he makes a decent point in a way that is easily misquoted to make him look like an arse. The actual argurment behind used games, namely retailers cutting publishers & developers out of the loop to maximize return, isnt the consumers problem. What is their problem is that used games have become an important part of the game market, & the industry's best idea seems to be to say "boo hoo retailers dont play fair so we'll take it out on you" | |
He has been very vocal lately. I wonder why... eh. Anyway, he's got a point. The consumers really should only be thinking "Hey, I can get this new for 60 dollars, or used for 30 dollars. I'll go with used." He forgot to mention, however, "Used as long as it's not from Gamestop." | |
You have to deal with the changes in the market or die off. I know lots of people who railed against the music industry and the movie industry for not changing with the times, but when it comes to games, they have a double standard. This is no different. The free market works. It's up to you to find out how to make a buck in the free market, not to change the free market to fit your needs. Jaffe seems to understand this... | |
There is only ONE point that needs to be made in this debate: The First Sale Doctrine applies to games. Period. End of debate. You can save your breath and go home now. We had this fight over LPs 90 years ago people. It's DONE. Selling used games is LEGAL. The industry can NOT take that away from the consumer without legislation. I know he's on our side, but Jaffe should look that up. | |
What exactly did this dude just say? He outlines the very reason why consumers should be part of the debate, because buying used is a sound economic decision for them, then says they should butt out because the only thing they should care about is getting the best deal? Again: what exactly did he just say? I guess he's cool with gamers getting the best deal as long developers and publishers get to define the phrase "the best deal." | |
I read the article and watched the video, but I don't understand what he's asking from us. Can anyone dumb it down for me? I want to understand, cause it sounds like something I wouldn't like. Regarding a company that exclusively produces consumer goods, everything is the consumer's business. | |
Yeah, I was a bit confused. It basically sounds like he's saying, I'm totally on the consumers side! But they should shut the F**K up and let us attack used games anyway. | |
I think he's saying that people who buy used games shouldn't feel like they're killing the industry. That's what I got from it. | |
I'm waiting for people to read the title and jump to conclusions. Basically, hes just telling gamers to grab the used games and be happy. Whatever the retailers and developers say, its got nothing to do with your right to buy. | |
This guy (from the article) is both right and wrong. For the most part, yes, whether or not a company chooses to enter the used game market isn't the consumer's concern. But as any retail establishment has the ability to purchase a couple cheap supplies which let them repackage used/opened products as new, that becomes the consumer's issue too. Toys r Us isn't going to be much of a worry on this, but somewhere less honest like WalMart or Future Shop, it could be worrysome. And yeah, nice going with the title... Bet I'm not the only one who saw it and came in ready to give this Jaffe guy a verbal smackdown. | |
I sort of agree with him, but I will still buy new games. At a discounted price, of course. | |
Generally thats what you do with a blog, comment on things you're thinking of. The man is heavily involved in gaming, and he has his own opinions. I personally think its right - we all get so caught up in it, but its not really any of our concern. That said, I usuually won't buy a preowneed copy unless its a steep discount. | |
Ummmm, how is a limitation on the alienation of our own property NOT our business??? | |
Yea, he comments quite a lot , but doesn't embarress himself like some other developers. He has a solid point: Used games are good for consumers and it should stay that way. | |
Hehe, like most in here, I was ready to tell this guy to take a hike. I read the article, and I'm still inclined to say so. Used, Vaccuum sealed, Old, New, whatever you want to call it, its still available to a consumer. This means, I have every right to say how I feel about this. Nobody should tell me to butt out of a transaction where I can keep more of my money, or on the flip-side, lose more. I've personally never heard of this man, but honestly...where does he get off? | |
It is not in the interest of the consumer for the developer to take away the rights granted to the retailer under the first sale doctrine. It is not the place of the developer to say where the place of the consumer is in the debate simply because the developers are trying to negotiate with retailers in their own best interests-- especially when that is ultimately to the detriment of the consumer. What's needed here is a boycott of products by developers who do not support the first sale doctrine as it applies to games. Need to downsize your game budgets to stay profitable in a market where you can't force everyone to buy new through new legislation? Fine by me. Second point: Many people only buy new games because they know they can turn it around for credit towards the next new game, and this is what supplies the secondary market. If people know they can't do that, they'll buy fewer games, so it is not as if every used market sale and resale represents a lost new sale. Only some of them do. The question is, is that worth more or less than the new sales you won't get from people used to trading in old games for credit towards new ones? | |
Wait did he tell us its ok to buy games illegaly because its a good deal? Or was he just saying how he is on our side but that we don't get a say in our rights? | |
Wow, way to misquote the guy to make him look like a dick. He's responded to game sites here by the way: link. | |
well thats obvious | |
Do DRM included PC games not infringe on this doctrine, considering certain games cannot be resold as they are worthless after a few installs, and you have to request more? Or is it a case of 'you can still sell it, but who would buy it?'? | |
Agreed, but I still can't help but feel like that, that's why I only buy pre-owned games if the discount is steep. | |
Seriously. I came into this thread ready to be all, But I still prefer to buy my stuff new. I fail to see how trusting another human being left it in good shape is intelligent in any way. | |
This debate is pretty much about the used CONSOLE games you see at GameStop and the like. You know, the type of game everyone assumes we are talking about when the topic of used games is brought up. The ones that don't make a copy of themselves to run, and pretty much always require a legal copy to even play. They used to be on cartridges (still are for DS), these days they are on discs. But they are used differently than PC install discs. Console discs and cartridges are perfectly analogous to LPs (single play, non-copying, physically transferable only). Your PC game is not (multiple plays from same source copy, only-copying, multiple transfers from same source possible). See the difference? And to try and answer your question anyway, IANAL, but I'd bet they cover their asses with a EULA. Some of which will be valid, some won't, but it will cost money for anyone to prove which parts are which. Not directly related to the First Sale Doctrine, but tangential in that it's a copyright related question. | |
What i'm getting from this is that as Saint Waldo says this is the law but games developers are trying to change the law to suit their products and David Jaffe doesn't think we need to be involved or care about it. I care if the developers are trying to single out and legislate against games consumers even though it seems some want to get shafted (people who refuse to buy preowned, their choice). Maybe David Jaffe should take his own advice and butt out. If he wants to let them talk it out behind closed doors that's up to him, I'm not going to follow his head in the sand advice. | |
Extra Punctuation
Experienced Points
MovieBob: Intermission
First Person
Loading Time
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Hexproof
Ask Dr Mark
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
The Darkness II Review
Reckoning Review
Exodus Review
Final Fantasy XIII-2 Review
Scarygirl Review
Amy Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
David Jaffe: Used Game Issue is "None of the Consumer's Business"
David Jaffe would prefer that gamers butt out of the used game debate and leave game companies and retailers to battle it out.
In his never-ending quest to comment on every new major gaming issue that tends to spring up on a weekly basis, David Jaffe of God of War fame recorded another video message, this time in response to the news of Toys 'R Us reselling used games.
"Whenever this stuff comes up, gamers get excited and upset, developers get upset, and there's all this kind of tension on the internet between developers and gamers and publishers," examined Jaffe.
He personally advocates gamers supporting used game sales, as it allows them to gain the most direct benefit from gaming by saving money for quality, tested titles.
"The fans will tell you, and they're right, consumers are always right. I'm a believer in that the customer is always right," he explained. "Look, if they can get a game for $5 and there is somebody selling them out there legally for $5, whether it's a used copy or whatever, go for it. Get the best deal you can get. It's not your job to look out for the developer or publisher or anybody except your self. I have no beef with gamers who partake in any kind of deal they can get for themselves."
"The issue though really has to do with developers and publishers and retail. I don't mean this in a mean way, like it's none of the consumers business," he commented. "But literally, it's none of the consumer's business. It should not affect the consumer at all. The consumer should really be out of the argument. All the consumer should worry about is, can I get the best deal possible?"
Jaffe navigated the issue of used games into game prices and whether high-quality, low-priced titles combined with digital distribution would eventually cause the issue to be moot. Until that point though, how much of a say should the players themselves have in the arguments over used game sales? Would the government and legislators end up being involved to ban used game sales in retail stores?
Permalink