|
|
Epic: Second hand games are a huge issue
Author: Joe MartinPublished: 10th November 2008
Gears of War sold well, but more than twice as many people who bought it, played it according to Epic.
Capps also said that piracy was a huge issue for PC games specifically, pointing to Crysis as an example. According to Capps the ratio of pirated to non-pirated versions for Crysis was a staggering 20:1. Capps says that's why Epic has no intention to release Gears of War 2 on the PC, not ever.
"That's gruesome to a company like ours that's been in the PC market for so long," he said to GI.biz. "We're trying to fix it, there's a new alliance of companies trying to make PC gaming work again. But if people are playing games without buying them, then the games aren't going to keep coming."
Right now though, Capps is more concerned with the second hand market, saying that Epic's primary retailer makes the majority of its money from second hand sales despite being a specialist games store.
"We don't make any money when someone rents it, and we don't make any money when someone buys it used - way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it."
The solution, says Capps, is a platform like Steam which can feed back to developers sales figures and cash on the same day.
"We're able to respond immediately. That model's so wonderful from a developer perspective, not just making money, but knowing where my customers are and being able to make them happy. With retail, I just don't have that - I get 'Oh Europe came back with this many numbers,' and I get that 60 days after we ship."
Capps also reckons that DLC is going to play a more important role in the future, but what do you think about that? Let us know in the forums.
Related articles on bit-tech.net
Comments (77)
My new policy on games with DRM is to buy second hand and never actually install from the disk that way i get to stick to my principles of not giving drm loving scum bags any money and still getting to play any decent games with out being a scum sucking pirate (much). Which also goes for crap games such as those that epic have been shoveling of late.
WTF not happy with screwing out PCs with DRM. It also stops us selling our games so we can get more money to buy more games. I used to think when you bough something you owned it. Not any more.
Hell when i buy my car ill be expecting it to start only 100 times and be un-trade inable!
Piracy may be hurting the games industry. BUT they are ruining it, and it doesnt help when we get "We are not releasing this game on PC". Then they do 2 years later in a **** port. THATS WHY NO ONE BUYS IT!!!
Lets face it Gears of war 2 is 40 quid in the shops right now second hand in a week it will be 35. rented a fiver. if your like me and at the moment have too many games to play Far cry 2, fallout 3, COD5 and L4D in a week. then it's easier to wait for some games to come down in price any way. Bring down the prices and piracy has a good chance of dissapearing, if not reducing.
yeh when people are buying preowned games, charging us more in the future after we buy a game is definately a way to stop us buying preowned. Sound counter intuative?
I cant see that the preowned market is a huge problem really. When im buying a game, if im really interested in a game i dont mind paying full price, for something im less bothered about i wont. in that way if there wasnt a preowned market i wouldnt be bothered buying some average games at all. so they arent lossing anything in my opinion because otherwise i wont buy it. the preowned market may even be stimulating the new market, im sure some people like the idea of buying a game and getting some of your money back after a month or so, so maybe they can go out and buy another(i myself begrudge selling a game to a shop so they can put it back on the shelf for twice the price they but it of me- thats just the way i see it)
also, profit made from preowned goes to the game shops which is probably goin towards the price we pay making them cheaper as they have income coming into them in from other sources which is probably stimulating the new market aswell.
Why are we the consumer the problem and publishers feel they have to trick us into buying games new or paying more instead of the industry looking at themselves to fix the problem
the consumer is always goin to do whats in their best interest, just the way it is
but then you are spending money and none of it is going to the people who made the game. you're basically pirating the game but paying for it :S
broken logic much?
This whole Piracy issue isn't the causal factor of this industry's problems as "business leaders" like this guy keep whining about, it's the RESULT MADE POSSIBLE BY THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TECHNOLOGY, as a reaction to poor service and inflated prices for years, as well as a few opportunistic chancers who like something for nothing... On that point, by the way, can all you self-righteous hypocrites flaming the act of piracy as though it was rape or murder just calm down and try to get things in perspective please?
It's either pathetic that people like him bark like this, or it's deplorable that they try and BS like they do.
Sure the ACT of piracy is very damaging, but the solution is proved and has been for a LONG time; STEAM anyone?
Not just steam, but Valve as a whole. They are a gleaming benchmark of how to make and distribute games, and more importantly LISTEN to their customers and play fair.
I just find it so hard to take this sort of argument from such a large player in the industry when they keep ignoring the alternative options because of their own strategies and agendas. IF THEY DID BUSINESS PROPERLY AND PUT THEIR CUSTOMERS FIRST, THEN MAYBE THEY'D SUCCEED IN THEIR CHOSEN LINE OF WORK!
To hear this guy trying to redefine a fundamental practice in trade as has been since... forever... by which I mean, fairly trading your rightfully owned goods at a lower value to others in the market for such goods, is just a great example of how out of touch some of these guys are becoming.
If I buy a game, I buy the right to use that game, the same applies for absolutely every other item or service I can buy, to now suggest that once I buy, I cannot sell that "right" on at a depreciated value is outrageous!!!
Is it even legal??
This industry is probably going through its greatest ever trial at the moment, and it will emerge, eventually, in a form that suites modern times. This challenge has largely been brought about by emerging technologies that have, in turn, made it harder to securely distribute, and also spawned the emergence of more tailored alternatives (consoles). These challenges are now seperating the men from the boys... Epic... and the "boys" just keep whining and crying and making the most ridiculous excuses and proposals.
Sounds like perfectly normal business practice if you ask me.
The games companies should have done something similar, but they didn't and now they're regretting that decision.
As for the second hand market, no other industry expects to make money from second hand products. Then, on the other hand, no other industry has after-sales infrastructures, such as online gaming or patching, like the games industry does.
Still, that infrastructure is still there if somebody doesn't sell their game and keeps playing online for months after buying it. That's no different, really, in the case of the someone who buys a secondhand game and plays online. The games company gets no extra money in the case of someone who keeps a game, so why should they get any money from a secondhand sale (assuming online play is free)?
Wanting to get money from secondhand sales is just greed, pure and simple. No other industry expects it, so why should the games industry expect any different?
And yes, piracy exists on every platform, but it is more rampant on the PC because it is so much easier (piracy on consoles requires some level of technical know-how).
Still, to not develop on the PC because of piracy is just a lazy excuse. Fact of the matter is that games companies probably make more from console sales than they do from PC sales. If that's the case, tell us that's why you don't want to develop on the PC. We understand market forces. We don't like bullsh!t excuses.
Epic used to be such a great company, but they seem to be bleating like a wounded goat every other week these days.
If they want us to keep our games. look at BURNOUT devs criterion. Not only are they giving us Excelent updates(often), A new FLYING CAR soon. BUT are not charging for it!
They will have a new LARGE update which will be paid for. But they seem to understand their audience and more intent on good support and fair value for money.
THAT is how it should be done. Not moaning like a bunch of twats.
Not really, i'm paying for a valid licence just not from the publisher. Piracy is using the product with out a licence imo. Fact is I don't want my money to go to EA, even indirectly by supporting the second hand market, but this is the best medium if i still want to play the game.
Ooooh perhaps this is a good thing for us PS3 owners perhaps devs will realize its the only non cracked console on the market even after 2 years and start to show it some proper respect.
I can see how the used market is an issue, people go into Game and pay near retail for used and the only people who benefit is Game, not the devs who put in the effort to bring a quality title to you, its not right really is it, if I was a game dev I'd be looking at ways to implement DRM to stop this too, online/telephone activations etc, will no doubt be in a lot of future titles.
other information: L4D is awsome
That is all
And game will tell you that they make so little on the sale of the original that they would either bump up prices and become even less competitive with the e-tailers or go out of business. I can't feel sorry for either camp but at least Game has made an attempt to fix its business model and not just whine at the end user.
How do they tell?
Way more than 2:1 for GoW and 20:1 for Crysis... I may not be a master of "da maff" but those numbers don't add up, one in twenty pirated for Crysis and one in two (second hand) for GoW.
Spot the bigger issue and quit whining about PC piracy!!!
So make games you don't actually need to sell. Look at the almighty Google Empire. They build it on free stuff!
Why? For one thing, asking a "full price" (54$) for a game such as Bioshock on Steam, while it's on sale on retailers for half that price or less and you actually get the physical product instead of just the download is hardly a solution or reasonable. Yes okay, that's just one example, but that's why I can't agree it being a clean cut and easy solution just yet. Yes it is great, yes it has potential to be even better, but it's not ready yet.
As for the actual news, makes me sad. Pirates yarr are sad too.
Still have to agree that Epic could consider making BETTER GAMES that would actually appeal to people enough to merit BUYING them. I can't remember the last time I have been enthusiastic about anything they've put out.
Less whining how bad it is and more doing something about it. DRM in its current forms (if you care to call them that) is not a solution as it only limits the rights of the rightful owners. That is unless they think that consumers who buy a product don't own it anymore as others have pointed out as well.
GTA4 cost 100mil to make and they made 500mil+. That was pirated to hell and back, so how come Rockstar isn't having press releases on a weekly basis to complain? Unless I missed them, then please correct me.
Games are meant to be one of the best cost to time activities around at the moment (tho i still think books are better at less than £10 for hours of entertainment), but lets face it thats just not true for most games. A 15hour game bought at £40 is ludicrous when compared to a decent online game like COD4 which u can pick up for £25 and get hundreds of hours out of it.
As for piracy...well theres nothing to be said there that hasnt been said a thousand times already.
They want it both ways, If you pirate it its the same as stealing a physical object but if you want to sell it then suddenly all you own is the right to play the game and not a physical object.
Its never enough for those whinging idiots, First they ditch pc games to cream more money off of console exclusives and now they are slagging off one of the core concepts of the console market. If they carry on like this they will run out of customers.
It's a tricky one really. If I paint a picture or knit a jumper and sell it to the store, I've already been paid. I'm not entitled to be paid a second time for something just because the person who bought my stuff sells it back to the store or onto a 3rd party. Make one thing, get paid once. The idea of me getting paid everytime a new person buys the painting from it's last owner is kind of silly isnt it?
I appreciate the amount of work the games company puts in to making a game (most of the time) but it's greedy to want to be paid everytime someone new buys the game (be it new or second hand) as opposed to everytime they buy the game from the creator (new). There's an important difference.
Every second hand game that the store sells (for a price way to close to retail if you ask me) has already been paid for once. What happens to it after that is none of the games company's business. The problem is that the games makers are trying to find a way to get money for 'Lost Sales'. The majority of lost sales come from 3 places, Piracy, Second Hand Market and Not buying the game (which may or may not actually be a lost sale if you didnt want to own the game).
Piracy is the only one of these that the games companys are correct in being annoyed about. Whilst not all Pirates would have actually paid for the game if they hadn't stolen it there is still a percentage of the pirated games that could have been sales were it not for the Piracy.
The second hand market's 'lost sales' arent the games companys sales at all. They've already sold the game once. End of story.
Eh... sorry for the minor rant :p
Back to the topic in hand - piracy is a problem in the games industry, as it is in most entertainment media industries ( music, video, etc ), but simply not releasing on a platform certainly is a move in the wrong direction and is not really a solution to the problem. I also take offence to Dr Capps inferring that the solution is a steam like platform when such a platform already exists (and they still refuse to release/develop the game for PC)
Fair point.... occasionally... these days.
I used to think the same in STEAM's early days, and that's because what you say was nearly always the case.
These days though, I find it hard to find much of a difference between STEAM's prices and those at Play, Game, or Amazon.
for example, Fallout 3 is $50 and £25 on etailers, Crysis is roughly the same, as is Warhead, Left for Dead etc....
Obviously they've worked on their pricing processes.
The only thing that bothers me now is our falling value of the pound.
Based on previous long-term history it was always reasonable to consider $2=£1, roughly, these days it's more like $1.50=£1.00, in which case you end up paying more. That's more the fault of our incompetent and short-sighted politicians than anything else though as our economy is receeding almost four times more than our peers, which is why I still consider the former long-term estimate as the figure that represents a reasaonable longer-term value to compare STEAM's prices.
That's the next step for Valve's pricing model for STEAM I guess; include currency exchange rate variations based on region in order to remain competitive.
Also, don't forget the nice one-off deals and introductory offers, and the seamless integration and community aspect, and mod support, patch-free gaming, blah, blah, blah...
The main reason I think that other devs, and publishers especially, are bitching and bleeting ridiculous nonsense is that they haven't figured out how to compete with Valve properly and are desperately trying to level the playing field with scant regard for the doing the right thing.
Based on that assumption, it 's nothing more than a competitive strategic move that has nothing to do with serving their customers, attacks their primary channel (videogame stores), and further holds them back fro mtaking the right moves.
Personally, it smacks of corporate arrogance led by ageing has-beens who need to be replaced with competent businessmen instead of trying to drag everyone back on pain of DRM, legal action, and outrageous control suggestions.
I sincerely hope to hear one day that companies like Epic get bought out at fire-sale prices, with no future for their, fankly, damaging "leadership"; those who make decisions in the organisation, not a suggestion that they are or have ever been leaders in this industry.
If there wasn't this insane amount of game piracy, game devs wouldn't even need to complain about the 2nd hand games market.
I really don't understand why these stupid f*cks stealing games do not understand that in the end they will be hurting themselves. I also cannot understand how they can so blatantly ignore that they are taking away the base of other people's livelihood. They just give a damn about other people's hard work, they are parasites w/o conscience and social competence, they only react to direct threats and punishment.
Just look at the numbers for Crysis. It's a fun game. It works. And if people want to try it first and find they like it, they should purchase it. If they think it's too expensive, wait 9 months and you will get it from the bargain bin. It will still be a great game 9 months from now.
But that's not the point for these hell bred software pirates. They want to satisfy their greed for free and have others pay the price.
__________
@iwog: Ok, make that 8:1 pirated/purchased Crysis copies. Is that anywhere significantly better? NO!
__________
@Teq: If you're too dumb to revoke the license before reformatting, your fault. Don't blame the game publisher for it. Guys like you pretend they're so upset about getting screwed when in fact they don't, but prefer to completely ignore why it has come that far - and that's because of retards like you.
__________
Btw, neither do I work for the computer gaming industry, nor do I make money with their products. I am just so upset how you selfish worth-less-than-nothings make life hard for honest people like me.
Contradiction?
The reason Steam is so successful is because they charge the full retail price for games that you *cannot* sell on.
QFT.
Here, here!
You can get some decent prices on Steam, but generally they are slightly above the average retail price (more so for us in the UK now the £ is dropping back) - but the key difference is that you can sell your retail game on if you don't like it/finish it/need cash for the next game.
I've got no problem with Fallout3 DRM nor did I have with the Bioshock DRM (nor did the guy who bought it off me). Providing DRM doesn't screw my machine up (Starforce) I don't mind. I wish I could avoid needing a DVD in the drive all the time, but it's not the end of the world. The steam alternative (losing from 50% - 75% of the game's value as resale) makes gaming uneconomical for me, and more importantly, offends my sense of natural justice.
Note that EMI moan about piracy but don't try to prevent me selling my CDs to other people. Nor do Penguin books worry that I might lend my books to other people. Last I heard, Kanye West was still just about managing to buy his bling, and Girls Aloud are still able to afford to make ends meet. I hear Michael Crichton died a wealthy man. And to my knowledge, Daniel Craig hasn't resorted to an evening bar job to pay the bills.
So why do Epic, EA, Ubisoft and pals all struggle on the proceeds or retail game sales?
If they want to stop piracy, they should open up Steam so that games will be trade-able, and there would be no resistance from the paying punters.
The problem is that the games are getting higher prices those days, and a lot of them just are not worth the money. Gears one was good, but the single player mode was just too short. I don't think it was good value for money (which is why I got it second hand for £28) if Gears was £30 new I would have got it new and not felt so bad at how short it was.
So, yes there are solutions to those problems, but no one has really implemented them in a way that works.
What would you suggest in the event of a HDD or mobo failure?