5 ms·

With laws like this you generally have to ask what's best for the consumer. I'm not sure reselling is. The current setup gives game developers a somewhat pred

by _edo 7y ago

With laws like this you generally have to ask what's best for the consumer. I'm not sure reselling is. The current setup gives game developers a somewhat predictable revenue model and on the strength of that model they can encourage investors to put up money to make the games. Changing the revenue model may change how investors look at the market. Maybe for better maybe for worse. Who knows, but it would be a disruption if Steam has to adopt this model worldwide. The thing that I don't like is if you allow reselling then developers get less long-term revenue but (hopefully) more short-term revenue. This will cause them to focus more on getting a big opening weekend than making a solid game that might have years of appeal. Portal is still $10 on Steam. Maybe they only sell 100 copies a month at this point but that's still money coming in rewarding them for investing in interesting core game mechanics. I'd rather see them get rewarded for that than for dishonest advertising campaigns because 50% of their money will come from the first few days of sales.

ElonMuskrat 7y ago
> The thing that I don't like is if you allow reselling then developers get less long-term revenue but (hopefully) more short-term revenue. This will cause them to focus more on getting a big opening weekend than making a solid game that might have years of appeal. But this exactly what happens now anyways. Not a cynical view point just a statement of what I believe to be facts. I had some interest in making indie games myself, so I looked at the market. Almost all games sales follow a power curve with most sales falling in the first week. The publishers build a tidal wave of marketing hype months before the game is released. AAAs spend tons of money to build-up to a critical mass of media influencers [e.g. YouTubers, entertainment conventions, TV ad spots, etc...].
- friendlybus 7y ago
  Warframe, Path of Exile, GTA V, Minecraft, ect all have long tails. I think we need new categories for different kinds of game sales & financial performance. There certainly are still flash in the pan style sales like you describe, but there's more sustained forest fires too.
shadowgovt 7y ago
It probably bites one-and-done adventure-style games more than games with the replay value of, say, a multiplayer competitive system or a Roguelike randomizer. That's a category already bit by the people who just watch the game played on YouTube instead of buying and playing their own copy; decreasing their opportunity for first-sale revenue increases the opportunity cost of making such a game. There will always be developers who will make a game as a passion project, but I'd predict that this ruling'd make the market for the potential next Sierra or Telltale even deader than it already is.
- _edo 7y ago
  I'm pressing F for the golden years of Sierra :( > decreasing their opportunity for first-sale revenue increases the opportunity cost of making such a game. I don't understand the use of 'opportunity cost' here but I think it's a good point. It's generally not good to discourage viable business models. My fear is that if we're baking in resale value to the purchase price, now consumers may overvalue both the game AND the resale so they get hit twice in a blockbuster/flop type situation. Short of offering resale/final-sale options, which I do like, the laws will encourage some sort of business model. I'm thinking encouraging long-term quality through final-sale only purchasing is looking a little better for consumers than what the French court is apparently doing. Another option is reselling could be done through Steam who takes 30% which they split with the devs. So the consumer gets to resell, Steam gets paid, devs get paid, maybe any lost revenues are offset by consumer wellbeing?
UserIsUnused 7y ago
Steam would get ts cut on reselling, and it might give devs/pubs a share. Right now, customers are less and less for traditional single player games.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  Would that be compliant? I'm not convinced it would be. What would stop Steam from making their cut 99% to basically make reselling pointless? The logical interpretation, I would think, is that Steam should have to allow customers to turn their games back into keys.
jeroenhd 7y ago
Funny how you can make the same comment about physical goods. Should we ban selling second hand furniture? With laws like this you generally have to ask what's best for the consumer. I'm not sure reselling is. The current setup gives furniture salesmen a somewhat predictable revenue model and on the strength of the model they can encourage investors to put ip money to make furniture. Changing the revenue model may change how investors look at the marker. Maybe for better maybe for worse. Who knows, but it would be a disruption if IKEA has to adopt this model worldwide. The thing that I don't like is if you allow reselling then carpenters get less long-term revenue. This will cause them to focus more on getting a big opening month than making solid furniture that might have years of appeal. Antilop is still $20 at IKEA. Maybe they only sell 100 chairs a month at this point but that's still money coming in rewarding them for investing in ergonomic chair design. I'd rather see them get rewarded for that than for dishonest advertising campaigns because 50% of their money will come from the first few weeks of sales.
- _edo 7y ago
  > Funny how you can make the same comment about physical goods. No, you can't. That's why this is such a complicated issue. The inherent value in a physical good is consumed with use. If somebody buys a couch and takes it home it becomes a used couch. Used couches are not great substitutes for new couches; they devalue with time and use and you eventually have to pay somebody just to take it off your hands. Its value actually goes negative. A used digital good is a perfect substitute for the original. A digital copy is also a perfect substitute for the original. That changes everything. If we want people to be able to make games professionally, and to be compensated for their work, we have to use laws to make the digital marketplace resemble the physical goods marketplace. Or find a whole new model which I don't believe anybody has done.
  - jeroenhd 7y ago
    The inherent value for a digital food also decreases over time. Top of the line graphics from ten years ago look bad in comparison to today. Story driven games get their stories spoilt over time, especially the popular ones. Compatibility with controllers and other such devices depend wildly on backwards compatibility (for example, the xbox one controller had loads of compatibility issues with games that only accepted xbox 360 controllers for a while). I would have paid 60 euros for Skyrim back in 2011. These days, I wouldn't spend more than 10-15 bucks on it if it was new. This is reflected in the price on steam as well, with it currently being sold for 15 euros. The mere passing of time decreases the value of the goods, just like using a game would. I don't know what happened that people think that selling things you don't need anymore second hand is suddenly bad just because the goods are on a computer. The car industry would love a method to stop people from buying second hand cars but consumers would never accept such limitations. Games sales aren't affected by anything past the opening quarter. A study done by the EU on piracy concluded that even piracy is barely affecting the price of games after the opening period. Reselling games will barely touch the games industry. Adding arbitrary rules just because the game industry is unhealthy isn't a solution to the problem. If I have to give up rights so that people can make some shiny toys every now and then, I don't care about those toys anymore. I don't want to give up rights to keep game developers employed because their current ecosystem is unviable. And, in my opinion, neither should you.
djsumdog 7y ago
I still by all my console games on physical disc, so I can sell/trade them. Steam raised PC Gaming back up but it also created a world where we don't buy games any more, but licenses to games. I still try to buy off Humble Bundle or GoG if the same game is available in their store DRM free, even if it cost more. I can see as it being better for artists, but it's also this weird situation where the license to the game is attached to the person. Physical media can be sold later, restored or copied if it's in danger of not being readable ..and old content is still preserved. Classic games from this era won't really be preserved the same way if any of these licenses servers from Steam/Origin/BattleNet ever go under one day.

by _edo 7y ago

ElonMuskrat 7y ago

> The thing that I don't like is if you allow reselling then developers get less long-term revenue but (hopefully) more short-term revenue. This will cause them to focus more on getting a big opening weekend than making a solid game that might have years of appeal. But this exactly what happens now anyways. Not a cynical view point just a statement of what I believe to be facts. I had some interest in making indie games myself, so I looked at the market. Almost all games sales follow a power curve with most sales falling in the first week. The publishers build a tidal wave of marketing hype months before the game is released. AAAs spend tons of money to build-up to a critical mass of media influencers [e.g. YouTubers, entertainment conventions, TV ad spots, etc...].

friendlybus 7y ago
Warframe, Path of Exile, GTA V, Minecraft, ect all have long tails. I think we need new categories for different kinds of game sales & financial performance. There certainly are still flash in the pan style sales like you describe, but there's more sustained forest fires too.

shadowgovt 7y ago

It probably bites one-and-done adventure-style games more than games with the replay value of, say, a multiplayer competitive system or a Roguelike randomizer. That's a category already bit by the people who just watch the game played on YouTube instead of buying and playing their own copy; decreasing their opportunity for first-sale revenue increases the opportunity cost of making such a game. There will always be developers who will make a game as a passion project, but I'd predict that this ruling'd make the market for the potential next Sierra or Telltale even deader than it already is.

_edo 7y ago
I'm pressing F for the golden years of Sierra :( > decreasing their opportunity for first-sale revenue increases the opportunity cost of making such a game. I don't understand the use of 'opportunity cost' here but I think it's a good point. It's generally not good to discourage viable business models. My fear is that if we're baking in resale value to the purchase price, now consumers may overvalue both the game AND the resale so they get hit twice in a blockbuster/flop type situation. Short of offering resale/final-sale options, which I do like, the laws will encourage some sort of business model. I'm thinking encouraging long-term quality through final-sale only purchasing is looking a little better for consumers than what the French court is apparently doing. Another option is reselling could be done through Steam who takes 30% which they split with the devs. So the consumer gets to resell, Steam gets paid, devs get paid, maybe any lost revenues are offset by consumer wellbeing?

UserIsUnused 7y ago

Steam would get ts cut on reselling, and it might give devs/pubs a share. Right now, customers are less and less for traditional single player games.

Wowfunhappy 7y ago
Would that be compliant? I'm not convinced it would be. What would stop Steam from making their cut 99% to basically make reselling pointless? The logical interpretation, I would think, is that Steam should have to allow customers to turn their games back into keys.

jeroenhd 7y ago

Funny how you can make the same comment about physical goods. Should we ban selling second hand furniture? With laws like this you generally have to ask what's best for the consumer. I'm not sure reselling is. The current setup gives furniture salesmen a somewhat predictable revenue model and on the strength of the model they can encourage investors to put ip money to make furniture. Changing the revenue model may change how investors look at the marker. Maybe for better maybe for worse. Who knows, but it would be a disruption if IKEA has to adopt this model worldwide. The thing that I don't like is if you allow reselling then carpenters get less long-term revenue. This will cause them to focus more on getting a big opening month than making solid furniture that might have years of appeal. Antilop is still $20 at IKEA. Maybe they only sell 100 chairs a month at this point but that's still money coming in rewarding them for investing in ergonomic chair design. I'd rather see them get rewarded for that than for dishonest advertising campaigns because 50% of their money will come from the first few weeks of sales.

_edo 7y ago
> Funny how you can make the same comment about physical goods. No, you can't. That's why this is such a complicated issue. The inherent value in a physical good is consumed with use. If somebody buys a couch and takes it home it becomes a used couch. Used couches are not great substitutes for new couches; they devalue with time and use and you eventually have to pay somebody just to take it off your hands. Its value actually goes negative. A used digital good is a perfect substitute for the original. A digital copy is also a perfect substitute for the original. That changes everything. If we want people to be able to make games professionally, and to be compensated for their work, we have to use laws to make the digital marketplace resemble the physical goods marketplace. Or find a whole new model which I don't believe anybody has done.
- jeroenhd 7y ago
  The inherent value for a digital food also decreases over time. Top of the line graphics from ten years ago look bad in comparison to today. Story driven games get their stories spoilt over time, especially the popular ones. Compatibility with controllers and other such devices depend wildly on backwards compatibility (for example, the xbox one controller had loads of compatibility issues with games that only accepted xbox 360 controllers for a while). I would have paid 60 euros for Skyrim back in 2011. These days, I wouldn't spend more than 10-15 bucks on it if it was new. This is reflected in the price on steam as well, with it currently being sold for 15 euros. The mere passing of time decreases the value of the goods, just like using a game would. I don't know what happened that people think that selling things you don't need anymore second hand is suddenly bad just because the goods are on a computer. The car industry would love a method to stop people from buying second hand cars but consumers would never accept such limitations. Games sales aren't affected by anything past the opening quarter. A study done by the EU on piracy concluded that even piracy is barely affecting the price of games after the opening period. Reselling games will barely touch the games industry. Adding arbitrary rules just because the game industry is unhealthy isn't a solution to the problem. If I have to give up rights so that people can make some shiny toys every now and then, I don't care about those toys anymore. I don't want to give up rights to keep game developers employed because their current ecosystem is unviable. And, in my opinion, neither should you.

djsumdog 7y ago

I still by all my console games on physical disc, so I can sell/trade them. Steam raised PC Gaming back up but it also created a world where we don't buy games any more, but licenses to games. I still try to buy off Humble Bundle or GoG if the same game is available in their store DRM free, even if it cost more. I can see as it being better for artists, but it's also this weird situation where the license to the game is attached to the person. Physical media can be sold later, restored or copied if it's in danger of not being readable ..and old content is still preserved. Classic games from this era won't really be preserved the same way if any of these licenses servers from Steam/Origin/BattleNet ever go under one day.