Breaking - Redstone sells Midway for $0.0012 a share
Megaton - Play.com drops pants in pre-Christmas sale
Report - Lich King is EB's biggest launch of all time
September 26th, 2008 @ 15:47
Bungie audio director Marty O’Donnell reckons second hand games sales have given the Halo-maker a beating, saying that creators should get extra revenue from further sales of their products.
“It’s hard to gauge the effect of used game sales on Halo, but I’m sure it’s big,” O’Donnell said.
“Complaining about sales when you have a multi-million seller is somewhat difficult to justify, but it seems to me that the folks who create and publish a game shouldn’t stop receiving income from further sales.”
O’Donnell added that the issue would impact the ability for lesser games to survive, but that digital distribution may resolve the issue.
“It will be harder for smaller titles to be successful in the future if they can’t fully realise a return on investment,” he said.
“Eventually, digital distribution is probably going to be the way most people purchase content and hopefully developers, publishers, and retailers will figure out a system that is good and fair for both the consumer and the creators of that content.
“I don’t worry that much about the middle man: he always makes out just fine.”
Del.icio.us | Digg | Share on Facebook
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I would pay up to €10 (but only if...
September 26th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
That made him sound like a generous and likeable fellah.
NOT!
September 26th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
What seems to get lost in this pre-owned debate every time I read it is this;-
Consumers being able to trade games they’ve bought and finished with for a reasonable amount is a GOOD thing. It means said consumer is able to buy more games.
Retailers buying said games from gamers for peanuts and devoting half their store space into aggressively selling them for twice as much, £5 cheaper than a new copy, rinsing/repeating without so much as a penny to those who spent 3 years / $10m making it is a BAD thing.
DRM placing unnecessary restrictions on gamers (i.e. their customers) in order to avoid the above is a BAD thing.
In the middle of that little triangle is something that works for everyone. Whether we ever get there remains to be seen :/
September 26th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Well, pricing on digital distribution is a little too high. Pricing for any medium you can’t sell on is way too high in an era where retail outlets would rather sell you a pre-owned copy due to the higher margin.
You can’t take steps to keep you product out of the pre-owned market AND keep the prices up. People only have so much money to spend and if they can’t sell something on they either don’t buy it or buy less.
You usually get 50%-70% of a game’s current value when you trade it in, so have a guess at what you should be selling non-transferable copies for. 30%-50% discount on non-boxed copies please, and for gods sake let me create a backup that I can restore without hassle.
September 26th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Very true…it’s a bit of a catch 22 with the retailers mind…if they undercut them too much online then that relationship gets damaged from the publisher’s point of view and exposes them to a bunch of other risks.
Going to be a transitionary phase for quite a while I think.
September 26th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
don’t care what the publisher wants if I buy a game played it I want to be able to sell it or trade it on so I can get something new.
They get more than enough money from collectors editions, and standard edition sales. This is just another case of I’ve had my cake but I want yours as well