3 Reasons Publishers Desire Us to Keep Old Games

When we invest in a new video game we want to feel satisfied by the content supplied in the game, we want to know we’re getting our moneys worth in the investment. Publishers, on the other hand, want us to keep our old games so they stay out of the used market. A publisher does not make a dime on used game sales. Their primary weapon to stop game sales? Downloadable Content (DLC).

1. Publishers Spend Lots on Marketing

A great example being GTA IV, hardcore gamers have a short attention span and live on hype more than physical games. Today, games live in press releases, demos, cinematic and live gameplay footage at conferences and on the web. Then, a game hits the shelves and sells millions of copies for a week or two before it’s forgotten. Publishers have marketed their game well, spent thousands on conference booths, streaming video bandwidth and rushing game demos through development and testing cycles early to get eyes on their titles.

Let’s face it, gamers that scrambled to buy Grant Theft Auto IV have moved onto the next big title or have decided to go outside for some fresh air (probably the former). Hardcore gamers consumes games like candy, sells them off for store credit and works towards their next purchase.

2. Publishers Want Loyalty

DLC breaths new life into old games, making them remain valuable for months after the hype and excitement has died. We’re now spending USD $60.00 for some of these new “current generation” game titles for a few days or weeks of excitement. Free downloadable content brings new reasons to play our “old stale” games and allows us to feel comfortable about our 60 bucks spent on a title.

Rainbow Six Vegas 2 is receiving a new “Fan Pack” for gamers to re-energize themselves about the “old” sequel to Rainbox Six Vegas. A game released in March is considered old by gamers, probably rarely played on Xbox Live anymore and needs something to keep the fans interested. This helps build loyalty to your product so the next franchise title which is released has a better chance of being purchased by your fan base because they can look forward to additional free content in the future.

3. Publishers Hate Used Games

Publishers are helping stick those games in the hands of the gamers for a longer period of time by supplying free add-on packs. Why would you re-sell your precious title back to the store when you could hold it and wait for potential DLC?

Publishers receive no revenue from the resale of a video game so it’s in their best interest to keep it out of the used markets. If there is a chance your beloved game will receive new features, at no cost to you, wouldn’t you hold off from selling it to see what’s coming?

Once a gamer has sold their title to a retail chain for pennies they’re unlikely to re-buy the title with the typical 80% markup when DLC arrives. They may opt to borrow a friends copy or rent the title rather than re-purchase it; neither fair well for the publisher in terms of revenue.

Games are expensive. Consumers must be wise to the best value in their video game titles and publishers want you to choose them for your gaming entertainment. Competition is high, profit margins are low and the market is all about sales volume. Publishers want repeat customers, people who feel their games are valuable before and after the purchase and are willing to share their loyalties with others.

Do you collect old console games, or do you sell them off to game stores and/or eBay? Would you consider holding off a sale if there was a great chance of new downloadable content?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Phil Harrison’s Building a 100 Million Dollar FranchisePhil Harrison’s Building a 100 Million Dollar Franchise

Once upon a time, Activision Blizzards CEO Bobby Kotick kicked a few franchises to the curb: Riddick and Ghostbusters. No doubt, this was a result of the Activision and Blizzard merger requiring some resources to the merged together while others were cut from the lineup. Phil Harrison, the new big suit at Atari/Infogrames has raised these little birds from the ashes with a dream to build them into 100-million dollar franchises.

While Bobby Kotick said the titles, “don’t have the potential to be exploited every year on every platform with clear sequel potential and have the potential to become $100 million dollar franchises,” Phil Harrision sees it as a personal challenge to prove him wrong.

“What Bobby, perhaps unhelpfully said, was that those games were franchises which wouldn’t make $100m of revenue and generate sequels. If that’s his benchmark, then fine — and we’d love to aspire to the same benchmarks. But you know what? I would love to turn Ghostbusters into a $100m franchise, just to prove him wrong.” (1up)

In many ways, this is the difference in attitudes from a large firm compared to a smaller firm with strong goals and a vision for success. Activision Blizzard is big now, perhaps the biggest publisher in the industry, they can’t be bothered with minuscule 80-million dollar franchises. Others, like Atari, strive to take a title from nothing to something of greatness. Granted, Atari’s failed in a lot of franchises, but with their new ex-Sony executive behind the helm things could turn around and this might be the first step.

Most of the best game franchises in existance today started from nothing but a dream. Big publishers don’t have time to dream, they’re too busy making money off the fanboys of their current franchises.

Games 2.0: User Generated Gaming?Games 2.0: User Generated Gaming?

In a world driven by the Internet, global economics and the short attention spanned reader we’ve been bombarded with social networks and 140-character micro-blogging. We’re constantly finding ways to promote ourselves, promote our brands or tell people what we’re eating for dinner. Is this obsession with ourselves and our creativity bridging into video games?

It’s games 2.0 people!. A time when we’re inventing our own video game stages, characters and full blown casual games! Not only are people getting a chance to design their own games with Microsoft’s XNA, Adobe Flash or from small independent casual games, but we can design our own stages in games like LittleBigPlanet.

Microsoft wants to remind us that Boku is much like LittleBigPlanet in its user generated video game content. Seen in this video below:

It’s obvious their going down the same path as Sony has gone with creating your own stages with LittleBigPlanet and creating a new way of gaming: playing other people’s stuff. You can find some similarities with Guitar Hero: World Tour‘s ability to create your own songs and publish them for others to play.

Are we heading down a generation of games where some of the best stages are created by fellow dedicated gamers? Or, is this just a distraction and means for developers to have gamers invigorate and create more of a demand for the games they are making the money on?

(Thanks, Destructoid)

Kaz Hirai Dooms 360 To Short LifeKaz Hirai Dooms 360 To Short Life

Sony’s PlayStation 3 has a 10-year plan. We’ve heard about the plan, we’ve seen Sony’s current execution and we’re starting to see some of the titles making their way to the PS3 for 2009. The Xbox 360? Kaz, Sony Computer Entertainment’s head man, made his thoughts clear when speaking to Official PlayStation Magazine.

kaz“Last time I checked, they’ve never had a console that’s been on the market for more than four or five years and we’ve committed to a ten year life cycle, so you do the math…,” he says. He goes on to state that the Xbox 360 won’t have a larger install base by the end of their 10-year plan has been completed, “unless things go really bad.”

Of course, nobody says Microsoft’s 10-year plan isn’t to push out yet another console. Is that wise? We don’t really know, but you can’t count them out on it. Maybe they’ll only have half the install base but two consoles in the market within the next ten years, nobody really knows.

The one major hole we can see in his comments revolve around their claims that the Microsoft doesn’t have any history of a console being on the market for very long. If I recall, Sony managed to squeek one by on Nintendo with the original PlayStation, which changed everything for the next ten years. Sony didn’t have a 5-year track record when they started taking Nintendo down, why does Microsoft need to have an extensive resume as well?

As for Wii?

“It’s difficult to talk about Nintendo because we don’t look at their console as being competitors. They’re a different world and we operate in our world — that’s kind of the way I look at things…” (kotaku)

Say what you want about Microsoft vs. Sony, but it sure sounds like Sony doesn’t want to acknowlege Nintendo’s success because it casts a dark shadow on their own product. Nintendo and Sony have been battling for years, that’s just the way it is and that’s how the industry sees it. When NPD releases numbers, when journalists write articles about consoles and when the war is finished one thing remains constant: all three consoles are included in the equation.