Used Game Marketplace

[w1g3y]

I'm wondering if Valve has considered incorporating a "Used Game" marketplace.

I have games I'll never play again, and there'll always be people who are wanting to try out a game.

In the current model:
- The developer makes a sale of a game to a user once
- Valve makes a percentage of profit once
- The user is stuck with a game they won't play forever.

But, if we could re-sell our games for, say 15% of their original value:
- The developer could make a little profit again and again
- Valve could make a little profit again and again
- The user would lose their copy of the game, but they'd get back 15% of the original game's cost, and not have a huge library of stuff they never play.

The Steam Store would show instances of a used game for sale alongside new ones, but once they're reallocated to user(aka purchased at a lower price), there'd only be "new" copies available.

Of course, it's all the same game, but it just allows another market cycling of otherwise ignored games.

Thoughts?

[drsxzgsa]

Mentioned this before, but I think it would be great fun if for one day a year we could swap a game on Steam.

Select a game to swap from your library
Add it to Steam Swap
Select a game from Steam Swap
Add it to your library
Done!

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Mentioned this before, but I think it would be great fun if for one day a year we could swap a game on Steam.

Select a game to swap from your library
Add it to Steam Swap
Select a game from Steam Swap
Add it to your library
Done!

Yeah great fun.. unless you're a game dev that actually likes money and the ability to pay bills and eat food.

[Tito Shivan]

Going to ask the same question I always ask.
What's in for Steam to have another game store within their own game store?

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by Tito Shivan:

Going to ask the same question I always ask.
What's in for Steam to have another game store within their own game store?

A less profitable game store at that.

[eram]

resell value of used digital games is 0.0001 cents, please confirm if you would like to continue.

[BJWyler]

Originally posted by w1g3y:

Originally posted by Aluvard:

Not going to happen. License is bound to your account.

Yep, I understand that's the way it's always been.

Just floating a new idea for re-allocating the license if it's no longer wanted.

Just a thought. :)

At the cost of the devs being able to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads.

Here's a better idea. How about Valve implement a system where you can simply give the license back to the dev. No money exchanges hands, you simply indicate that you no longer want the game and give it back to the devs. They are then able to resell that license as normal to someone else.

Now that's a win win. The user is able to get rid of a game they don't want, and the dev is still able to make money off of their hard work.

[drsxzgsa]

Originally posted by Start_Running:

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Mentioned this before, but I think it would be great fun if for one day a year we could swap a game on Steam.

Select a game to swap from your library
Add it to Steam Swap
Select a game from Steam Swap
Add it to your library
Done!

Yeah great fun.. unless you're a game dev that actually likes money and the ability to pay bills and eat food.

Ah yes! The second-hand market argument. I bet you’ve never bought a used book or album? Ever watched a film you didn’t buy at your friend’s house? Ever played a game at your friend’s house that you didn’t buy?

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

This topic got slammed multiple times for so many years it been asked. Just google search, and you get your answers why this isn't ideal by most as people don't want to spend more, get less, or have to deal with mistakes they regret afterwards.

- WHOOPS sold a game you liked, and wanted reply.
A) Free market by anyone, you sold game for low price, want to buy it back paying same, less or more welcome to gamestop where prices are uncontrollable, and may get worse as time goes on, and if it get delisted, WELL GUESS WHAT hope your wallet ready to cry if want it back that badly. No really look up cost for old spider man games for left over steam keys still floating around, ~$1k for one key, then realise wow is it really that worth it.

B) Store buy it back, you get fix rate, they get money, dev get money, you get less each time. Spend $80, get $20 back, spend $20, get $5 back.... Not hard to figure that out. This likely be more the path than A) since they get to double dip on you, and make you feel dumber when want the game again, and more funny if get delisted, well you're SOL.

- Sales be subject to change, why offer best deal, when you're willing to pay more.
A) Free market, either they do what Nintendo do where don't put anything on sale at all, let consumers fight themselves for sales likely be happy to spending $30+ on avg instead of $5 on avg, and when delist happens well just like other A) above hope your wallet ready to pay out the @#$ if you really want it back.

B) Store buy it back, you get fix rate, they can give you less sales discount, you be more than happy to pay more, and get less because there money be hold by you that has to be given back, and that point is get you spend it, call circle of life, works more against you, then you realize. Now you're seeing a pattern to the problem if read this far.


Know the don't fix what not broken, this one of those things don't try to screw with if want to keep good things happening. Want those deep discounts, don't screw with them, don't give them ideas to screw with you, and they keep giving you those discounts because they need people to spend money, your idea creates a ecosystem to keep people spending, to have less, that is the point, pay more, get less, that why it's bad idea for digital market, and it very likely going be B) than A) as it works more in their favor.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Ah yes! The second-hand market argument. I bet you’ve never bought a used book or album?

Those are physical. And so subject to many forms of friction digital licenses don't.

[BJWyler]

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Originally posted by Start_Running:

Yeah great fun.. unless you're a game dev that actually likes money and the ability to pay bills and eat food.

Ah yes! The second-hand market argument. I bet you’ve never bought a used book or album? Ever watched a film you didn’t buy at your friend’s house? Ever played a game at your friend’s house that you didn’t buy?

There's a difference between digital goods and physical goods. And you can play a game at a friend's house right now without any issues whatsoever. However, is that "friend" charging you money to play at his house? Yeah that's a problem then.

[HikariLight]

Originally posted by w1g3y:

Originally posted by Aluvard:

Not going to happen. License is bound to your account.

Yep, I understand that's the way it's always been.

Just floating a new idea for re-allocating the license if it's no longer wanted.

Just a thought. :)

You have never had the right to sell your game.
It's only due to the onset of digital marketplaces that the devs can now enforce that.
They couldn't stop you with physical copies unless that copy came with a CD key that had to be redeemed to play the game.

[nullable]

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Ah yes! The second-hand market argument. I bet you’ve never bought a used book or album? Ever watched a film you didn’t buy at your friend’s house? Ever played a game at your friend’s house that you didn’t buy?

Some of your examples deal with physical media, which games on Steam are not. Ignoring the differences between mediums doesn't make them the same.

Some of your examples refer to going to a friends house which isn't any kind of secondary market, so it's really just a worthless example. You don't need to be able to sell games or trade them to go to a friends house now and to play their games.

At any rate your argument seems to be concerned with the morality of the secondhand market and you seem to think by arguing everyone has participated in it at some point makes any argument against hypocritical? I don't think so. Most of us are just making factual arguments, about why the secondary market existed, and why it doesn't on digital distribution. And why it's not some kind of oversight by digital storefronts, but rather a deliberate decision.

In short you're confusing the issue and you can't address the the business reasons so you fall back on weak emotional morality appeals.

The secondary market wouldn't destroy gaming. But people making and selling games aren't going to willingly enable it. And quite clearly with digital distribution they've deliberately crippled it. And ignoring that, or pretending the reasons for it aren't real issues for one of the parties isn't gonna get you anywhere.

[William Shakesman]

Without a physical object involved, a second hand market makes no sense. Corporations already try to shoehorn enougu dumb stuff into a market where there is no scarcity or manufacturing cost. Cannot blame the users for trying that too as a result but its still silly.

[nullable]

Well yeah, lots of ideas sound appealing, but aren't realistic, or realistically going to happen.

Although sometimes people don't seem to know about the second bit., or understand why. And that's not really a plus for the idea.

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by drsxzgsa:

Ah yes! The second-hand market argument. I bet you’ve never bought a used book or album? Ever watched a film you didn’t buy at your friend’s house? Ever played a game at your friend’s house that you didn’t buy?

Physical goods tend to be limited in quantity and are physical which generally ties most things within a certain distance for kids, and for adults they can sell things online which still has costs involved (shipping), whereas digital can be anywhere with an internet connection that isn't restricted from using the service without any shipping costs.

Physical vs Digital in many cases is a bad comparison for 2nd hand market, they function differently. At the end of the day people should just be honest that they want something rather than it being good for the business, the developers and the community especially in regard to prices & sales.