Valve sued (in Germany) for not allowing Steam users to resell games

[Jokester]

No, it was driven by desire to increase margin and hence profitability. It's cheaper to provide games this way and brings with it added benefits like the ability to restrict the trade in used products. Many of the publishers didn't and don't like Steam hence the initial reluctance.

It is absolutely correct for a business to attempt to operate in this way - after all, Valve exist not for you and me but to maximise shareholder value.

But they must do this within the laws of the markets in which they chose to operate, and it would appear the EU are less than impressed with this way of doing business.

This is the way the industry is dearly wishing it could go already!

So fundamentally you are supporting a law that will ultimately restrict consumer choice to subscription based services only.

You don't need to go into a shop and pay a relatively high price at all. You can buy a used game anywhere. From your friend next door. From an internet forum. From an auction site. From the highstreet. Wherever

But this doesn't happen cost free - trading a digital copy online will be cost free. As game 2nd hand prices decrease it reaches a point where people tend not to bother with making the sale - this will be completely removed.

If it helps people to stop making this point lets just swap cars for books or keyboards or monitors or any of the literally billions of other products you can buy and sell second hand which DONT have servicing requirements like a car does.

All these items wear out though, people tend to have a continued use for the item that stops them from selling it on in most cases 2nd hand until years later.

Games don't, if a publisher releases a game and 2nd hand sales appear within a few days, the price gets driven down extremely quickly. There is no other product market that operates in this manner.

Or perhaps it'll make developers think 'We need to develop products that have longevity - we need to make products of sufficient quality that this isn't a problem for us because by the time people begin to trade in used versions in any meaningful quantity, the product has reached the end of its lifecycle anyway'?

If only that was so easy, as I said the financial risks in doing so will kill any decision to develop a game in such a manner.

 

[Notorious]

supposedly your leasing a license for the game, to be revoked at some time in the software's license. Best bet is lease the license from a British game leaser or buy the software in a state you can resell it or at least own it. Basically **** the yanks as much as possible.

 

[Gimpymoo]

It is absolutely correct for a business to attempt to operate in this way - after all, Valve exist not for you and me but to maximise shareholder value.

They have no shareholders

If it helps people to stop making this point lets just swap cars for books, keyboards or monitors

Two out of the three having a much higher perceived chance of failure the older they are, thus lowering their price and making them not as desirable compared to a newer model.

You cannot compare a book to a computer game.

 

[Jokester]

Just like second hand examples of ANY product in the world then?

Name a market where substantial 2nd hand sales of a product identical to a brand new version of it appear almost immediately when the new product is released.

 

[Purdy]

You knew what you were buying when you bought it, I dont see why valve should be punished into attempting to provide this service along with many account based games developers and then devs/publishers punished with ridiculous fall in sales.


If you could trade your game instantly or sell for money digitally, basically your own steam store not many games going to make money. If I could list my 30 odd ps3 games on a digital market with a click and let them sell themselves I would, I'm not going to go to the effort or auctioning them all and posting to many different people and I don't fancy getting shafted trading them in, I'm sure many others are in same boat

 

[Mockingbird]

Imagine the outcry if Ford developed a way to prevent you ever selling your car, because used cars reduce new car sales volumes and harm the new car manufacturers (Or Dyson a way to stop you Ebaying your vacuum cleaner if you are going to bring up the irrelvent of aftermarket support as a revenue stream).

The repeated use of this and similar comparisons is becoming excessively tiresome.

Cars have a relatively finite lifespan and consequently plummet in worth (in terms of what a person will pay for it second hand) once used. Physically distributed software/DVD movies/CDs have a physical component that gets worn over time (to a much lesser degree than the cars) and therefore lose value second-hand (rarity notwithstanding). They also incur a combination cost of time and money and bother for the new buyer to get hold of.

Barring deliberate attempts to prevent it (day-1 first-purchaser DLC etc), digitally distributed games if sold second hand are 100% perfectly the same product as the new version. They can change hands instantly and have EXACTLY the same level of time/effort cost to the acquirer (i.e. download and install) as a new version.

In that setup, the only incentives to buy new over used are earlier access to the game, or the desire for simultaneous use by you and the other person (to continue your analogy, if the second hand Ford was perfectly as-new, the only reason not to buy the second hand one is if you wanted to race against the car's current owner).

If Ford was able to create a car that's totally unbreakable, didn't wear out or get dirty and never changes over time then once there were enough out there, they wouldn't ever sell another car, as their market would have been replaced by an infinite second-hand market. Then your analogy would be worth something.

 

[[TW]Fox]

So fundamentally you are supporting a law that will ultimately restrict consumer choice to subscription based services only.

No, because I don't beleive that will happen. You are massively overstating the influence this will have.

But this doesn't happen cost free

Because of decisions made by the industry for the industry. Boo hoo. Though frankly the cost is hardly massive.

- trading a digital copy online will be cost free.

Trading a physical copy online is hardly prohibitively expensive.

All these items wear out though, people tend to have a continued use for the item that stops them from selling it on in most cases 2nd hand until years later.

Some items wear out, some don't. But then so does the appeal of a computer game. Lots of people playing the Bad Company online I see. Not.

Games don't, if a publisher releases a game and 2nd hand sales appear within a few days, the price gets driven down extremely quickly. There is no other product market that operates in this manner.

I don't beleive this would happen - it certainly doesn't happen with conventional used game sales. I worked in the games retail industry for years. It was a LONG time before we had meaningful used stock of any decent new release. Sometimes, on rare occasions, we were very quickly inundated with tradeins for a new release. This was because the game was incredibly short and/or incredibly crap...

Name a market where substantial 2nd hand sales of a product identical to a brand new version of it appear almost immediately when the new product is released.

Not the PC game market. Where would all these sales come from? You can only generate one used sale at a time from each new purchase. How do you immediately swamp a market with used keys without there having to have first been new purchases?

 

[[TW]Fox]

They have no shareholders

Yes they do, every business has shareholders. What you mean is that it's not publically traded on the stock market. This doesn't mean it has no shareholders. Your local independant butchers shop isn't listed on the stock market either but it has a shareholder..

You cannot compare a book to a computer game.

You can and I just did.

 

[Gimpymoo]

Your local independant butchers shop isn't listed on the stock market either but it has a shareholder..

I thought that would be a STEAKholder?

You can and I just did.

 

[[TW]Fox]

The repeated use of this and similar comparisons is becoming excessively tiresome.

Cars have a relatively finite lifespan and consequently plummet in worth (in terms of what a person will pay for it second hand) once used. Physically distributed software/DVD movies/CDs have a physical component that gets worn over time (to a much lesser degree than the cars) and therefore lose value second-hand (rarity notwithstanding).

I don't beleive there is any value in this point I'm afraid. You are saying that a digital PC game never degrades and always retains its new value. It clearly doesn't - it does 'degrade'. A car has a limited lifespan, sure, but it's usually at least 10 years. How many people give a **** about a PC game 10 years after it came out? So clearly PC games do have a limited lifespan, especially these days when half the features end up turned off after that length of time anyway.

I glance whistfully at my physical copy of Race Driver GRID, bought for online racing and now totally useless. That certainly degraded, very quickly infact!

I have never had any of my physical PC games discs 'degrade'. Every single game I have ever purchased is on my shelf, in the same condition it was, fully working (Well, installation wise). Infact right in front of me now I have my original, perfect condition copy of Call of Duty 2. There are no marks on the box. The manual is pristine. The CD itself is devoid of any marks at all. It functions exactly - and I mean exactly - as it did when it was new. It has not degraded at all. Yet it is worthless - it has no value. Why? Because gamers have moved on. It's old. It's finished. This is what devalues games, not the physical condition of the delivery mechanism.

In that setup, the only incentives to buy new over used are earlier access to the game, or the desire for simultaneous use by you and the other person (to continue your analogy, if the second hand Ford was perfectly as-new, the only reason not to buy the second hand one is if you wanted to race against the car's current owner).

There has never been any genuinely decent reason to buy a new physical CD album, or DVD, or PC Game, over a used one other than artificial barriers put in the way to stop used game sales. Remember without a new sale, there can be no used sale after the original purchaser has finished with the product.

Unless you break the disc or mistreat it (In which case why would anyone buy it) then a CD will continue to work long past the point in which you'd actually care whether it does. A properly looked after CD does not appreciably degrade.

Yet CD based games, music and films have been traded for decades without significant ill effects. This is not really any different.

 

[[TW]Fox]

I thought that would be a STEAKholder?

No, its a shareholder? You are confusing publicy held/traded shares with privately held shares. If a company is limited or incorporated, it has shareholders. In the case of companies which are not publically traded the shares are usually held entirely by the founders/owners.

A stakeholder is somebody with involvement in the business in some way - even a customer is a stakeholder.

A steakholder is either a chef or somebody with no table manners

 

[Gimpymoo]

No, its a shareholder? You are confusing publicy held/traded shares with privately held shares. If a company is limited or incorporated, it has shareholders. In the case of companies which are not publically traded the shares are usually held entirely by the founders/owners.

A stakeholder is somebody with involvement in the business in some way - even a customer is a stakeholder.

A steakholder is either a chef or somebody with no table manners

It was a joke....

See, look where this is going - lol.

 

[Jokester]

This is not really any different.

It is, online digital trading, done EU or even worldwide with zero cost to the sellar is like nothing that has gone before.

 

[[TW]Fox]

It is, online digital trading, done EU or even worldwide with zero cost to the sellar is like nothing that has gone before.

It's nothing like as revolutionary as you think. The costs to the consumer of selling a phsyical computer game ranged from zero to £1 depending on the method of sale chosen. It's not as if there are huge cost barriers to selling or trading in games.

I genuinelly think this will have limited effect on the industry. Most people won't bother selling most of the games they have. Why would you? If you sell your copy of Battlefield 3 you can't play Battlefield 3 anymore. People hang onto games they still play or games that are decent.

The only major effect will be on publishers that constantly churn out short crap - people will realise they can immediatly bin crap games. Suddenly there is more incentive than ever to make sure the products you kick out have quality and depth to them.

How is that a bad thing?

 

[~Divine~Wind~]

I thought that would be a STEAKholder?

It's wrong I laughed at this isn't it

 

[Jokester]

It's nothing like as revolutionary as you think. The costs to the consumer of selling a phsyical computer game ranged from zero to £1 depending on the method of sale chosen. It's not as if there are huge cost barriers to selling or trading in games.

I genuinelly think this will have limited effect on the industry. Most people won't bother selling most of the games they have. Why would you? If you sell your copy of Battlefield 3 you can't play Battlefield 3 anymore. People hang onto games they still play or games that are decent.

The only major effect will be on publishers that constantly churn out short crap - people will realise they can immediatly bin crap games. Suddenly there is more incentive than ever to make sure the products you kick out have quality and depth to them.

How is that a bad thing?

Fox there is more to cost than just money, there's things like time, effort etc that all add up to whether someone can be bothered to trade a game in. All of these are removed to the point that all it takes is a single click online.

Yes people will hang on to games they still play, but why hold onto something you might play in the future, knowing you can just get the key back as and when you needed it from the market (at a lower financial cost).

It might improve quality, but at the expense of originality and innovation. Developers just won't want (or are able to afford) to take the risk in doing something different.

This is already happening with things like Elite 4 having to go down the Kickstarter route to get money to develop it. If it wasn't a big name in the gaming industry it just wouldn't have happened. Developers are just churning out safe sequels to massive seller's as it is, it'll just get worse if this comes to fruition.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Fox there is more to cost than just money, there's things like time, effort etc that all add up to whether someone can be bothered to trade a game in. All of these are removed to the point that all it takes is a single click online.

Doesn't everyone shout 'Adapt or die LOLLOLOLOLOL' when challenges like this affect high street retailers?

Yes people will hang on to games they still play, but why hold onto something you might play in the future, knowing you can just get the key back as and when you needed it from the market (at a lower financial cost).

Because for most of us it isn't worth the bother. Hardly anyone is going to go about chopping and changing CD keys to get 15 quid back or whatever to then have to spend it again when you fancy a blast a month later or whatever.

It might improve quality, but at the expense of originality and innovation. Developers just won't want (or are able to afford) to take the risk in doing something different.

Sounds like the current PC market. It's hardly full of originality and innovation is it? It's full of the same games with the same OMG DOUBLE XP LULZ and OMG PAY £3 FOR A GUN 'innovation' we've seen of late..

. Developers are just churning out safe sequels to massive seller's as it is, it'll just get worse if this comes to fruition.

I don't agree. If a game doesn't sell, there are no second hand copies to sell on for a start. The only way a market can become 'flooded' with used copies is if a huge amount of new ones were sold in the first place! Churning out 'safe sequels' that last 6 hours is exactly the sort of thing that will, if there is any noticeable effect (I still dont think there would be), be hit by the fact you can flog the junky crap you just wasted 40 quid on to somebody else

 

[Jokester]

Doesn't everyone shout 'Adapt or die LOLLOLOLOLOL' when challenges like this affect high street retailers?

Yeah, but you would be killing the industry itself, not just one of the delivery channels to the consumer.

Because for most of us it isn't worth the bother. Hardly anyone is going to go about chopping and changing CD keys to get 15 quid back or whatever to then have to spend it again when you fancy a blast a month later or whatever.

Precisely, it's not worth the bother currently! If this goes through all you would need is an account on a website that would allow you to buy and sell keys with as close to zero effort as you can conceivably get. You mentioned selling 2nd hand games to your neighbour, this is equivalent to the entire EU now living next door.

Sounds like the current PC market. It's hardly full of originality and innovation is it? It's full of the same games with the same OMG DOUBLE XP LULZ and OMG PAY £3 FOR A GUN 'innovation' we've seen of late..

Yet your advocating something that will make it even worse.

I don't agree. If a game doesn't sell, there are no second hand copies to sell on for a start. The only way a market can become 'flooded' with used copies is if a huge amount of new ones were sold in the first place! Churning out 'safe sequels' that last 6 hours is exactly the sort of thing that will, if there is any noticeable effect (I still dont think there would be), be hit by the fact you can flog the junky crap you just wasted 40 quid on to somebody else

If a game doesn't sell there probably won't be a market for it 2nd hand either. Either way the price plummets. Large numbers of people who might have bought new will now hold fire for 2nd hand copies, safe in the knowledge they will get it cheaper and the idea of Steam sales etc becomes redundant. With a 2nd hand market, every sale is a "sale".

 

[Omaeka]

Yet your advocating something that will make it even worse.

It's been a while since I saw somebody get shot down so hard by a single sentence. Bravo.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Yeah, but you would be killing the industry itself, not just one of the delivery channels to the consumer.


Precisely, it's not worth the bother currently! If this goes through all you would need is an account on a website that would allow you to buy and sell keys with as close to zero effort as you can conceivably get. You mentioned selling 2nd hand games to your neighbour, this is equivalent to the entire EU now living next door.


Yet your advocating something that will make it even worse.


If a game doesn't sell there probably won't be a market for it 2nd hand either. Either way the price plummets. Large numbers of people who might have bought new will now hold fire for 2nd hand copies, safe in the knowledge they will get it cheaper and the idea of Steam sales etc becomes redundant. With a 2nd hand market, every sale is a "sale".

Produce products people want to keep because they like them and continue to get value from them rather than because they have no choice and it wont affect you as a publisher.

I disagree that it will have the effects you have outlined above. The console market is not a barren wasteland as a result of used game sales and however much you make it sound like its rocket science trading in a console game can be as easy as spending 30 seconds putting it in an envelope, so it's not as its sufficiently difficult to save the industry, is it?

Most people like to have a library of games, films, music so they've always got various things to play, watch or listen to. If everyone was to rush into selling everything in an industry destroying melee as you predict we'd all end up sat at home with nothing to play..

People would only sell what they dont want. You appear to be advocating a situation whereby developers profit from people owning products they don't use or want...