Weep Not For The Publishers: Used Games Debate Is Missing The Point
So there has been a lot of hubbub today about the recent comments by THQ’s Cory Ledesma, stating that “when the game’s bought used [the developers] get cheated”. This was in response to THQ bundling a one-time code in new games enabling multiplayer access, preventing used game buyers from automatically getting access to online play. This is hardly a new contact, of course, since EA has done it several games over the past few years, most notably its sports titles and Mass Effect 2.
Nonetheless, this has caused a furor among gamers, especially after Penny Arcade posted in defense of developers, stating, “If I am purchasing games in order to reward their creators, and to ensure that more of these ingenious contraptions are produced, I honestly can’t figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy.” He has a point, honestly. Developers and publishers see absolutely no revenue from used game sales. Whether that is something they should be honestly concerned about is another question; after-market and secondhand sales of cars, homes, or other electronics are oft-cited examples of robust markets that do not raise the dander of the original manufacturers.
The point that many voices on both sides of the debate seem to be missing is that, by and large, developers do not see any direct money from games sales. Unless you are purchasing an indie game via an online service, be it XBLA or Steam or whatever, the percentage of the purchase price going directly to that developer is precisely 0. This isn’t Ebay. Rockstar doesn’t have an account that fills up with money soon after little Johnny Gamer drops his lawn mowing money. They are paid directly by the publisher, either in advance or in response to sales numbers or both. And the publisher isn’t directly paid either. They get money from vendors like Gamestop and Best Buy and indie places like Games N Go, who pay them in order to stock the games. In a sense, publishers complaining about lost revenue is like Amazon complaining about money lost to garage sales and textbook buyback programs.
Where new games sales numbers directly affect developers and publishers is in precisely that, the numbers. If Bloodkill: The Reckoning sells a million copies, the publisher is much more likely to have the developer go ahead with Bloodkill 2: The Re-reckoning then if it only sold 100 copies. So if devs are dependent on games selling high numbers to prove their worth to the publishers, why aren’t they lobbying for the publishers to include used game sales in their forecasts and reports? Surely a sale in any sense is an indication that there is interest in a title, even if it doesn’t directly contribute to the bottom line of the company. If publishers thought of used game sales in a marketing sense rather than a sold product sense (since again it is an indication of consumer interest that doesn’t cost them anything, much like a user blog post or a commercial), perhaps they would look more favorably toward used games sales, or at least less dismissively.
This is not an unheard-of tactic. Car companies have for years touted the resale value of their product, for example. Also note that the used game market has the ability to stretch the life a game franchise well beyond that year’s Christmas window. Take Beyond Good And Evil, a game that sold terribly when it was first released. Thanks in no small part to positive press then and since, the game has grown a large and loyal fanbase fed on used sales of the game made long after it went out of print, a point almost assuredly pointed out in the pitch meeting for Beyond Good And Evil 2. A significant portion of sales of the upcoming sequel will be due to the used game market keeping good games available to people that for whatever reason missed out the first time around.
In the end, the only direct victim of used game sales is publishers, which in the age of digital distribution are about as necessary to game developers as music labels are to musicians, which is exactly dick all. While I certainly understand the plight of developers, the fault does not lie with consumers, just outdated models. Developers, beholden to the whims of the money men, are forced to defend their practices since they believe that being attached to a “big label” is the only way to go. This is no longer the case, and is becoming less and less the case every year. If we as consumers want to help developers, support developers that directly distribute their games. Where that isn’t possible, and you want to reward developers that put out the games you enjoy, buy games new if you can, from your friendly local game store where possible. And buy DLC that you think is worth it. But certainly don’t feel guilty for buying used. There is no bad way to buy games. Don’t let the pubs and their serfs the developers tell you otherwise.