Used and abused

I've always been this staunch believer in supporting the industry.

I've very rarely bought a used game, and have only done so when the game is clearly out of print.

And before I got on any further, I'm not tooting my own horn here. This will not turn out to be some holier than thou post where I point out your foibles and laugh.

I've never had the heart to hack any of my systems or pirate games. An R4 would make my life so easy, as it stands I own 47 Nintendo DS games. Being able to carry a large chunk of those on one gray market cartridge sounds like my idea of heaven (or at least a very nice resort). But I view the R4 like the ring from Lord of the...Rings. Whoever touches one turns to diarrhea, and they never buy a game again. I don't want to suffer that same fate.

So, the reason I'm going on about this is that now I'm hearing that the used game market isn't as bad as on might think. Now, I'm not some dolt buying into the blather of some high up executive. While the points made by Dan DeMatteo, the chief executive officer of GameStop, are to be taken with a grain of salt, I do have to say that even post-salt, his points are interesting.

For starters, if say, 100 used games are sold at any given time, only three or four of those are titles that have been released in the last 90 days. That means while Gears of War 2 has been traded in, for three months very few are being sold second hand. So when we read of a title selling 2 million copies in its first week at retail, it's safe to say they're going to do all right.

To continue his point, DeMatteo says that people trading in games are generally putting that credit towards new games, not used. Which is interesting, because it's not as if they're endlessly recycling used titles.

DeMatteo's last point is that gamers are still spending quite a bit of money even when they intend to eventually trade the title in. As I or anyone can tell you, it's a fair generalization to say you get nothing for your trades. So, when we buy that brand new $60 game, we understand we'll make back a third of that if we're lucky. I thought GameStop's argument here was a bit weak, because I already understand that the industry is receiving that money, but this point is a bit redundant in the grand scheme of things.

So, I could hardly say my eyes have been opened to the beauty of trades. However, I do agree that they have a place in the industry, and to condemn them is a bit loopy. I mean, not everyone works a job where they can support their game related habits. $10 or $15 dollars taken off the top is something many people consider easier to swallow or justify.

It's obvious that DLC is the industry's current solution to this problem. Even if I do buy a game used, if I like it, I'm likely to buy the extra content. How I figure it is, if people will only buy games used, they're generally not a consumer you'd be pleasing anyways, so don't attempt to paint the picture that used games are the problem.

 While DeMatteo obviously has an agenda, it's interesting to see that we're not as close to the brink of death as I thought we were. If developers and publishers feel the squeeze to make games that don't bubble up as used games a few days after release, then I'm for it. If they create the incentive, then I'm totally there day one. But people will treat poo like poo, so don't put it out there then complain about the results.

Comments

[Jason Chamberlain]

The Used... are my... FAVORITE BAND!!!!