But the problem with getting rid of the used game market, is that it will destroy gamespot.

I need my used games. How will I enjoy classics I missed if they aren't availible for download?

I really don't think making a system that rejects used games is the answer. With his solutions, developers and publishers will make lending a game to a friend so much of a hassle that no one will want to do it. Online passes (if learned to handle more properly) could be a good solution, but eliminating the used game market isn't the way to go.

On one hand, I totally understand where he is coming from. They made the games, they should get the profits. On the other, where would I get all the games that I missed out the first time? How long will retailers hold onto games? Take Metro 2033 for example. I heard about it from GI, and then went and picked it up from GameStop. GREAT game. But without the used market, would any still have had a copy? Either way, I guess I accept there decision. Paying $60 for a game every time might decrease the total amount I buy, but I will most likely still find a way for game series I like or games that excite me.

While it is true that developers are experiencing more financial pain as a result of the used games market, I really do not know how I would get games without a store like Gamestop. The credit I make back selling old games is crucial to my ability to purchase the newest titles. In addition to that, there are certain games that simply do not get ordered to major retailers (a prime example would be the upcoming US version of Xenoblade Chronicles, offered only at Gamestop or Nintendo's website).

Hmm. mabie its a somewhat good thing thq is going under

Hmm, is renting a game considered a used game even though it's new?

I'm not really sure what he is trying to point out. Used games have been around since gaming surfaced, and developers have been able to grow just fine as long as they are creating games that people like. Although, if digital downloads could keep up with supply and demand, I could see this as a nice compromise. I always find it funny when I find a digital download on XBL that costs more than the retail copy at your local gamestop.

On another note, why can't they just give developers compensation for their games? If a used game is sold, again lets use gamestop as an example, why can't developers receive some type of royalty? I always used to think that was the case, but apparently I was wrong. I don't understand why developers cannot get compensated for the reselling of their games at retailers. Am I misunderstanding this or can someone explain this to me?

We should all just have new cars that stop working after you sell them or furniture that bursts into flames if you try to sell it at a yard sale. Used clothes? You're in luck brothers and sisters, no more hand-me-downs.

This is one of the worst ideas to ever come from a console developer. I'd much rather stick to DLC and online passes if it means keeping the use of used games.

I don't think the industry is taking into account the amount of people who can buy new games because they can sell there used games to the store they are buying the new game from. If a no used game policy is implemented then the stores are not going to buy these useless disk back, which means some people are not going to be able to buy more new games. What developers and publishers need to do is instead of punishing the consumer, they should reward them. By giving the consumer reason to keep that disk. By giving free DLC or just really good paid DLC. If the publisher/developer can limit the amount of used disk available then they will sell more new games. They also don't understand why people buy used games. Most people are not concerned with saving that $5. They want the other incentives to buying used, which is mainly the fact that you can return it if you don't like it. I know that when I buy used I often return it within the seven days and purchase a new copy.

Without me buying used games, I probably never would have bought those games' sequels in the future. There's your profit.

Can anyone think of any other product where the creator renders their goods void if it's purchased second hand? Can you imagine what it'd be like if we HAD to purchase every car fresh from the factory? I do understand where they're coming from, they want to see a return on every copy sold, but EVERY SINGLE other market deals with this. There are entire business devoted to selling used everything. It's simply not economical to buy every game new, especially if you're an avid gamer. If you've got the money to buy every game that you want on day one, that's fine. But don't expect everyone else to have such deep pockets.

What if you dont have internet.... Yea, wont happen. Someone tell me how they will cater to those who only play offline.

I, and every one else I know, can only buy the large amount on new games that we buy every year because we are able to trade in our old games and cover a decent chunk of the cost. Take that away, and I won't be able to afford most of the games I buy brand new. That includes Volition games. Some supporters say "Oh well PC gamers haven't been able to trade in their games in a long, long time and they don't complain" There are many things wrong with that way of thinking, such as... A) Since PC gamers can't trade in their games to afford new ones, many will just resort to piracy instead. Hence the absurdly humongous amounts of piracy on the PC platform. If PC gamers were able to trade in their old games in order to afford new ones, I don't think any one doubts that piracy would drop significantly. This is why piracy on consoles isn't even a quarter as huge as piracy on the PC is. B) PC games are cheaper. For those who use Steam, sales are constant, and you can almost always save a decent chunk of money, so those who do buy their games on the PC without pirating them will spend significantly less than those who game on consoles. For example, I bought Metro 2033, GTA4, and Crysis 2 on my PC for $50 total. On the console, it would have cost me twice as much. C) Just because PC users have to put up with it, doesn't make it OK. It is a sad time to be a gamer when so many fellow gamers have just accepted the fact that they are getting screwed left and right, especially PC gamers. Don't accept the fact that you can't trade in your old PC games. Don't let that become the norm anymore. It isn't right, and you should be able to do what you please with the retail copy of the game YOU purchased.

If used video games are abandoned: 1. It will devestate retailers such as Gamestop and Best Buy, both of which currently buy used games from consumers. 2. Selling used games provided me with a steady source of income which I could buy new games with, therefore, I will be unable to purchase many of the games I want, and if other people use this method, than this can add up and developers will not make the money they deserve off of new games, which can lead to inadequate later products, or no product at all.

Let's get rid of the used automobile market too. how about getting rid of the used housing market? Here's how game deveopers can make more money(they can't stop losing something they don't have): make good games :)

F#ck that.

As a consumer, used games are great. Sure, we want to help the developer so they make money and continue to make games, but we all can't afford to pay $60 for a brand new game that we want. If game devs went completely digital, they would lose tons of sales because many people don't have high-speed Internet. You could pay $120 and get 2 new games or pay the same and get 3 used games that are all relatively new, especially with the used deals Gamestop runs a lot, not to mention the rewards card that makes used games cheaper. I think a good solution would be if game devs put out proper demos for their games. If I were to buy Volition's latest - Saints Row: The Third, I would buy it used because I haven't had a chance to play it because there isn't a demo. How would I know if I'm wasting potentially $60 or even $20, it's still a loss. Used games correct this in allowing to buy a game cheaper and then return it if we don't want it. If new games had a better return system that would still benefit the developer, then that would be awesome. But until that happens, used games are the way to go for people that are unsure or are looking for a good deal.

The only problem with this is, is that I am not going to shell out $60 for a game that is only going to last me 5-10 hours and offer only a mild level of entertainment, it just isn't happening. Most games now-a-days aren't worth that high a price. Games that are, like Dark Souls, Skyrim, Gears of War 3, etc... I will buy new because they actually last more than an afternoon. In order to fight the used market, game developers need to take a step back and realize that their game needs some sort of factor that makes it replayable and fun, and I don't mean a tacked on multiplayer. If developers do this, I guarantee more people will buy new. Just look at Modern Warfare 3 (Or Battlefield 3 if you prefer), the game offers hours of online entertainment and fun making it worth buying new. Then look at the new sales numbers. While, yes, Call of Duty is a juggernaut, this kind of replayability will encourage more gamers to buy new rather than getting some sort of bonus or not having to buy an online pass.