I’ve detailed my preference for used games in the past, so needless to say, I laughed when I saw THQ’s creative director, Cory Ledesma, go on the record to say that used games purchasers are cheating the developers and are not loyal fans. Following that, though, I was stunned to see outlets such as Penny Arcade backing THQ up. In their latest post, the PA crew flat out demonizes the purchasers of used games. For the past 10+ years I’ve looked to Penny Arcade as a source of valued and enlightened opinion, so I doubted myself for a moment. Am I a bad person? Hell no I’m not.
Point 1: It’s My Legal Right
I have nothing but respect for the developers of games. They are a passionate group of people who work hard every day to bring me games that I enjoy. However, it is nobody’s place to judge why I feel the need to purchase a title used instead of new, especially when it is perfectly legal to do so. The first-sale doctrine, as established by the US Supreme Court, limits the reach of copyright law by allowing consumers to lawfully sell previously purchased copyrighted work without permission. First sale pertains to books, music, movies, and yes games as well. Exercising your rights does not make you a bad person, although you may be painted in that light, which brings me to my next point.
Point 2: Keep Gamestop Out of the Argument
Those who attempt to frame used game purchasers in as selfish delinquents often run straight to the Gamestop example. I don’t think we need to go into the reasons why Gamestop is evil, but if you are a gamer who is buying their games at a $5 used discount there, rather than 50%+ off online, you are beyond hope. In the eyes of the haters, all used consumers are the thug guy pictured in the Penny Arcade comic, but this is simply not true. When defending your stance as a publisher, do not try to attack someone’s credibility without actually addressing their stance.
Point 3: You’re Eating Your Own Lunch
A used game purchase is part of the food chain. Obviously, there are a large number of individuals who turn around and sell their games once they beat them. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if there were not. Whether it’s a conscious decision or not, when those individuals decide whether to buy Game A or Game B, they will know that if one of those games has gimped features upon resale, that they won’t be getting nearly as much for it when they go to sell. This is not hurting the used game purchaser, but the primary customer of the video game publisher, and it will cause some level of market erosion towards games that can be resold.
Point 4: The Market is Bloated
If a game publisher cannot stay afloat in the face of used sales, then there is simply not enough demand for their games to warrant that publisher staying in business. Rather than create a new business model that taps into previously unexplored sectors of the gaming hobby, publishers are attempting to trap their existing audience into paying full price. The reality is that for many people, the choice is between buying used and not buying at all. Customers do not take kindly to being treated as criminals, and moves such as this are signs of a bloated industry.
Opponents may spin my previous point to say that gamers themselves are eating their own lunch by created a world where less games exist, but I argue that there is not enough time in a day to play every single great game as they come out. I would gladly take quality over quantity any day.
This is a topic that will fold into a larger debate, and will occur with increased frequency as media shifts towards digital distribution. The way in which we own media, and the right to both use and sell it, will be put to question in the coming years. What are your thoughts on this topic?
This is a great article. I’ve always been a Penny Arcade reader/follower as well but didn’t see they backed THQ with this. I agree that is disappointing. I agree, you are in fact not a criminal because you buy used games. If anything you are a criminal because of all of the dead hookers in your trunk.
There’s no right or wrong here. I have the same approach that I do to music at this stage in my life.
If I really like and support a studio or artist, I will purchase their product in a manner that will most directly support them. I want them to thrive, and make more stuff that I love. New products, and stuff I’m on the fence about, I’ll buy used, or borrow. If I am sold, sequels or future productions by the same company will be considered for purchase. Sure, it costs more, but as someone who hopes to be payed to create things at some point in the future, I’m idealistic.
That being said, I’ll sell my old games in a heartbeat.
I download music,art, and knowledge(HBR articles in my case)coz I feel that these things are produced without much capital.. But when it comes to games or movies, I feel guilty if I download, coz they make them with a lotta capital and man power.. and I feel that if I must enjoy the game, I need to contribute something back to the makers, or I’ll jus be cheating them.. So I think that buying used games is wrong as well.. just my opinion.. I may be wrong.
I see where you are coming from Nitin (although I am not one to judge whether it is more labor intensive to produce movies, music, or art), in that people should contribute back to the makers. My view is that one should contribute to the marketplace, but need not make their contribution directly to the maker. If I were to borrow a video game or movie from a friend and really enjoyed it, I would be inclined to go support the creator with my wallet. I would not feel the same inclination, however, if I had purchased a used product, since in my view I stimulated the marketplace already by paying my money and upping the buying power of whoever I paid.
I think there is no question that, even when you purchase a new game, as is your right, you marginally contribute to the first-run game economy by proving a measure of re-saleability to those who like to purchase new games and re-sell them after they’re done. On the other hand, it is perfectly obvious, and entirely reasonable, that game developers aren’t inclined to cater to the used game buyer. I suspect that content only available to the first owner is more a measure against straight piracy than used game buyers, however. The whole rage against used buyers is a tempest in a teapot, IMO.
I’ve sold games. I’ve bought used games, and been glad I did both. But I don’t have any illusion that, as far as the publisher is concerned, there is much difference between buying used and torrenting, because practically there isn’t.