitting on your shelf until you A) lose it, or B) forget about it, then by all means, hang onto them.
A very common, dare I say, universal misconception about game stores, specifically ones that do second hand games as well, is that the trade-in program is designed to be a reimbursement for what you paid. I honestly can't think of a single market or product on the planet that works like that. Even loans - you essentially buy money for more money.
Actually, I usually hang out to them as part of an entirely worthless yet sentimental video game collection. I still have Syphon Filter and maybe even the original Tony Hawk. And I still sometimes go back and play them... I usually play through Final Fantasy Tactics about once every two years or so. :D
ReplyDeleteThe line that needs to be drawn here is the difference between sentimental, functional, or financial value. After that has been determined, then we can move forward to decide what the appropriate course of action would be.
ReplyDeleteSentimentality or functionality hold a great deal of water in the discussion, as both give the owner a substantial amount of satisfaction. Financially speaking, however, holding onto something just because you paid XX amount of dollars one time to get it, is silly. It might seem like you are wasting that money by selling something (to anyone) for less than you paid, but that's how it works. It would be like keeping a ratty old T-shirt in your closet, not because you wear it, but because you couldn't bear to part with something you once paid 20 dollars for.
I have no issue with people not trading in their games. I'm nearly one of those people my self, as many games I own, I find sentimental value in, or powerful stories, or, blah blah blah. The times I get defensive is when the system is critiqued for not doing something it isn't designed to do.
I don't know if you caught the sarcasm in my "Take that, Gamestop!" sentence... :D
ReplyDeleteThe last time I traded any in was for Battlefield 2142 because I was working at Best Buy (they pay crap).