Dysfunctional Console Industry Struggles For New Profit Centers [Slashdot]

[DP ServBot]

http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/GKJBP0xc4cCmFIEu__8gMWIsE1Y/0/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/GKJBP0xc4cCmFIEu__8gMWIsE1Y/0/da)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/GKJBP0xc4cCmFIEu__8gMWIsE1Y/1/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/GKJBP0xc4cCmFIEu__8gMWIsE1Y/1/da)
MojoKid writes "The rumor mill is still churning out quite a bit of information on new consoles this week, including new data on Nintendo's upcoming Wii U. According to unnamed developers, the Wii U actually isn't as powerful as the Xbox 360 or PS3, despite boasting HD graphics and significantly improved hardware. Meanwhile, the Xbox 720, codenamed Durango, is reportedly targeting the holiday season of 2013 as a launch window. Rumors are floating about of a required always-on internet connection and of locking out the used game market. What this discussion truly highlights is just how dysfunctional the entire console industry is and how skewed its profits are. Profits on hardware sales are so small, game shops can't survive on console sales alone. $60 MSRPs are subsidized by exchange and trade-in programs. Kicking Gamestop in the teeth may occasionally sound like fun, but the idea of killing the used games market doesn't make much sense. If used title values collapse and MSRPs stay the same or rise, the entire industry could hamstring itself in the name of higher profits."http://a.fsdn.com/sd/twitter_icon_large.png (http://twitter.com/home?status=Dysfunctional+Console+Industry+Struggl es+For+New+Profit+Centers%3A+http%3A%2F%2Fbit.ly%2 FHfKWYF)http://a.fsdn.com/sd/facebook_icon_large.png (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fgames.slashdot.org%2Fsto ry%2F12%2F04%2F04%2F1355259%2Fdysfunctional-console-industry-struggles-for-new-profit-centers%3Futm_source%3Dslashdot%26utm_medium%3Dfac ebook)http://www.gstatic.com/images/icons/gplus-16.png (http://plus.google.com/share?url=http://games.slashdot.org/story/12/04/04/1355259/dysfunctional-console-industry-struggles-for-new-profit-centers?utm_source=slashdot&utm_medium=googleplus)

Read more of this story (http://games.slashdot.org/story/12/04/04/1355259/dysfunctional-console-industry-struggles-for-new-profit-centers?utm_source=rss1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed) at Slashdot.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~4/W6Yztd0ld_M

More... (http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdotGames/~3/W6Yztd0ld_M/dysfunctional-console-industry-struggles-for-new-profit-centers)

[DOAsaturn]

I think the easiest and best solution for both sides of this issue is put a "lock down" on new games. Make it so in the first 2-3 months, new software would have to be purchased new or require a pass code of some sort if not new. There are still plenty of early adopters to reel in and this wouldn't completely kill the used game market. Still this doesn't really get around an "always online" connection requirement, since the console would have to be talking to the network in order to approve your gameplay...

It's all ridiculous, but oh well, this is a meet in the middle solution that hasn't really been talked about.

[Edmond Dantes]

Here's a solution:

The gaming companies can stop being so damn stupid.

[burn_654]

I think the easiest and best solution for both sides of this issue is put a "lock down" on new games. Make it so in the first 2-3 months, new software would have to be purchased new or require a pass code of some sort if not new.

I could agree with this. Almost sort of a movie theatre/release approach - for x many months you can only use it new and then it becomes accessible used and thus, able to be sold that way. An exclusivity window almost?

[Press_Start]

I just had to post this cause it's QFT.


They WILL hamstring themselves. Even with the overall apathetic appearance of a large portion of the United States, if they attempt to kill off the secondary or used game market they will, in effect, be killing the console game market. The only people who can afford to throw $60+ at a game every time they turn around does not constitute the overall gaming market. I would be willing to bet that those people with large enough bank accounts to buy games AT WILL amounts to less than 10% of the overall gaming market. The VAST majority of the gaming market depends on being able to play a game and then turn it in to lessen the cost of the next game, specially when you can run through the majority of the games on the market in under, what? -- 20 hours per game?

Their need for control and their greed will be their undoing. A lot of people say that voting with your dollars doesn't work. I say that it will work when at least 50% of the market rises up against the corporate overlords who are producing this crap. Who want us, the gamers, to continually pay them for the privilege of using their game - not owning OUR game. As these rumors become fact, I hope that each of you who despises this will begin educating those fellow gamers who may not be following the information. Educate them that the cool thing to do is not to buy that uber new shiny, but to reject the new paradigm that the corporations want to foist upon all of us. Actually vote with your dollars this time and not just pay it lip service. All it takes is enough of us protesting in forums, in direct mails to the companies, in e-mails to the companies, and DO NOT BUY ANY NEW CONSOLES. Make it plain and clear, without resorting to cursing and ranting, that you nor anyone in your family or circle of friends will be purchasing any gaming console that removes the rights of the people* to First Sale Doctrine or the ability to trade it in so you can afford to purchase another new game.

Make them understand they will pay for their hubris by us, the gamers, simply saying "No."

* Do NOT, under any circumstance, call yourself a consumer. We should always remind them that even if we act as a group, we are individuals who are much more than just a consumer.

[The 1 2 P]

I think the easiest and best solution for both sides of this issue is put a "lock down" on new games. Make it so in the first 2-3 months, new software would have to be purchased new or require a pass code of some sort if not new. There are still plenty of early adopters to reel in and this wouldn't completely kill the used game market. Still this doesn't really get around an "always online" connection requirement, since the console would have to be talking to the network in order to approve your gameplay...

It's all ridiculous, but oh well, this is a meet in the middle solution that hasn't really been talked about.


I could agree with this. Almost sort of a movie theatre/release approach - for x many months you can only use it new and then it becomes accessible used and thus, able to be sold that way. An exclusivity window almost?

I have long suggested that myself. So for instance, Gamefly and Blockbuster couldn't rent out any new releases until they have been out for atleast 2 weeks or maybe even a month. I'm not sure how they would get around people buying it used outside of the online passes they already use today. Now that I think about it, how come game companies never complain about Netflix and Blockbuster stealing from their sales by renting the same disc over and over again? You'd think they would since they complain about Gamestop so much. And they pretty much want to make all the excuses they can for why the industry isn't doing as well as it was a few years ago. Because it totally couldn't have anything to do with the high price of new games:roll:

[DOAsaturn]

I have long suggested that myself. So for instance, Gamefly and Blockbuster couldn't rent out any new releases until they have been out for atleast 2 weeks or maybe even a month. I'm not sure how they would get around people buying it used outside of the online passes they already use today. Now that I think about it, how come game companies never complain about Netflix and Blockbuster stealing from their sales by renting the same disc over and over again? You'd think they would since they complain about Gamestop so much. And they pretty much want to make all the excuses they can for why the industry isn't doing as well as it was a few years ago. Because it totally couldn't have anything to do with the high price of new games:roll:

It's interesting you mention rentals - I want to say Nintendo did have some lawsuit against Blockbuster back in the day trying to block game rentals. I'm not going to pretend to know anything on this matter, but maybe there are agreements worked out for this. I've heard that buying a game as a rental license costs a lot more than just a game - which is why some stores charge insane fees for replacements. I used to frequent Hastings - which may be the last of its kind in the country in terms of a brick & mortar rental place - and they charged triple digit fines to replace games due to damage.

I suppose a similar agreement can be worked out between Gamestop (and Best Buy/Hastings, etc in retail used game sales) to generate a certain % back to the companies. That would probably cause the price on used and they'd lose even more customers to ebay and Amazon.

What will be interesting to see is how Gamestop goes along with this. The fact that digital only and lack of used games would kill of their franchise will make them a major player here. If they refuse to stock a console (and maybe other stores join in, like Best Buy) then you've thrown it right back at Microsoft or Sony and all the game developers/publishers who will all take a huge risk without mainstream retail support. Cooler heads will almost have to prevail to keep everyone happy and in business...

[Polygon]

Still this doesn't really get around an "always online" connection requirement, since the console would have to be talking to the network in order to approve your gameplay...

Which will keep me from buying the game, period.