I’m so furious that I don’t really know how to begin this article. I keep typing one or two sentences, deleting them, and then typing a few more, and then redeleting. In lieu of a clever introduction, allow me to share the link that has spurred my rage: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=261330
For those of you too lazy to click the link, allow me to summarize: THQ wants all your money and they hate you.
Essentially, some gaming companies such as THQ and Activision are taking steps to ensure that people would rather buy a new copy of their game than a used copy by including a one-time use only online code that provides all of the content of the game packaged with new games. The reasoning behind this is that if someone were to sell their game to a pre-owned store like Gamestop or Vintage Stock then customers would rather purchase a new game because it would be complete. In essence, a pre-owned game would only be part of the game since it doesn’t have the one-time use access code.
Normally, I wouldn’t begrudge THQ for wanting to maximize their profits because that is just the nature of business. To say that including an online access code is unfair isn’t really a valid reason in my mind (except it kind of screws over people who aren’t connected to the internet and still want to play their favorite game), because video game publishers are most assuredly losing money due to pre-owned video game sales.
HOWEVER
It’s the way THQ decided to tackle the issue that really bothers me. Cory Ledesma, “creative” (my emphasis) director for THQ’s wrestling games says, “I don’t think we really care whether used game buyers are upset because new game buyers get everything. So if used game buyers are upset they don’t get the online feature set I don’t really have much sympathy for them.”
Finding good deals on video games comes with the holiday season territory, and THQ is essentially saying that they want every dollar they can squeeze out of you for their product. I don’t want this argument to turn into “It’s not fair” because in the end, video games are nonessential items to our daily lives, so “fairness” doesn’t really factor into the equation, but the sheer rudeness on the part of Ledesma was what struck me.
Jerry Hollikins of the popular webcomic Penny Arcade defended THQ by saying, “I honestly can’t figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy.” Pre-owned video games are protected under pawn shop law whereas piracy is the act of stealing a product. In addition to this, after a customer purchases a video game, that product becomes the customer’s property and they can do with it as they wish. If they wish to play it, sell it, or break it in half they can do that because they purchased the product. Hell, if they wanted to rent the game out to their friends and make money like that, they could do so. This proves what I’ve been saying for years; Penny Arcade is stupid.
The Penny Arcade article goes one step further and states the real issue that THQ reps probably weren’t allowed to say, “It’s exceedingly rare that I purchase a game from Gamestop these days. I got tired of being harangued for trying to buy products there, or being told that they didn’t have a product when they did, or going across the street to Best Buy or Target or Fred Meyer and finding fifty copies of the game I was trying to buy heaped up like some heathen altar to commerce. There’s more, besides. At some point in the last few years, I became incredibly uncomfortable with the used games market.”
From this quote, we can see that the issue at hand isn’t pre-owned games, but the fact that Gamestop makes so much money off of pre-owned games. If THQ or Penny Arcade really cared about the “artistic integrity” of the work (because WWE games are so artistic) then they would have extended their argument to selling games on Craigslist or garage sales.
If THQ wants to include an online access code in their new games, that is perfectly fine and I honestly won’t begrudge them for wanting to do so. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be a bit competitive to get more people purchasing a product. However, the confrontational rhetoric on the part of THQ combined with the ignorant, and just plain stupid comments from Penny Arcade should not be tolerated. There is nothing wrong or illegal about trading in a game for cash or store credit in order to purchase another used title. It’s a system that allows people to save some money and I don’t see how there is anything wrong with that.
The argument from THQ and from Penny Arcade is that customers are somehow stealing from publishers when they don’t purchase new games is simply ridiculous given that they have not shown one iota of evidence that new game sales have been significantly effected and that used games are significantly higher. Sure, their reasoning might seem to make logical sense, but you know what? It seems to make logical sense for a gas tank to explode when you fire a bullet into it, but Mythbusters proved that wrong, so just because something seems logical, doesn’t mean that it actually is without facts, figures, and numbers.
I might have been stretching for a proper example with that Mythbusters example and for that, I apologize.
I guess the question we should really ask though is, “Who really wants to buy THQ games anyway? They all suck.”
I feared that this day was coming. The other thing that started to get under my nerves is that some game developers are releasing games with the intent of selling you an additional 20 dollars of add-ons directly after the game’s release. I LOVE the idea of add-on content, but hate the idea that it’s now being factored into the business model rather than be a continuing support for the game. This is why I like Bioware’s games.
Honestly, you can buy four games nowadays for the price of an X-box itself, and the games are filled to the eyeballs with advertising that doesn’t seem to lower the price. If it’s the never-ending commercials that make watching local TV free, then I should be getting a better price for video games filled with advertising. Games have steadily risen in price from 40 bucks to 65 bucks in the last 5 years or so, and I don’t see it stopping anytime soon unless consumers refuse to pay such high prices for new games. Hence why I buy used games.
Individual video game titles shouldn’t cost nearly as much as some home appliances. Thanks for the head’s up. I won’t be buying anymore THQ titles to do my part to show them that this business model is not what needs to be done to increase new videogame sales.
I’m pretty happy that I don’t own a console and my PC is enough for my gaming needs. Though this sort of thing has been going on in the PC market for years now (with the serial codes that PC games bring to stop pirated copies from using online content, though having little impact with the actual piracy of the game) it is, as you said, an issue of piracy and not of pre-owned titles.
I had a friend whom I gave my Battlefield 2 game, I just gave him my account log-in information and the game CDs and he could install and play the game with little hassle. This seems to go farther than that in regards to account management as it seems to be linked to the original customer’s Xbox 360 or PS3 account, that which is filled with the players lovely stats and achievements.
It won’t suprise me to see this kind of thinking become more and more popular in the future with accounts that are linked together to various products and to the internet to be used as a means to keep players in check. Unfortunately, this will likely become a standard for the videogame industries, much like serial codes for PC games.
On a larger scale, this same attitude toward people who buy used games has in the past been expressed toward people who buy used music and used books. In the case of music and books, artists do have a genuine complaint due to how these industries arrange royalties. Many musicians and authors must live on royalties between projects if they don’t have additional jobs. Do game developers get royalties, or do they get paid for their work? (This is a genuine question since I really don’t know.) However, it seems that the people who complain the most vocally about the used market are those who make quite a bit of money. I’m sure that THQ is still doing quite well, even in these unpredictable economic times. One of the most vocal opponents to the used music industry was Garth Brooks, someone who is probably quite wealthy. I completely agree with you that THQ can develop and market the game however they wish, but to somehow imply that the used game industry is somehow shady if not outright unethical is a quite the astounding leap in logic.
The “virtuous fiction” mention on Penny Arcade has some merit. Again, as stated earlier, some artists do get less money due to the used marked. I truly believe that you should buy new where you can to support the artists and to ‘vote with your dollars’. But lets face it, games are more expensive than CDs and books. The gaming industry is fertile ground for a pre-owned market, and the “artists” involved in development are more than a single author or four guys with guitars and drums. You aren’t supporting any one person in the gaming industry.
As a person studying to be a game designer, I can say designers don’t get royalties until there game sells more a certain amount of sales. They do get paid, but that pay comes from the buget that the leads get from the publisher.
Upon further thought, this is really a PR crisis for THQ, and they would be wise to fire Ledesma. How much better to say, “We are designing the game this way to reward those who have faithfully put up their hard-earned money to buy our games new. We realize that new games can be expensive and we want to reward the people who are willing to spend their money on our games with something special.”
I’ll take it a step further. I’m -pretty- sure that Jerry Hollikins probably got himself some THQ swag for suddenly being available for comment on the issue. I mean, I admire the guys from Penny Arcade but I’m also smart enough to know that the two of them know a thing or two about marketing. Allow me to put it this way:
“What? Jerry Hollikins is suddenly available to defend THQ? Oh yeah, not only does THQ have the right to defend its product by trying to attack used game buyers but let’s talk about those used game stores. Ugh, I totally agree that it’s probably hell going to those used game stores that are in your face, harassing you, up-selling you product that they want to deliver. They’re totally ruthless compared to online sales say…from THQ’s website! Hey! THQ’s website allows for hassle-free sale of new product with the new extra content key that dishonest used product gamers will miss out on because you’re a better customer! Come to think of it, don’t shop at those stores at all. Pre-order DIRECTLY from THQ!!! ….okay is that good? Awesome! I’m glad to help, you can send those copies of WWE RAW 2012 to J…E…R…oh wait hang on the mic’s still on pfff—”
Steven – I completely agree and that is actually the same sort of wording that Activision used (maybe they weren’t quite as positive about it), but that’s precisely why I haven’t said one bad word about Activision.
Kind of hard to support an industry that insults its customers. This doesn’t surprise me coming from THQ. I still haven’t actually gotten to play Dawn of War II thanks to the block systems they’ve placed in the way of actually using it. I guess it makes me mad, but mostly it just shows me that the guys running things are out of touch with the intentions of their customers.
I have alot of respect for Jerry Hollikins. I think he’s smart, funny, and interesting to listen to. Doesn’t mean I agree with everything he says. I understand his position in principle and can see what he’s doing by overblowing the situation. So, yeah, not with you this time Jerry.
Throwing out the fact that your wife works for Vintage Stock and that you used to work for Vintage this is still wrong. It is a poor business plan to make a single use code for the games to get the full, standard package. Often times people will prefer to purchase used games for the sake of trying out games they are uncertain about for a decreased price. If a company, especially THQ, who also is suffering from poor public relations, presents a good quality game that a customer enjoys his first time playing at a used game store then they will be more prone to buying the new games.
Also, this practice is poor in the long run of the individual game shelf life, making it impossible for gamers to gain the full experience of a game when it is older. It is used game vendors that allow many people to play a large collection of classic games, which define the culture. If THQ and Penny Arcade debases them for that same practice that creates the same video game culture they are commenting on then they are debasing the nature of video gaming at its core.
Good article Cody.
If i were to put myself in Cory Ledesma’s shoes, I would probably feel the same way. However, I would hope that I would have said it in a better way, or not mentioned it at all.
I own this game, and i think it’s mostly good, but like all the wrestling games, has parts that piss me off to no end. Oh for the days of No Mercy or Fire Pro.
THQ is being fundamentally dishonest about the reasons behind this. Cody is right, as this is about Gamestop. THQ is mad that Gamestop is getting more and more revenue. THQ can’t stop selling to Gamestop because, well, money. So they need a way to make used games (how Gamestop makes its real revenue) less attractive hence the one time code deal. Thus, THQ gets more cash from gamers instead of Gamestop. In theory. Their reasoning ignores a basic economic truth: The full value of a game INCLUDES THE ABILITY TO RESELL IT.
Hell, even the PA guys admit that they would buy games so they could play them, beat them, and resell (trade in) their games. Thus, they considered the ability to RESELL THE GAME PART OF THE GAME’S VALUE.
THQ is reducing the economic value of the game and keeping the price the same. This is a shitty deal for the consumer hence consumer outrage. Sadly, the outrage is probably not going to be enough to change this trend.
The “virtuous fiction” is absolute bullshit though. Buying an artist’s work != supporting his work for many many reasons. At a base level though, every used product had to first be a new sale so every single used product you buy has ALREADY SUPPORTED THE ARTIST (ASSUMING THAT THE ARTIST WAS INDEED SUPPORTED BY THAT SALE BECAUSE IN REALITY MANY ARTISTS ARE SCREWED BY DISTRIBUTORS, PUBLISHERS, AGENTS AND THE LIKE)
Nothing from me about the article this time…just wanted to say that I love the new logo. ‘Nuff said.
Ross – Thank you. You said it better than I could have said it myself.
Michael – Thanks! Chad Woody designed it and I think it is glorious.
I feel like Jerry Holkins’ position is being somewhat unfairly represented here. The full quote says: “If I am purchasing games in order to reward their creators, and to ensure that more of these ingenious contraptions are produced, I honestly can’t figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy. From the perspective of a developer, they are almost certainly synonymous.” I find nothing objectionable about this statement, and if you’ll take a deep breath and bear with me a moment, I’ll tell you why.
Jerry’s stated goal is to directly, financially contribute to the creators of the game. From that perspective, buying used games and game piracy are on equal footing. If you buy used or pirate a game, it does not directly benefit the creators. Can it indirectly benefit them? Certainly. Some pirates will buy games, music, and movies that they like after they tried them out for free (in some communities, it’s part of an emerging file-sharing ethic). Some people who buy used games will decide to buy new games from the same series or developer or whathaveyou (though many will continue to buy used). Both can contribute to word-of-mouth advertisement of the product’s quality. But the direct creator benefit link is what he was discussing, and there isn’t one in piracy or secondhand buying.
Then there’s the “virtuous fiction” line that there’s so much gripe about. Look at the entire quote: “You meet one person who creates games for a living, just one, and it becomes very difficult to maintain this virtuous fiction.” How can we begrudge that? He has made friends with game designers, and wants to support their work — and the work of those like them — in as direct a method as possible. He was writing about his own reaction based on his personal relationship with the media he consumes and the creators he knows.
It was the CVG website that framed Holkins’ opinion as a “cendemnation,” which I find absolutely disingenuous and incendiary. He asserts that secondhand game buyers are not THQ customers, which is true. And he says that piracy and secondhand buying share equal footing in correlation with directly paying a games creators, which is also true.
Later in the article, even specifically states that he doesn’t agree with the THQs methods.
And speaking of THQ, well… they are being crassly dismissive of people who consume their products. But, it’s not incorrect to say that those who buy secondhand THQ games aren’t actually THQ customers. To paraphrase the Dude: they aren’t wrong, they’re just assholes.
We’re in a tumultuous time in the realm of media distribution. The winds are changing and these larger corporations are responding to the mounting threats to their traditional models of business. If their responses don’t work, they’ll suffer for it — and as has been said before, who the fuck cares about THQ anyway?
I don’t give much of a shit here. I’m far more interested in the rise of digital distribution and the growth of independent developers. So let the behemoths rattle, gnash, and wail while they may. Eventually, it’ll come to change or die time and this sort of behavior will get them exactly where they deserve.