The Used Games Debate: Kingdoms of Amalur Locks Up Content

  • Share
  • Read Later

Let’s talk about the entitlement mentality. No, I don’t mean welfare, tax incentives, or a national healthcare system. I’m talking about video games — used video games, to be precise — and the publishers and development studios discombobulated about so-called “lost sales.”

Buyers fork over $60 (on average) for a new, store-bought video game these days. When they’re finished, they’re incentivized to sell the game back to the store, either for cash or store credit. The store then resells the game at a slightly reduced price. Since the game data on a new or used disc is identical — it’s all ones and zeroes, remember — the only distinction between new and used software is the state of the packaging. Just like buying a reasonably well-kept music CD secondhand, the advent of digital technology renders the very notion of “copies” obsolete.

The used games market is big news, accounting for as much as half (or more) of retail games giant GameStop’s annual revenue. That’s partly because of the way easy trade-back programs have flourished, partly because video games are the most popular form of entertainment in America today (if we gauge popularity by annual revenue, anyway). From both the consumer’s and retailer’s standpoint, used games tend to be a great deal.

(MORE: Move Over PSN and Xbox LIVE: Here Comes the Nintendo Network)

But publishers and development studios have repeatedly cried foul, complaining about lost revenue and occasionally making wild-eyed comparisons (of used game sales) to software piracy. While online game services like Steam, Xbox LIVE and the PlayStation Network get around the issue by selling digital-exclusive copies of games that can’t be resold, publishers who depend on the sale of physical copies of games have started to lock pieces of content away online, requiring buyers enter a (free) code after purchase to unlock that content. But buy such a game used and if the code’s been redeemed, it’s no longer valid — you’ll have to pay the publisher a fee to unlock the content for yourself.

Enter Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, a fantasy-themed action-roleplaying game by Ken Rolston, the lead designer on Bethesda’s Elder Scroll-series fantasy games Morrowind and Oblivion. Rolston hit my radar back in 2007 at the Game Developer’s Convention in Leipzig, when — while on a storytelling panel — he leapt from his chair and moved his arms up and down in a sawtooth pattern to illustrate the way story cutscenes and gameplay jerk players around. (Two of KoA’s names I’m less impressed with: R.A. Salvatore, the game’s writer, whose lowbrow, cliché-riddled fantasy bestsellers define all I dislike about genre writing, and Todd McFarlane, the game’s artist, who once tried to screw writer Neil Gaiman over and lost.)

KoA, which ships next week, is in the news because it puts sections of the game behind an online code-wall. Retail copies — and I can confirm this, because I have one — include a slip that reads “Activate Your Online Pass,” stating “Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Online Pass gives you access to the House of Valor faction quest, featuring seven additional single-player quests.” (That’s a picture of it above.)

(MORE: Sid Meier Talks XCOM: Enemy Unknown Remake’s Action, RPG Angles)

article continues on next page…

Needless to say, the news didn’t go over well with users, prompting a massive backlash thread on the game’s official forums (pushing 144 pages and over 1,400 post to date). That got KoA developer/publisher 38 Studios bigwig Curt Schilling to throw down around page 49, writing:

… this next part is likely to piss people off, but it’s a truth and it’s how I feel. You can argue the merits and effectiveness of it, but right now it’s how it’s done and as someone that’s as invested as I am in this company, I stand by what has happened … DAY 1 DLC, to be extremely and VIVIDLY clear, is FREE, 100% totally FREE, to anyone that buys a new copy of Reckoning, ANYONE … If you don’t buy new games you buy them used, and in that case you will have to pay for the Day 1 free DLC content the new copy buyers got for free … It’s clear the intent right? To promote early adopters and MUCH MORE IMPORTANT TO ME, REWARD fans and gamers who commit to us with their time and money when it benefits the company … Every single person on the planet could wait and not buy Reckoning, the game would hit the bargain bin at some point and you could get it cheaper. 38 Studios would likely go away … That’s just how business works. We MUST make a profit to become what we want to become. THE ONLY way we do that is to make games you CANNOT WAIT TO BUY! If we do that, and you do that, we want to reward you with some cool free stuff as a thank you … You can TOTALLY disagree with this and I am sure many do, so we’ll agree to disagree. This is not 38 trying to take more of your money, or EA in this case, this is us REWARDING people for HELPING US! If you disagree due to methodology, ok, but that is our intent.

(MORE: 5 Reasons Final Fantasy XIII Worked)

Schilling’s post is frank and (frankly) commendable. To be fair to 38 Studios, this whole thing feels blown out of proportion — the game’s perfectly playable without the extra content, which he’s defining as a “reward,” and which I’m assuming isn’t intrinsic to the core game. But that’s the semantic trick going forward, right? What constitutes “core” versus “sideline” content? As publishers and studios attempt to add used games sale revenue to their coffers, they may try things like locking out parts of the game pending online code activation. It’s no stretch to suppose a company might drop a game’s finale behind a code-wall (online, or locking out parts of game on the physical media itself), giving it up gratis to new buyers, but ensuring they’re paid an access fee when the game hits the used circuit. That, in turn, probably impacts the buyback market — should a retailer like GameStop pay you for what amounts to only part of a game?

People resell stuff. In fact I’ll tiptoe out onto a tree-trunk-sized limb and argue people like to resell stuff. It’s why we have flea markets, consignment stores and garage sales. I routinely sell old books and movies (DVDs) I no longer want to buyback retailers, who then resell the goods through online e-tailers like Amazon. Book publishers aren’t complaining about used bookstores. Music publishers haven’t said word one about used record stores. But for some reason, game publishers appear to believe what they’re doing is different or unique.

It’s not, of course, and their position’s untenable (unless you think Stephen King deserves a cut from every used sale of 11/22/63, or that Ford should get a piece every time someone resells a Focus or F-150 on Craigslist). Publishers and studios who disagree are fighting traditions as old as human beings. Not that they won’t find ways to get around the issue: Expect more retail games to include lockout codes that force used buyers to pay up. Company’s have that right, just as we have the right to be indignant about it, mark the game down for it or protest by simply not buying it in the first place.

The long-term solution is probably the digital-only sales paradigm, which all but eliminates the used market and ensures publishers get their piece. That’s where we’re headed, for better or worse. In the meantime, it’ll help if we’re careful to raise our voices when and where it matters most. In KoA’s case, where the content’s supplementary to the core game, nonplussed gamers are probably protesting too much.

MORE: The 7 Coolest Gaming Ideas of CES 2012

  1. Previous
  2. 1
  3. 2