Is there any reason not to buy used Xbox 360 games? I’ve got a trial membership to gamefly I’ll be cancelling shortly (I don’t have enough time to play to justify the membership charge), but their offering me GTA IV & CoD 4 for $40 each. Given that they’re still both $60 new, can anyone think of a good reason not to get them? They send out the original box & manual, and I’ve played them both, so I’m pretty sure the disk is satisfactory.
Yeah, there’s one, but it doesn’t happen as often as you think. Some jerks (I’m ashamed to say myself included…once) will trade in games that are barely functional or non-functional. If you’re sharp and quick, you might be able to go back and get a refund. Otherwise, though…
Although, more and more places check and throw out the damaged disks.
The good thing with Gamefly, though, is that you can have them send you the disks as part of your membership so you can test them out, then buy them when you’re satisfied they play fine and they’ll send the box and manual. I’ve bought games a few times through Gamefly when I found I was going to spend a long time on a game. I have yet to have a problem.
I’ve bought quite a few used games from eBay and Amazon. I think it’s a great deal. I think you could get GTA IV cheaper than $40 on eBay, just look for someone with good feedback and reasonable shipping.
Most places that sell used games will either pop the game in and verify that it works first, or they will give you the option of replacing the disc if it’s bad.
I’ve gotten good deals on ebay too, I just make sure to look over the sellers feedbacks and check the item description to make sure it has maps, manuals, etc.
Don’t used games give all the profit to the retail venue instead of the developer or publisher? If that’s true then I’d much prefer people buy new games, simply because it’s not much different than pirating. It’s different in a way because the copy is hard and can only be used by one person at a time, instead of widely distributed on one sale, but the publishers aren’t getting all the money back to pay for development of new games.
I’m not saying it’s terrible to buy used games, and I’d much prefer it to pirating in any way, I’m just saying that it’s a consideration.
That’s one way of looking at it, but if you can sell your old game, then you can better afford a new one.
Or you can use that money to buy another used one. The cycle perpetuates, you buy a cheaper used game, trade it in and get money, buy another cheaper used game, trade it in… forever and ever.
Same as used books, used cars, used anythings…
You didn’t think about that very hard, did you?
Yes, and I’d much prefer people didn’t buy anything used that’s not out of print/production, unless they need it and they absolutely cannot afford it any other way. The money should go to the people that bother to produce these things and attempt to make them good (i.e. cars) or people that put their souls and mind into it (i.e. books and movies).
I’ve heard figures from a billion dollars up that used games cost the industry a year. Yes, like I said I’d much prefer people buying used to people pirating games (though i admit it’s much more difficult to pirate a console game than a PC game, hence why PC games can’t be traded in), but the point is it costs the industry money that could be spent on production either way, and a nice chunk of it at that.
So you’re against libraries?
The only way this actually is bad for developers is if people are keeping copies and selling the CDs. That’s called piracy.
I’m not against libraries being used for quick references for a report or previewing a book before purchase, or even checking out books that are no longer in print (and of course "oh shit, I left my Grey’s Anatomy at home and the library is closer to the hospital than my house is). And I’m certainly not against them providing a way for poorer families to find material necessary to a child’s literary stimulation or school research, but I feel if you can afford them you should buy new books instead of borrowing them from the library or getting them from Bookman’s.
What’s your plan for people who have read the book or completed the game and don’t have any interest in doing it again? Should they destroy their copy and never let anyone else use it. Since that would harm the developer’s profits?
Hold on to it, or wait until the game is no longer being published. There’s nothing you can do if you wait, trade it in and SURPRISE virtual console is adding it to their line up, I’m not going to condemn you for a coincidence like that. And I’m not utterly abject to lending it to a friend to try out the game (preferably he buys it for himself afterwards if it’s not out of production).
I know I’m sounding draconian here, I’m not trying to make people who buy used out to be the spawns of the dark lord Satan himself. I’m saying what I’d PREFER in an ideal reality, I really don’t give a crap how you acquire your games, movies, and books my preference is that you buy new if you can.
Well, if this can not inspire some sort of flame war…
I resent the implication that my property is not my property, with which I shall do whatever the heck I want, including redeeming it for some of its current value by selling it someone else who also values it.
Such is the way of the world, and to stop this is to institute totalitarian government.
On review, I really wouldn’t mind if you sold it even after it’s out on VC because retro gaming is different than emulating it on a newer machine (in my experience at least Golden Axe on my Wii and Golden Axe on my Genesis just FEEL different for some reason).
Like I said, it’s what I’d PREFER, I’m against any restriction on it whatsoever. I don’t care what you do with property you legally purchased, short of stripping it for parts for a nuke. I was simply saying taking revenue away is a CONSIDERATION, not the end-all of arguments, it’s simply another weight on the two-plate balance that is your decision.
It’s only reasonable to say it “costs” the industry that money if you adopt the perspective that the industry was entitled to that money in the first place.
I’d prefer if people didn’t feel some kind of entitlement to be paid over and over again for one sale. Once somebody’s sold me a book/car/saucepan/tennis racket/whatever, it’s generally mine to do with as I please and none of their business what I do with it, including, among other things, reselling it; I hardly see why the original owner should feel any claim to further money at this point, simply because of his original production and sale. Game discs are a little different, as their price is not meant to reflect their marginal cost of production in quite the same way, but I still feel the same general principle holds.
Maybe a good comparison would be hand-me-down clothes; should a family feel ethically obliged to avoid handing down clothes from older members to younger ones, in favor of going out and purchasing new clothes from the same manufacturers? After all, they are denying the clothing manufacturers a sale which otherwise would be granted, for the privilege of multiple people consecutively making use of the manufacturers’ product.
Well, other than the fact I feel that items inside a family are a different case entirely (for my purposes a family is considered a single person, so your little brother using something is the same as you yourself using it), hand-me-downs don’t seem like a good comparison to me. Most of the time you CAN’T use hand-me-down clothes anymore. Sorry, but that child’s dress just isn’t going to fit the 18 year old, but her 8 year old sister may have it perfect.
Yeah then you wind up with the cheapest game in the world, Battlecruiser 3000AD or something. Then you go outside and play.