Death of retail? (split from Ketsui/DOJBLEX)

[bcass]

Imo retail games will not vanish for two reasons:

Many / most people love to go shopping, be it clothes, shoes, CDs, DVDs or videogames. Many people just go shopping without the intention of buying something in particular and they end up buying something they've seen in shops and that grabbed their attention. Especially the large crowd of "casual" gamers that don't know which games are even out, don't read magazines or internet news sites and so just buy what they see in stores and looks interesting or fun.

Impulse-purchases are alive and well on PSN, WiiWare, XBLA and Indie Games.

You all have some very pertinent points, but at the same time, it's impossible to argue with people who are so materialistically inclined. It's in direct opposition to the open-minded qualities required in the appreciation of our humble sport. Life truely is full of paradoxes.

[dcharlie]

I'll give you a clue - there is no limit to the number of gamertags you can create on any given console.

you mean... create a gamertag for every game you purchase so you can then sell off the game at a later date?

that's a lot of trouble for the ability to sell a game.

[bcass]

You have to weigh-up the odds. Dealing with moronic imbeciles in a game shop, or doing it all from the comfort of your own home?

[dcharlie]

well, i'd expect there to be little in the way of game value appreciation with DD too. :/

so i'll take my chances with store clerks for now

[Ex-Cyber]

I'll give you a clue - there is no limit to the number of gamertags you can create on any given console.

you mean... create a gamertag for every game you purchase so you can then sell off the game at a later date?

that's a lot of trouble for the ability to sell a game.

Also, there's this:

In using the Service, you may not:

[...]

- resell or redistribute the Service, or any part of the Service

Maybe they're not enforcing this now, but who knows about tomorrow?

Anyway, I'm not against downloadable games. However, I am against some server out in the ether having the power to veto me installing software I paid for onto a machine I paid for. This is especially prevalent with downloadable games but is by no means limited to them.

[bcass]

In using the Service, you may not:

[...]

- resell or redistribute the Service, or any part of the Service

Yeah, that holds about as much legal weight as the notice on the back cover of loads of my JPN PS1/Saturn games that states "Not For Resale" and "For Japan Only".

[UnscathedFlyingObject]

I buy from Amazon. There's no need for me to move away from the couch or deal with Gamestop, which I despise for a lot of reasons but that's besides the point. I'm strongly against buying any kind of downloadable title because I lose control over them. The powers that be make it difficult for me to sell games that I don't like, and despite them promising re-downloads, they're free to deny them as they please. That to me is the same as giving them the right to kick me in the nuts anytime they want. Hard drive technology is not very durable and it just scares me too much to have a single point of failure with no way to recover my collection down the road.

I'll stick to physical games for the foreseeable future. If devs want to sell to me, they need to press a disc, manual, and box at the very least. I believe that I'm not the only one who thinks like this and there's even more people for whom buying games means going to a store and getting a physical item. Going full downloadable means losing a sizable slice of the market. Try telling soccer moms (huge segment of the market) how to buy any of these downloadable titles for her 5yo kids.

[bcass]

I buy from Amazon. There's no need for me to move away from the couch or deal with Gamestop, which I despise for a lot of reasons but that's besides the point. I'm strongly against buying any kind of downloadable title because I lose control over them. The powers that be make it difficult for me to sell games that I don't like, and despite them promising re-downloads, they're free to deny them as they please. That to me is the same as giving them the right to kick me in the nuts anytime they want. Hard drive technology is not very durable and it just scares me too much to have a single point of failure with no way to recover my collection down the road.

I'll stick to physical games for the foreseeable future. If devs want to sell to me, they need to press a disc, manual, and box at the very least. I believe that I'm not the only one who thinks like this and there's even more people for whom buying games means going to a store and getting a physical item. Going full downloadable means losing a sizable slice of the market. Try telling soccer moms (huge segment of the market) how to buy any of these downloadable titles for her 5yo kids.

That's very touching and pertinent to the user, but like I said before, you won't be having a say in the matter. Digital distribution allows developers and publishers total control of the product. That's why it's inevitable.

[dcharlie]

That's very touching and pertinent to the user, but like I said before, you won't be having a say in the matter. Digital distribution allows developers and publishers total control of the product. That's why it's inevitable.

until of course bandwidth providers jack up their costs when the publishers move whole-sale to internet only, hence becoming the replacement for retail anyways

Again, not adverse to downloading from XBLA, PSN or STEAM - but it's going to be interesting to see what happens. I personally think the time line is quite long for when we get download only.

[Elixir]

You have to weigh-up the odds. Dealing with moronic imbeciles in a game shop, or doing it all from the comfort of your own home?

So you have a dedicated account per DLC-only game.

[CStarFlare]

Yeah, that holds about as much legal weight as the notice on the back cover of loads of my JPN PS1/Saturn games that states "Not For Resale" and "For Japan Only".

Yeah, except Sega and Sony can't ban your gamertag/console from a network that is necessary to play a game that was downloaded on the seller's xbox.

On a related note, couldn't you theoretically buy a game with gamertag A, sell A, but keep the game on your hard drive and continue playing with gamertags B-Z?

[popawell]

Anyway, I'm not against downloadable games. However, I am against some server out in the ether having the power to veto me installing software I paid for onto a machine I paid for. This is especially prevalent with downloadable games but is by no means limited to them.

This, and the other implications that come with it.
Can you imagine a day when the vast majority of games you purchase online have a set expiration date?
This is the kind of thing I fear about anything download only, most software bought on discs do not have anything like that.

[UnscathedFlyingObject]

You have to weigh-up the odds. Dealing with moronic imbeciles in a game shop, or doing it all from the comfort of your own home?

So you have a dedicated account per DLC-only game.

He's probably the one hogging all the gamertags.

[Acid King]

That's very touching and pertinent to the user, but like I said before, you won't be having a say in the matter. Digital distribution allows developers and publishers total control of the product. That's why it's inevitable.

It's inevitable only if you completely ignore all the logistical problems of doing so.

[yyr]

On a related note, couldn't you theoretically buy a game with gamertag A, sell A, but keep the game on your hard drive and continue playing with gamertags B-Z?

This will work, until the person with gamertag A decides to do a license transfer. At that point, the record of which console "owns" the content will change, and this may cause the game to stop working on your console. (I haven't tried this so I don't know for sure.)

The idea of reselling digital content is an interesting but a strange one. Let's say I want to resell my XBLA copy of Triggerheart Exelica. What price could I charge? Since it's a bunch of ones and zeroes, it'll be in the same condition it was in when I originally bought it. So I could charge full price, right?

But if "used" copies cost the same as new ones, why wouldn't I just buy it new to support the developer? If "used" copies were cheaper for some reason, then of course those would get bought up first, because the condition is the same. But then how does the developer make any money?

And... this is a big one... if I could resell it for the same price as I originally paid--"new" or "used"--wouldn't that just mean that all of these downloadable games would essentially be free? I'll just sell them when I'm done for what I paid and I'm not out a cent. If I feel like playing it again, I'll re-buy it off of someone else, then re-sell it. Developers would basically be releasing their games for free, which will cause them to stop releasing the games.

It seems to me that we can't re-sell DLC and downloaded games because the market just wouldn't work.

[Specineff]

Dream-on sweetheart. I've seen the future, and it doesn't involve a shelf full of cardboard and plastic. The funny thing is you won't have a say or a choice in the matter. Just have a quick glance at where all music sales are now. That's exactly where all games distribution is heading.

Not to argue with you, but... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX_%28Di ... Express%29

I know that games and movies are not the same thing. But people wil be very pissed off if their concept of ownership is influenced in any way by the whims of the entertainment industry.

[Ex-Cyber]

I don't think ownership issues necessarily made DIVX fail. There were certainly plenty of other things wrong with it: poor player support (at a time when DVD itself was still a fledgling format), poor distribution of the discs themselves, the requirement that the player be hooked up to a phone line...

[Specineff]

Oh, no. I was quoting it as an example. That "you are only buying the right to use this data" crap is not going to sit well with Johnny Consumer.

I mean, I-Tunes at least lets you back up you purchased tracks, right?

[bcass]

You have to weigh-up the odds. Dealing with moronic imbeciles in a game shop, or doing it all from the comfort of your own home?

So you have a dedicated account per DLC-only game.

No, because I'm an extremely well-informed consumer and would never buy a game that I didn't know that I would at least get some entertainment from.

Yeah, that holds about as much legal weight as the notice on the back cover of loads of my JPN PS1/Saturn games that states "Not For Resale" and "For Japan Only".

Yeah, except Sega and Sony can't ban your gamertag/console from a network that is necessary to play a game that was downloaded on the seller's xbox.

How would they find out your gamertag from an ebay auction/forum sale? If you'd been diligent enough to create a new gamertag for each game, then the worst that would happen would be that that one game would be no longer playable. Also, you don't need to be online to play download games (with the exception of Indie Games on the 360).

[Lordstar]

a lot of people like there XBL points added to there names. Its nice but i dont give a toss about them either way really. Has anyone actually tried to sell off singular second hand gamer tags with games attached? I would think the resale value would make it pretty much pointless on a 600 or 800 point MS game. how do you value second hand data/DLC?

[bcass]

a lot of people like there XBL points added to there names.

Do you mean gamer score? If so, anyone whos gamertag is logged into the same 360 that the game is on can get achievements from that game. You don't have to play using the gamertag you downloaded the game with to earn acheivements/gamer score for that game.