Consoleation Opinion: Standing Up

I woke up on this Super Bowl Sunday and realized that I must be missing something.

After learning of Microsoft shutting down its original Xbox LIVE service and disabling downloadable content for the Xbox console, I figured it would ignite more conversations about the perils of digital distribution and how it is possible for people to one day be unable to access content that they’d previously held rights to. There is some backlash going on, but what makes me scratch my head is that there’s a growing number of people within the gaming community who think that this is acceptable and understandable.

Really?

Apparently, the notion of spending money to actually buy games and content is antiquated. We were robbing game companies blind, for years! The games were never truly ours; in fact, I hear that Square-Enix will be asking for my Final Fantasy Chronicles discs back soon. The PlayStation is an outdated console that doesn’t need support anymore and the game has lived out its usefulness… and since the game was never really mine to begin with– despite the $40 that I paid for it– they want it back. The license has expired, according to them. I guess my whole collection of games isn’t really mine. They are glorified agreements on optical discs. I guess having a collection of discs is much more interesting to look at that a scrapbook full of cards that read something like “The above licensee has been granted the unlimited use of Final Fantasy Chronicles until Square-Enix deems that the supporting platform is no longer viable.”

I must also be ridiculous in thinking that console gaming has become too expensive as a medium of entertainment. After all, who doesn’t have $400 for a console and $60 to spend on licenses… errr, umm… games? Developers and publishers are suffering! They need more of your money, because without them, where would we be? Maybe Bobby Kotick has it right. Let’s bump the prices of games to a round $75 each. Let’s also make them some sort of timed format where the discs basically become coasters after two years and that your console’s serial number is required to unlock the game on the disc; that way, if you want to play your game at a friend’s house, he’ll have to buy it too. (Come on! Bringing games to a friend’s house died out decades ago, and you’re robbing publishers of a potential sale!)

While I’m at it, who am I kidding about not being able to get access to content that I paid money for? My Xbox 360 won’t break! My hard drive won’t go bad! These things last forever now. If my hardware fails, it’s my fault… or, you know, things break. That 60 gigabytes of content that I bought will be pretty much worthless in five years anyway, regardless of whether I have the urge to play those games or not.

Or… you know what?

STOP.

How are people actually defending some of these business decisions? I could see it if they worked in the industry, but many of the defenses that I’ve been reading in the last couple of days have been from people within the gaming community. Have we become so used to these changes that they’re now just acceptable? Are you really going to use the “That was then, this is now… things change” defense with any kind of conviction? What are you getting out of these changes as a consumer?

Are you shooting for more industry growth? Nice try. You don’t have to be an analyst to look at the trends and realize that the mainstream love affair with console gaming is nearing its end. Are you worried that publishers or developers are losing their shirts? Maybe there needs to be some introspection here. Blowing millions on a big-budget game is not the way it’s always been done, and the more you spend… the bigger the risk that you lose a ton of your investment. Failings of notable publishers like Midway and Acclaim can be attributed to delivering some big-budget flops and thinking too far outside of the box. Oh, but you wanted those companies to fold. Oops.

The relationship between the console gaming industry and its consumer base is a symbiotic one. Gamers need the industry to develop new games and hardware to play them on, while the industry needs its consumer base in order to raise enough revenue to continue making games. The problem with this relationship is that it’s now completely out of balance. The industry believes that consumers are so hooked by their games that they can rewrite the rules and that consumers will follow this new set of rules without question. In short, the industry holds all of the cards here, and they’re being proven right by defenses like what I’ve seen lately. The only way that balance can be restored– at least in part– is by way of the correction period that will come. When consumers stop feeding money to the industry for fewer rights and privileges than they’ve ever had, the industry shrinks and has to step back to figure out what happened… but by then, considering all of the changes that have been made, it may be too late.

I have supported the industry for decades. My thousands of dollars are insignificant to the industry when compared to the billions that it’s made. I have seen console gaming rise, fall, and rise again. I’ve seen arrogance knock many a company down to size, and even kill some off entirely. I realize that there’s an ebb and flow to this symbiotic relationship, but the imbalance has never been quite this strong. In this console generation alone, we’ve seen the gradual demise of things that we once took forgranted:

• Consoles selling for more that $300 were rare before this generation. The PS3 and Xbox 360 both sold for more than $300 at launch.
• Instead of just assuming that our consoles will work, we now cringe every time we turn on the Xbox 360, waiting for Red Rings.
• New games sold for $50 for disc-based platforms for nearly 10 years. Now they sell for $60– for no apparent reason.
• Discs used to be filled with content and bonuses. Now that content is stripped out for future downloadable content– and more money.
• Borrowing from or loaning games to friends is becoming a thing of the past with digital distribution.
• Also with digital distribution, there’s no option to resell anything you don’t like or no longer play… something that’s been done for years.
• Games now realistically have a finite timeline since companies can pull content when they see fit, rather than consumer decision.
• The age of the single-player game has been forcefully interrupted by the advent of forced co-op or online-only play for some games.

Maybe I’m a grumpy middle-aged gamer who yearns for things to be they way they were in my day. Maybe this industry is passing me by. One thing I do know is that console gaming was once in a time of explosive growth, and that was before any of these changes were enacted. Things were better 10 years ago, and that’s without high-definition graphics or broadband online play.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Play-by-Play Special Edition: Sonic the Hedgehog 4

  
Download now or listen on posterous

Consoleation Play-by-Play – Sonic the Hedgehog 4.amr (568 KB)

Posted via email from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Opinion: And so it goes…

I just talked about how the video game industry is continuing its slide, and three notable and unfortunatel events that broke today lend creedence to my theory that the Great Video Game Correction is well underway.

The first event came courtesy of THQ, who announced some internal restructuring which will lead to some 60 jobs being lost. While 60 is a small number when compared to other recently announced job cuts in other industries (such as the 13,000 positions that Verizon is set to eliminate), it is significant in that it’s coming from a major publisher. In addition to the cuts, Rainbow Studios has been assigned to digitally distributed content. This likely means that their days of feature game development are at an end. THQ did announce that, despite an analyst claim to the contrary, a sequel to Darksiders is in the works. That’s at least a little bit of good news.

The second event has to do with video game retail. Game Crazy is in trouble again, thanks to a second Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the last two years by its parent company, Movie Gallery. Another round of store closings is in the offing for Game Crazy, dropping the number of locations down to 250 after this round of closings is completed. It’s not a secret that Game Crazy has been consistently outperformed by GameStop in terms of specialty video game retail, but the gradual loss of competition is a troubling sign. It’s simply getting harder to sell video games in this economy. Retailers make almost zero profit from new software sales, and used game sales are being not only frowned upon but also consumers are seeing financially punitive consequences for buying used. When stores like Game Crazy rely on used game sales to stay afloat and these sales drop, it doesn’t take an analyst to figure out that the chain will eventually fail. In fact, it would not be surprising to see Game Crazy– along with Hollywood Video and parent company Movie Gallery– completely bankrupt by the end of 2010.

Last on the list is the likely end of Play Magazine. Staff from the magazine confirmed (via Facebook conversation) that notices of Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing by Play’s publisher, Fusion Publishing, were received on February 1st. Play is a direct descendant of GameFan, which saw limited popularity in the early and mid 1990s as an enthusiast publication. When GameFan went under, founder Dave Halverson went on to start another ill-fated magazine, titled Gamers’ Republic, but it too failed. Play represented Halverson’s third publication project. While the likely shuttering of the magazine isn’t a surprise, given Halverson’s history, it can be argued that the gaming press has possibly overgrown in size. While it’s certainly pleasant to have so many choices– both online and offline– to pick from in order to catch up on gaming news and information, paying for that information is becoming more of an uphill battle. Why pay for a monthly magazine when you can visit one of thousands of different websites and get the same information for free? You have to wonder whether the Electronic Gaming Monthly reboot is going to face similar challenges, and how Steve Harris and company will meet those challenges.

There are other stories of interest, including Sony’s continued struggle with figuring out how they can charge for content on PSN, but I believe that these stories that have been mentioned here are the major ones to consider. The question now should be not be whether video games are in trouble, but rather asking how fall the industry will fall and where the eventual bottom will be.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Play-by-Play: Bioshock

  
Download now or listen on posterous

Consoleation Play-by-Play – Bioshock.amr (438 KB)

Posted via email from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Play-by-Play: 0 Day Attack on Earth

  
Download now or listen on posterous

0 Day Attack on Earth.amr (1275 KB)

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Posted via email from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Crystal Ball: The End is Nigh

Console video gaming has enjoyed a great run of popularity for nearly 25 years now. From the NES right on through the Xbox 360, gaming has gradually become a part of mainstream culture. This popularity has helped to attact new players to the fold and to help introduce a variety of different genres of games to play. While there have been some peaks and valleys over the last quarter of a century, it’s generally been a prosperous time. We’ve seen companies rise and fall. We’ve seen console gaming embrace the online world over the last 10 years. We’ve seen new controller formats. We’ve seen the first-person shooter genre rise to prominence, while we’ve seen other genres try to reinvent themselves. We’ve been able to play along with our favorite music, re-enact our favorite movies, and play sports as our favorite athletes on our favorite teams.

Indeed, it’s been a good run… but all good things come to an end, and this run of popularity for console gaming is gradually nearing its conclusion.

There are several factors that can be cited for making such a bold prediction:

First and foremost, it’s become evident in this console generation that game publishers have become obsessed with milking every possible nickel and dime from consumers. Bobby Kotick’s quote about wishing he could charge more for games is all the proof you need. Other CEOs are a bit more tactful, but you’d be kidding yourself if you thought that they didn’t agree with him. The vehicle for charging more for games has become downloadable content (DLC), which has become one of this console generation’s biggest problems. Whereas developers and publishers used to pack whatever content they could onto a disc or cartridge, they now have DLC to fall back on. Cheats, extra costumes, extra game modes, and other things that consumers used to take for granted are now extra charges. A dollar here, five dollars there, and it eventually adds up. DLC used to be considered a way to extend the life of a game after it’s been played and beaten, but it’s now a fleecing tool for publishers to add revenue that they never could have gotten a generation ago.

The next factor is the suddenly bitter battle between the console gaming industry and console game resellers. Used games have been around since console gaming got its start. Before there was a GameStop or Game Crazy, resale options included specialty shops (like FuncoLand or Electronics Boutique), small independent stores, tag sales and pawn shops. While consumers always ran the risk of being disappointed or dissatisfied with a game or console, there was always the opportunity to trade in or sell unwanted product and get something back in exchange. Only now, in this console generation, have we seen publishers and developers take to not only openly complaining about the alleged evils of used merchandise– but there’s also been a movement towards digital distribution and “new game only” access codes for certain content that forces consumers to spend more if they buy used. The industry certainly has a case regarding this issue, but this battle has spilled over and financially wounded bystanders– gaming consumers.

The still-struggling economy and the aftershocks from the Great Recession also play a role here. It’s become apparent that there isn’t a quick fix for the damaged economy. Unemployment is slated to remain high in 2010, and expenses are continuing to rise in many areas. A majority of states will be imposing higher taxes this year to offset large deficits in their budgets. Fuel prices, as they do every year, will gradually rise as the winter begins to ebb and more driveable weather takes hold. People are still dealing with healthcare issues, foreclosures or late payments for homes or other items, even after job opportunities become available. In short, disposable income will continue to wane in 2010, which will continue to eat into entertainment spending. The $59.99 that consumers once merely complained about for new games will become too much to spend in more cases, and as the aforementioned war against used games takes its toll by punishing used game buyers, more casual consumers will begin to disregard console gaming as a viable entertainment option. More serious gamers will continue to buy new, but they will become more selective and less impulsive.

Online social gaming will also be a factor. It’s now easier than ever to find free games to play online, and they’re perfect for the casual game player. Farmville, Mafia Wars, Bejeweled Blitz, and others can be played on Facebook with no cost involved. Online game sites could potentially thrive; the cost of a one-year subscription to Pogo, for example, is $40. That’s $10 less than a subscription to Xbox LIVE, and it’s $20 less than a new PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360 game… and Pogo has nearly 200 games to play. Even if you didn’t want to pay the $40 subscription fee, Pogo still offers over 180 games that can be played for free. Serious gamers will scoff at Pogo, but the more casual crowd that Nintendo has been attracting can potentially see the savings in online social games.

There are other factors that could be at play. Microsoft will have a tough time recovering from bad publicity due to continued hardware problems with its Xbox 360. Nintendo is great at selling its own software, but third-party publishers will continue to struggle with the Wii platform in 2010. Sony still boasts free-to-play online capability with the PS3, but what of these “premium subscriptions” that have been mentioned? Even if basic online play is still free, what current features and functionalities of the PlayStation Network will be considered “premium”? Demos? Video content?

While I don’t believe that we will see another industry collapse like we did after the Atari VCS implosion, I strongly believe that an industry correction is in the gradual process of occurring. Fewer games, fewer publishers, fewer gaming-related websites, less mainstream coverage, and maybe even fewer platforms will result as revenue will continue to drop in 2010. As the industry adjusts and struggles to keep some sort of spotlight on itself, a move back towards consumer awareness and just trying to sell the product– rather than speculate on how high the selling price can go– will steady the ship. Downsizing, reorganization, and moving the focus at least partially back towards the gaming consumer is what the industry needs in order to survive.

Before we get to that point, though, expect the same trends from 2009 to continue– and it will be painful to watch, as well as experience.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Opinion: Over-Wii-Action

If you’ve zipped by Kotaku over the past few days, you might have caught this story about Chris O’Brien, a San Jose Mercury News columnist who bought a Wii for his kids and then returned it after realizing “hidden costs” associated with the popular platform and citing other family reasons.

The family reasons are one thing. Trying to determine the proper amount of playing time for a video game console is a task that many parents struggle with on a daily basis. O’Brien’s worry that the Wii might overshadow the other gifts that his children received for the holidays is also valid to a point. While the reaction likely wouldn’t have reached N64 Kid proportions, it can be reasoned that the other gifts might have been all but forgotten once the Wii was discovered. These reasons can be debated on a case-by-case basis, but there is merit on both sides of the argument for these reasons.

The “hidden costs” argument, however, is just ludicrous. O’Brien admits in his piece that his experience with video games is minor, at best… but when you cite additional games and replacement batteries (for the Wiimotes) as “hidden costs”, you gain absolutely no sympathy. Even if consoles come with a pack-in game (as the Wii does), there will always be new games to buy. If you have more than one child, extra controllers have always been regarded as a necessary investment. With the advent of wireless conveniences, the use of batteries is pretty standard… so batteries for wireless controllers makes sense. As a parent, when you buy gifts for your children, one would expect that at least some research be done before settling on a gift choice. If your children want something special, wouldn’t want to look into it first rather than just plunk down the money without asking? Instead, O’Brien blindly bought the console first, then discovered that games, extra Wiimotes, and batteries were additional expenses, and panicked.

That’s bad enough, but when you take to the mainstream press to basically whine about your mistake, it’s little more than a try for attention.

This is an anecdote that requires zero press attention. If O’Brien decided to post this on his own blog or small website, that’s fine. As gaming consumers, we’ve all made purchases before that we either didn’t research or were generally disappointed in. The Internet empowers us to share these anecdotal stories for a variety of reasons. Perhaps we just want to vent about buying a bad game or unworthy hardware. Maybe we want to educate others so that they might think twice before buying what we bought. O’Brien could simply have posted this anecdote, a few people might have responded, and that would be that.

What O’Brien likely didn’t expect was that Kotaku’s Stephen Totilo picked up on the column and ran a story on it… and then the reaction from Kotaku readers was largely negative and cutting. O’Brien fired back with a Silicon Beat column that was a knee-jerk reaction to the scathing comments he received via both Kotaku and the Mercury News pieces. He assumed a sarcastic tone in the piece, which didn’t aid his defense one bit. As a columnist, he should expect negative comments along the way and have a thick enough skin to deal with them. O’Brien proceeded to pick a small sample of immature comments from Kotaku’s piece and use them to demonstrate how apparently ridiculous “gamers” are. At the end of the piece, O’Brien pats himself on the back for being the center of this rather pointless firestorm of controversy, noting that even the Taiwan News was discussing his plight.

Good for you, Chris. Congratulations on outing gamers as the real problem and not your own ignorance.

There’s no question that some of the commenters at Kotaku– and around the web, for that matter– can be real pieces of work. The Internet empowers people to hide behind anonymity and fire salvos of immature and offensive blather, especially in reaction to something that they don’t agree with. This is not something new. Ask anyone in the gaming press about getting hate mail and sifting through comments containing personal attacks, death threats, and calling for their firings. It happens all the time, right or wrong. As a columnist, reviewer, or other role within the press or journalism, you need to rise up and be the better person… but O’Brien has not done this here. Instead of letting it go and chalking it up to mistakes on both sides of the fence, he now views himself as some sort of martyr who is taking abuse for the greater good.

O’Brien is not a martyr. He is not blameless in this developing mess. Misguided parents may rally around him for seemingly sticking it to a video game company, but his overly defensive reaction is damning. He didn’t need to use the San Jose Mercury News as a tool of needless complaint to begin with, and he most certainly should be able to look past immature comments and stick to his story instead of going on the offensive. He deserves no sympathy from anyone and has proven that he should keep his writing to topics that he knows and understands, lest anyone else call him out for his ignorance.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Reaction: Look Who’s Talking…

Coming out of today’s news are conversations with two people: Ben Jones from Zipper Interactive (of SOCOM and MAG fame) and Michael Pachter. Jones made a claim that Xbox LIVE is “more juvenile” than PSN, while Pachter made a claim that Epic Games is regretting not making its Gears of War IP a multiplatform venture. Both men are proving to be shining examples that one needs to think before they speak to a press source, because both men are looking pretty silly after these stories were broken.

Let’s take a look at Ben Jones and his claim first. Now I get that Jones and Zipper Interactive really have no interest in promoting Xbox LIVE as their software is exlusive to Sony platforms. That’s fine. Anyone with even a moderate understanding of the industry would expect Jones to promote the PlayStation Network, especially as his company’s upcoming title, MAG, is a massive multiplayer undertaking that will put PSN to the test. Knowing this, why would Jones take an unprovoked dig at Xbox LIVE? What does that accomplish? As it stands, his claim is impossible to prove. Many Xbox 360 units came with headsets, which promote vocal communication… and anyone who’s been on Xbox LIVE playing almost any game online has heard the gamut of expletives and bigotry. That is a fact; I’ve experienced it myself quite often. You don’t hear as much trash talk during a PSN online game because headsets are additional accessories. This means that consumers have to spend additional money– aside from the cost of the hardware and the games– to have one and be able to talk much like the people on Xbox LIVE that Jones is referring to.

The truth is that there’s a lot of unnecessary and offensive talk during games and it’s a problem that is deserving of criticism. There is no real policing of such behavior. Sure, there may be moderators to try and keep the peace, but oftentimes it’s an issue of hearsay. I can hear you call me an offensive name, but I have no proof other than what I heard. Furthermore, online gaming is about assumed identities and anonymity in many instances. We can be as rude as we want because the person you’re offending can’t find you to retaliate or confront you over said unacceptable behavior. It happens on PSN. It happens on Xbox LIVE. It’s unfortunate, but it is what it is.

Now let’s turn to Michael Pachter. Pachter is probably the most visible video game sales analyst around. He’s quoted or written about on an almost daily basis. Pachter has made many predictions over the years; some have been right, but many others never came to fruition. Despite his track record, when Pachter speaks, people generally at least hear him. I’m fine with predictions that aren’t right. Heck, even today, I was backtracking a little via Twitter on my NPD predictions for this month due to increasingly bad economic news. You can use all the stats and trends you want… predicting is an inexact science. The problem with this latest Pachter story is that it’s not as much a prediction as it is a situation of needlessly putting words in someone else’s mouth.

The situation occurred during a recent Bonus Round session with GameTrailers. Pachter opined that platform-exclusive games are not the way to go, which I can agree with when it comes to third-party publishers. When the discussion touched on Gears of War 3, Pachter mentioned that Epic probably regrets signing exclusivity of the series to Microsoft, predicting that Gears of War 3 could move at least 3 million copies alone on the PlayStation 3.

I can get where Pachter is coming from, but I don’t see where the “regret” factor comes in. It’s not like Mark Rein, who has been outspoken on a variety of topics in the past, came out and said that exclusivity was a mistake. It’s Michael Pachter, who should have absolutely zero influence on situations like this. The PlayStation 3 has only made serious strides in recent months, and that’s after development of the first two games in the Gears of War franchise were completed. This is not a repeat of Capcom’s exclusivity deal with Capcom during the last generation. Capcom quite simply rode the wrong horse when it signed the deal, believing that their games could be enough to move Gamecube units and make them more money… but the Gamecube never really took off and many gamers just did without the Resident Evil remakes and sequels (plus games like Killer 7) until Capcom eventually brought Resident Evil 4 and Killer 7 to the PlayStation 2 some time later.

Indeed, console-exclusive games are a big risk. You do limit your potential audience when developing a game for a single platform. That being said, Epic Games did not really hurt themselves terribly with the exclusivity of Gears of War. The Xbox 360 installed user base still outnumbers that of the PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360 owners are already very familiar with the brand. Meanwhile, there would be some risk involved with porting Gears over the the PS3. Do PS3 owners care about Gears of War? Could it really move three million copies? What about the resources necessary for doing the port work? It’s basically akin to possibly fixing something that isn’t broken. Sure, Epic would likely sell more units of Gears of War 3 overall if it was multiplatform, but would the sales bear enough fruit from the initial investment? Either way, despite Pachter’s assessment, Epic Games wins.

Ben Jones and Michael Pachter are certainly free to speak their minds, and I’m sure that they’re continue to do just that. It’s unfortunate, though, that more thought isn’t initially given to what they say before they say it. Thanks to the internet and quick reporting, almost nothing goes unnoticed, so you need to strive to consider all angles before answering that posed question.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Suggestions: Web Destinations

I’m taking a break from writing about sales numbers and gaming news for one post in order to share some websites with you that are worth taking some time out of your day to visit– and hopefully even interact with from time to time.

The Kartel: This site just recently came to prominence on Twitter thanks in no small part to their Ultimate Video Game Twitter List, which is a comprehensive list of gaming-related personalities on the quick-blog service. While the list is great, the underlying site has a lot to offer fans of the gaming industry. Active forums, updated gaming-related news stories and features, and a decent blog tool make for a highly interactive and enjoyable experience. Lots of people have been turned on to the site in recent days, and the community is growing. The Kartel is definitely worth at least a look.

Raptr: This site is the gaming equivalent of current social networking frontrunner Facebook. Users can post status messages, meet other gamers, write game reviews, and more. If you link your Xbox LIVE gamertag to your account, though, Raptr really shows its worth as it tracks all kinds of statistics relating to your Xbox experience. Information on Achievements, the number of hours that you play a game, and more are available for viewing… plus there are options to have Raptr auto-post gameplay updates to other social sites for sharing.

GameCritics: While it’s easy to point out the more visible gaming-related websites out there, GameCritics isn’t always prevalent on that list… but it should be. The writing is great, the topics are solid, and the writers are passionate about the gaming industry. This site has a team of writers, some of which have been with GameCritics for many years now. That’s despite the recent turnover and site closures within the gaming press in recent months. I also recommend it to those of you who are considering getting into writing or the gaming press in general; it was one of my early influences. (I also recommend checking out Brad Gallaway’s blog, Drinking Coffeecola, for additional insights. He’s one of GameCritic’s most tenured writers. Tell him I sent you.)

GamePlayBook: If you’re a fan of sports-related video games, like I am, then this site is right up your alley. (Pun intended.) No matter your sport, if there’s a game that represents it, writer extraordinaire Robert Workman will cover it. The site is in blog format and is currently in Beta phase, but it’s updated almost daily and contains plenty of reviews, previews, interviews, and news that targets the sports video game fan in all of us.

These are just a few of my regular stops during my regular bouts of web surfing. There are certainly others, but we’ll save those for another post at another time. If you have any suggestions for me, feel free to leave a comment and let me know.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0

Consoleation Opinion: Pay up… or else!

Some interesting news came out of Electronic Arts on Tuesday, as it was announced that Mass Effect 2’s Cerberus Network– which basically serves as the DLC portal for the game– will only be unlockable via a code contained in new copies of the game. Consumers who buy used copies will be force to pay an extra amount of money to buy a code to unlock it. There was also mention about how DLC is tied to an EA online account, as opposed to just being able to purchase it normally via the Xbox Live Marketplace or via PSN.

This story is the latest in a salvo of tweaks made to various console games recently in order to dissuade consumers from buying preowned copies of games for less money. EA has been at the forefront with this movement, adding access codes for certain features in their sports games, and UbiSoft’s Assassin’s Creed II has DLC that’s only available to those who buy the game new (via a redeemable code). Game publishers and developers continue to maintain their claim that the used game market essentially steals from their collective bottom lines by cutting into potential new game sales and being a catalyst for more cash-strapped consumers to hold out for used copies that can range $5-$10 less than MSRP.

You know, that’s all well and good. I believe that publishers have a reasonable gripe with resellers. Perhaps they should be paid a certain amount per game or be paid a flat relicensing fee from resellers like GameStop and Game Crazy. I’m willing to listen to both sides of that argument.

Unfortunately, moves like this hurt the general consumer base. It’s an outright punishment. With the economy still trying to claw its way out of the Great Recession, now is not the time to start adding costs to games. Adding premiums to used games will certainly dissuade consumers from buying used… but it also could very well result in consumers losing interest in current gaming and lead to either a boom in older console sales or a move to another form of digital entertainment that doesn’t appear to nickel and dime its players. All you have to do is look at the tremendous followings that social games like Farmville and Bejeweled Blitz have gained; there’s no cost to play these games, other than the monthly service fees that users pay to their internet service providers. Conversely, console game companies want $60 for a new game– and often times the $60 doesn’t even include the whole game, like players would have gotten even a few years ago.

I know that I’ve brought up the DLC argument several times before, but it’s a sore enough topic that it warrants repeat mentions. The DLC model could have been something great; in fact, there are cases where it has been. Rock Band 2 has been going strong for over a year now due to weekly song offerings. Extra episodes in the Grand Theft Auto IV universe arguably were better than the base game. Criterion Games delivered plenty of free DLC before finally charging for the last few installments, and the last– Big Surf Island– was the best of the lot as it added a brand new island to wreak racing havoc on. Bethesda also got it right with its DLC for Fallout 3, which was spaced well and each delivered a new experience.

On the flip side, we see DLC that really should have been in the final game to begin with, but was withheld for questionable reasons. This is more prevalent in offerings for XBLA and PSN (I’m looking at you, Mega Man 9 & 10), but other examples are easy to come by. Versus Mode in Resident Evil 5. Extra costumes in Street Fighter IV. Cheats for EA Sports games. These are all things that, back in the PS2/Xbox era, we got on the disc for FREE. Developers packed what they could onto a disc, utilizing the extra disc space for extra content and making for full experiences. This just doesn’t happen anymore. Why? Publishers believe that they can make an easy few extra dollars by charging for it and taking advantage of the new generation of ignorant gaming consumers. When this console generation first started, it was easier to fleece consumers because the economy was pre-recession and paying a little extra was a minor inconvenience.

This is simply not the case any more, even for the most devout of gamers.

My situation may be anecdotal, but it applies well. Since my move to Arizona, I’ve been struggling to keep up with bills and living expenses. My disposable income is nowhere near what it once was. I’ve been forced to gradually part with large chunks of my personal gaming collection in order to keep up with current releases… otherwise, I wouldn’t be able to play Bayonetta and Darksiders like I have been. I had enough in store credit to buy both games brand new. I had $45 left in credit from my transaction, and I spotted a used copy of Assassin’s Creed II for $55– which wound up being $49.50 after my used game discount. That means that instead of paying $180 for three games, I got three quality games for less than $10 out of pocket… which is much more manageable right now.

More people are likely in the same boat. There’s a tendency to save, rather than spend, disposable income. People don’t know when the layoff ax will fall on them, so they save when they can. If they see a game that costs less than what they’ve generally seen it sell for, they’re more likely to spring for it. At $60, though, it’s a gamble. Impulse buying is eroding, and yet the software market is literally flooded with shovelware and average games that are being passed over. Wouldn’t it make more sense for game companies to either push out fewer releases or lower the price points so that it opens the possibility of more impulsive purchases? Sure it does… but don’t tell executives that.

With more game companies following EA’s lead and essentially punishing used game consumers, and with the advent of digital distribution on the horizon, it appears that this group of consumers is clearly in the crosshairs of gaming companies and executives, and it will be interesting to see what further moves come along. Could there be Achievements or Trophies for new game buyers only? Could endings or characters be locked away pending a secondary output of cash?

Anything is possible, and with the missteps that the industry as a whole has taken in this console generation, it’s fair to assume the worst.

Posted via web from Consoleation Version 3.0