"Xbox One" Reveal Event

[Summers]

They help the industry, tbh. People play games they normally wouldn't if they can get a used copy cheap. If they enjoy it, they'll buy similar games/sequels.

[TKz]

I posted on Facebook how I was a bit underwhelmed by the reveal mainly due to certain questions not being answered (the used games thing in particular) and someone commented on it by saying how the used game thing (in regards to the rumors) is perfectly acceptable to him and, "I love the people that make a huge issue out of the used game thing when it's specifically hurting the industry." Of course, this is the same guy who has no problem with 'acquiring' games. Am I wrong in thinking used games don't really 'specifically hurt' the industry, at least significantly?

Well, they do. They're good for the consumer, but there's no denying that they hurt the industry. The creators of the games, specifically. I'm not really against blocking used games either, because if I want something I buy it when it comes out. And usually if there's an old game that I want, I'll get it on Steam for like £4 when the deals come around. That's not to say Used Games aren't great for consumers who can't afford brand new ones, or need to make some cash to put towards a new game, but I can't really fault any company for trying to block them. Consider that a used game can be sold and resold like, 5 times. Let's say that half the copies of the game get sold like that. That's a lot of cash the devs don't see any off.

[GoGo Yubari]

They help the industry, tbh. People play games they normally wouldn't if they can get a used copy cheap. If they enjoy it, they'll buy similar games/sequels.

Word. I bought all the Assassin's Creed games up to III used, played them over the summer, and then pre-ordered III so I could play it the moment it came out.

(The fact that I didn't really like III and wished I had bought it used is more a flaw with the game itself than the system.)

[Skummy]

On the pre-owned games front, my girlfriend will buy a game, finish it really quickly, and then trade it in if she can't envision herself playing it again. She'll then use the money/store credit from trading in to get her next game. Without the pre-owned market, she'd just end up buying fewer games, as she wouldn't be willing to take a risk on something she might not enjoy if the option of trading it in for something else wasn't there.

I'd wager that plenty of consumers follow the same model - you need to look at pre-owned games from both angles. Yes, if someone's only buying pre-owned games, then the developers are losing money. But if someone is trading in games, in order to save some money off a brand new game, then cutting off the pre-owned market altogether means that fewer brand new games are sold. They support each other.

[RPS]

Also, with DLC now as prevalent, the idea that companies can't profit off of used games is crazy. If I buy Borderlands 2 used, I could go out and buy the DLC for 40$, the extra characters for 20$, etc.

Above all, it's just bad business. People buy personal property because we want to have the maximum amount of use out of it. In other areas of property, when you start to limit and control how people consume/use/dispose of property, it goes down in value. The same should be true of video games. You want to tell me when, where and how I play my games? You want to retain the maximum amount of control possible over what you sell? Than you are going to have to lower your prices.

[TKz]

On the pre-owned games front, my girlfriend will buy a game, finish it really quickly, and then trade it in if she can't envision herself playing it again. She'll then use the money/store credit from trading in to get her next game. Without the pre-owned market, she'd just end up buying fewer games, as she wouldn't be willing to take a risk on something she might not enjoy if the option of trading it in for something else wasn't there.

I'd wager that plenty of consumers follow the same model - you need to look at pre-owned games from both angles. Yes, if someone's only buying pre-owned games, then the developers are losing money. But if someone is trading in games, in order to save some money off a brand new game, then cutting off the pre-owned market altogether means that fewer brand new games are sold. They support each other.

I don't think there's any argument against that, it's not really a black and white situation though. There's a lot of variables about how the consumers use the system that can effect the sales. You could also say that if they wanted the game, they were going to buy it either way, even if that means having to wait until they can gather the funds or even until the cost is cut down. For a lot of people I don't think it's a case of "Well, I'll get it if I can get it pre-owned/use the cash towards it", it's a case of "I want this game, I'm going to get it." I'd like to stress before someone is stupid enough to get pissy at me because I don't agree with their viewpoint that I'm seriously fine either way. I just think you have to look at it from the perspective of the devs in particular to understand that this is a sizeable amount of money they're not seeing in a time when the industry isn't doing great. A lot of games are failing to meet their targets (as ridiculous as some of the targets are), it makes sense to want to try and get that money back to the company that made the game, rather than the company that sells it to you.

I totally agree with the fact that not being able to play your games on a different console is bullshit, though.

[Crybaby Bunting]

What I'm interested in is the excuses they'll give for poor sales of games, given that the console is designed to eradicate piracy and the second hand games market.

[Skummy]

It's not so much "I want this game, I'll buy it one way or another", though. Not every game people buy is because it's a game they've wanted for months - sometimes a game will catch your eye, but you're not quite sure about it. You're going to be more willing to take a risk on a game if you can get credit against it, or buy it pre-owned, than having to fork out £40+ to get it full price. It's a lot of money to spend on something on a whim, especially when there are so many other things competing for your money and attention.

[Your Mom]

It's not so much "I want this game, I'll buy it one way or another", though. Not every game people buy is because it's a game they've wanted for months - sometimes a game will catch your eye, but you're not quite sure about it. You're going to be more willing to take a risk on a game if you can get credit against it, or buy it pre-owned, than having to fork out £40+ to get it full price. It's a lot of money to spend on something on a whim, especially when there are so many other things competing for your money and attention.

This is the problem. We trade a lot to afford new games. If this gets rid of it we just cant get as much

[thatshortguy]

Actually, here's a random thought to chew on. Complete conjecture, but eh, it's what we do.

What if the 360 is being set up to be the main gaming system, while the XB1 is set up as the multimedia entertainment system? Yes, logic dictates that any E3 news for the 360 will be a possible price cut and the last spat of games before it's taken out back with the XB1's release. However, keeping the games coming to it opens up the possibility for a PS2-like lifespan for the 360. A $100 console in the 360 gets people in to pay for XBox Live, which is the primary moneymaker for Microsoft (we've seen this with the subsidized XBox deals a while back). Keeping the 360 around also allows them to effectively sidestep the entire used game debate, as you can play used titles on the 360 and lend/trade them as you see fit.

Do I expect this to be the case? No. Alas, an interesting prospect.

[Colly]

What, Microsoft competing with Sony using donkeys old tech, while their new console is a media hub with no real forward steps on something you could buy for far less?

[Dan]

Yeah, that's not happening.

[Cactus Drags]

The use of entitlement in here bothered me. I hardly think it's considered entitlement to be able to use a product and licensed accessories you've likely laid down €600+, in any which way you choose, I think that's a consumer necessity for most people. Just because in this industry it's much easier to control, doesn't make it more ethical to display this level of control over the consumer post-sale.

I really feel that if this is as bad as feared and Sony follow suit, it'll be a blow to either console gaming or consumer power to point of no return.

I'm using entitlement because people are saying that the One should be this or should be that. There's no "should be". I said before, Microsoft can release whatever it damn well pleases, if it's not to your tastes, don't buy one. I'm not saying it's a good idea to lock down features or require an internet connection at all times. I'm saying you can't complain about it because you don't have to opt in. It's not like you've bought the console already and they've then turned around and said "thanks for your cash, now we removing the ability to play used". If it's a terrible call and fails miserably then they'll have to find a way to reverse it, or lick their wounds, learn from it and come back with a better solution for the next generation.

I posted on Facebook how I was a bit underwhelmed by the reveal mainly due to certain questions not being answered (the used games thing in particular) and someone commented on it by saying how the used game thing (in regards to the rumors) is perfectly acceptable to him and, "I love the people that make a huge issue out of the used game thing when it's specifically hurting the industry." Of course, this is the same guy who has no problem with 'acquiring' games. Am I wrong in thinking used games don't really 'specifically hurt' the industry, at least significantly?

Well, they do. They're good for the consumer, but there's no denying that they hurt the industry. The creators of the games, specifically. I'm not really against blocking used games either, because if I want something I buy it when it comes out. And usually if there's an old game that I want, I'll get it on Steam for like £4 when the deals come around. That's not to say Used Games aren't great for consumers who can't afford brand new ones, or need to make some cash to put towards a new game, but I can't really fault any company for trying to block them. Consider that a used game can be sold and resold like, 5 times. Let's say that half the copies of the game get sold like that. That's a lot of cash the devs don't see any off.

I can't find the article now because Googling just returns a flood of stories about customers not being interested in a used block, but Gamestop put some stats out earlier in the year that said that close to two thirds of all new purchases were funded either through trade-ins directly, or credit on gift cards and the like. Obviously, they've motive to skew any figures towards that conclusion, but from my experience working at Game for five years, it seems pretty accurate. And as Skummy said, there's a lot of games that people either won't pay full price on, or at least need the safety net of trade-in credit to take a punt on.

[Bobfoc]

If the major publishers would release their games at lower prices, perhaps the whole used game/trade-in issue would be lessened slightly, but it doesn't look as though they'll do that, so the problem is likely to persist. Regular online sales and lower recommended retail prices for pretty much everything except Call of Duty have softened the blow for PC players, who have had to put up with a virtually non-existent trade-in market for years now, but with Microsoft in particular showing little in the way of a desire to attempt to follow suit, they've ensured that those who need to trade in their games to fund their subsequent gaming purchases will become increasingly alienated.

[TKz]

I think being more of a PC gamer lately helps soften the blow, too. If PSN and Xbox Live offered the kind of deals and lowered prices for digital downloads that Steam can, I don't think the used game market would be quite as big. A big part of why I don't bother with used games now is because why would I buy Dead Space on PS3 for £10-15 when I can get it for £3 on Steam? I'm a lot more interested in the transition towards digital than most others seem to be, though.

[apsham]

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-features-new-xbox-that-are-about-to-ruin-everything/

[apsham]

I think being more of a PC gamer lately helps soften the blow, too. If PSN and Xbox Live offered the kind of deals and lowered prices for digital downloads that Steam can, I don't think the used game market would be quite as big. A big part of why I don't bother with used games now is because why would I buy Dead Space on PS3 for £10-15 when I can get it for £3 on Steam? I'm a lot more interested in the transition towards digital than most others seem to be, though.

The thing with Steam and PC gaming is the fact that in-store PC sales started to decline around the same time that Steam started to build up speed. It's been years and years now that the PC section at an EB Games or similar has been a tiny, dusty corner of the store - and the thing that hurt PC games for the stores would've been the CD keys that tied the game to a single account, etc.

Now that sounds like the same could happen for consoles pushed out by Sony and Microsoft... essentially destroying game speciality stores and their ilk, however - there is no guarantee of that.

[Cactus Drags]

Reading all this drivel from executives this week (Activision CEO said the One was still a games machine first for example) and the bizarre decisions regarding mandatory Kinect monitoring, whatever they're doing with preowned, always-on etc. (I'm still reserving judgement until this stuff gets properly clarified), it just strikes me that the wrong people have ended up in charge, not just with MS, but right across the board.

[TKz]

I think being more of a PC gamer lately helps soften the blow, too. If PSN and Xbox Live offered the kind of deals and lowered prices for digital downloads that Steam can, I don't think the used game market would be quite as big. A big part of why I don't bother with used games now is because why would I buy Dead Space on PS3 for £10-15 when I can get it for £3 on Steam? I'm a lot more interested in the transition towards digital than most others seem to be, though.

The thing with Steam and PC gaming is the fact that in-store PC sales started to decline around the same time that Steam started to build up speed. It's been years and years now that the PC section at an EB Games or similar has been a tiny, dusty corner of the store - and the thing that hurt PC games for the stores would've been the CD keys that tied the game to a single account, etc.

Now that sounds like the same could happen for consoles pushed out by Sony and Microsoft... essentially destroying game speciality stores and their ilk, however - there is no guarantee of that.

Thing is, as much as it sucks for the people that work in that industry, I'm pretty okay with being completely digital. I'd much rather download the game in an hour or two (or as little as twenty minutes if Steam's being good) than have to worry about pre-ordering, then if they've got the stock, let alone the fact that my local game hasn't even received any stock for a few big releases lately. Or having to wait for the copies to show up if I buy them online. Again, that's just me, I'm sure there's plenty of people who can't stand the idea of not having a physical copy of the game they purchased. For me, it's not such a big deal now.

[Skummy]

Reading all this drivel from executives this week (Activision CEO said the One was still a games machine first for example) and the bizarre decisions regarding mandatory Kinect monitoring, whatever they're doing with preowned, always-on etc. (I'm still reserving judgement until this stuff gets properly clarified), it just strikes me that the wrong people have ended up in charge, not just with MS, but right across the board.

Personally, I think we're seeing the dying days of the home console as we know it. I think the next generation after this will be the last as we know it, unless things change drastically.

There are just too many expensive, well-marketed as "must have", products out there vying for our attention for games companies to start throwing out this kind of consumer-unfriendly nonsense.

When there's a new iPad for £300+, a new iPhone for anywhere from £100-£500 or however ludicrously expensive they are now, Kindles for £150...a games console for £400+ becomes a much, much harder sell.

The money in gaming now comes from DLC, from social gaming, and from mobile gaming. You've got a thousand other things asking for your money, and your attention. When a games console is costing you a decent chunk of a month's wages, and the games are close to £50 on top of that, the console manufacturer really should be doing more to win over a consumer.

With the X-Box One in particular, it's not just the "always online", the enforced Kinect, or the damage to the pre-owned market, or inability to trade/share games. It's that nobody has anything nice to say about it. The entire feedback of the reveal has been negative. There was absolutely nothing in the presentation that has impressed people, or at least not enough to outweigh the negatives.

Maybe I'm being over-dramatic, but the times of games consoles having a near-enough captive market of gamers are coming to an end, and they just can't afford to alienate their base to the extent that they have.