Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sony patents pre-owned games block

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    NeVeR
    Registered Users Posts: 5,330 ✭✭✭NeVeR


    Not sure if this was said ... but ...

    What if you buy a game and don't have the internet to activate the content in full ? -- Will you just be paying for 10 minutes of a 6 hour game ?.. I don't think they can get away with it.


  • Options
    #33
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    I read recently that only 10% of game sales are second hand, it's just money grabbing by game studios to try and scrap as many pennys as they can.
    Got a source on that one? Last reliable figures on the subject I saw were Gamestop's financials from 2011 where they made...
    ...$4.04 billion from new game sales, of which $839 million was profit; and $2.6 billion from second-hand sales, of which $1.2 billion was profit.

    Of equal importance is the profit margins made on these sales which is a further indication of why they're pushing second hand sales so heavily.
    Gamestop's gross profit margin on new hardware is a shade over seven per cent; on new software it's 20.7 per cent. For pre-owned products, 46.6 per cent of sales revenue is pure profit.


  • Options
    #34
    Retr0gamer
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 51,053 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    I can't remember where I read it but it was a reliable source. It's probably skewed as well since it counted digital sales.

    I think games companies need to adapt rather than to infringe on consumer rights otherwise they will end up like the music industry.
    Untitled Image




  • Options
    #35
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    I can't remember where I read it but it was a reliable source. It's probably skewed as well since it counted digital sales.

    I think games companies need to adapt rather than to infringe on consumer rights otherwise they will end up like the music industry.

    I'd agree with this sentiment but right now I'd describe the video game industry as the most self destructive industry in the entertainment business. So I doubt they'll come up with a sensible solution.

    They are like the banking system without the bottomless cheque books.


    I do have a pro vs con of 2nd hand games industry (not 2nd hand games but of the industry practice) list somewhere I should dig it out. But overall I think they do more damage then good. But its a combination of issues related to other aspects (mostly dealing with the short lifespan of videogames)

    But to put simply no other industry allows 2nd hand sales to infringe so heavily on the core market as they do in video games. None of the big chains (from HMV to Bestbuy in the US) offer 2nd hand dvds or music cds, but they all do 2nd hand games which is the core of the problem. To buy 2nd hand dvds you need to go to upstairs in chapters or to cash converters or something, but games its all done at the biggest chains, no other industry allows this practice...and for good reason.


  • Options
    #36
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    I can't remember where I read it but it was a reliable source. It's probably skewed as well since it counted digital sales.
    No probs, if you do find it later I'd certainly be interested in seeing it.

    I'm not sure how strongly digital sales would factor in though since I can't imagine such sales on the consoles would be particularly high. All I can think of is that they were comparing second hand console sales with sales across all platforms including those which don't allow them anyway, such as the PC?

    Anyway, point being I highly doubt the 10% figure is either fair or in any way accurate. Even if we discounted the large publishers, there have been plenty of smaller and/or independent companies who have highlighted the problem, voiced concerns and, in some cases, signalled that it will result in a massive shift in their focus going forward. You don't make that kind of noise or effort for an issue which only affects 10% of your potential revenue.

    EDIT...
    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    I think games companies need to adapt rather than to infringe on consumer rights otherwise they will end up like the music industry.
    As I said above, I most certainly agree with this. That being said, I also see the futility in pushing for a carte blanche approach to second hand sales if the net result is a drop in quality of the games being released with even less risks being taken with new IP, more tacked on multiplayer and DLC and all the other horrid things we talk about.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    according to this the 2nd hand sales figure is 27%, though the 10% quote might be from michael pachter, I need to look around a bit more
    Multiply that by thousands upon thousands of transactions and you have a healthy business model. According to the company’s earnings call on March 22, used software and hardware sales accounted for just over 27% of total sales in 2011, but a whopping 47% of all profit.

    Break that out into actual numbers: At the end of its fiscal year 2011, GameStop sold $5.6 billion in new games and hardware, compared to $2.6 billion in used inventory. Note the italics—this is an enormous business. For reference, Electronic Arts, the largest game publisher, sold only $2 billion in games in its previous 12 months. But despite the overwhelming topline impact of the new games—nearly 2:1 over used games—GameStop made only $952 million in profit off new products, versus $1.2 billion in gross profit from used games and accessories.


    http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/111869


  • Options
    #38
    Retr0gamer
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 51,053 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    gizmo wrote: »
    I'm not sure how strongly digital sales would factor in though since I can't imagine such sales on the consoles would be particularly high. All I can think of is that they were comparing second hand console sales with sales across all platforms including those which don't allow them anyway, such as the PC?

    I can't remember where I read it but it was recent. PC and IOS sales were included as well in the figure.
    Untitled Image




  • Options
    #39
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    according to this the 2nd hand sales figure is 27%, though the 10% quote might be from michael pachter, I need to look around a bit more.
    Ah, they're from the same Gamestop financials I linked above. The 27% figure is just in terms of total sales whereas I referenced the sales/profits of new games vs. used games.


  • Options
    #40
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    TheDoc wrote: »
    There is a common misconception here. The issue is not with all second hand trading. A publisher and studio has no issue with someone buying an old title second hand. EA arn't worried about you going out and picking up Fifa09 for €5.

    The issue is with the increased marketing, pushing second hand sales. This is typically noticable everywhere, when a new game is released, the store will offer you a "good"trade in value, should you return the back , trade it in, within a certain timeframe. This is what irks publishers.

    Maybe they should stop pushing for banal games and rehased IP that can be completed in such a timeframe.
    Sorry, no sympathy for publishers. How many great IPs over the years have been diluted because publishers don't feel it'll reach a wide enough market?
    [...]This is what has the publishers raging, and that is why one of the talked about controls is a timing license, which I personally think is much better. A game will come with a timing license, so that once activated on your console, it will be linked to your console alone for a set amount of time, to which after that can then be released into the second hand market. [...]
    Yes... Or they could simply push for better IPs. Timing licenses? Really? And the retailers reselling are the ones using a sneaky tactic? Publishers want their cake (fund mass marketable IPs) and to eat it (not having to face the economic result of that).

    When you make an inferior product, the solution to people trading it in is not to force them to - essentially - hold onto it until it devalues, you simply stop making crap and start making something they'll want to hold onto.

    The retailers are wrong for profiteering off the back of the work of others but the publishers have only themselves to blame for creating a market where it's possible.


  • Options
    #41
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    twinQuins wrote: »
    Maybe they should stop pushing for banal games and rehased IP that can be completed in such a timeframe.
    Sorry, no sympathy for publishers. How many great IPs over the years have been diluted because publishers don't feel it'll reach a wide enough market?

    Yes... Or they could simply push for better IPs. Timing licenses? Really? And the retailers reselling are the ones using a sneaky tactic? Publishers want their cake (fund mass marketable IPs) and to eat it (not having to face the economic result of that).

    When you make an inferior product, the solution to people trading it in is not to force them to - essentially - hold onto it until it devalues, you simply stop making crap and start making something they'll want to hold onto.

    The retailers are wrong for profiteering off the back of the work of others but the publishers have only themselves to blame for creating a market where it's possible.


    Ahh yes, the magic solution of making every game specific to your tastes will surely save us all!
    Why did nobody think of this before?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    johnny_ultimate
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,247 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    There's always the option to simply not buy the derivative and / or bland games you don't like in the first place? I know that outlandish method works for me!


  • Options
    #43
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,520 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    If this ends up meaning that I can install from disc then fine, as long as i can run it from disc on anther account with my details on it.

    Limit activation but if I could by a retail game and install it to one PS4 then play some co-op with another using the disc I happy, I already buy some games from PSN to do this.


  • Options
    #44
    jill_valentine
    Registered Users Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    The fact is, bricks and mortar shops - what are left of them - are massively dependant on preowned game sales and margins to stay afloat. New games are sold basically on speculation that they'll generate a preowned turnover, but the actual money they generate for the store is minimal. Remember what games sold for before there wasn't a preowned market to speak of? They cost a bunch more because that whole price tag had to pay everybody. From the point of view of the retailer we have a situation where preowned sales are, for all intents and purposes, subsidising new games and keeping them at a (relatively) low price.

    Up until now, games companies have been content to let this situation abide because they needed the bricks and mortar stores to carry that new product. They didn't like missing out on that piece of the pie, but it was a kind of symbiosis that they had an interest in. Now though, with the increasing availability of direct downloading and measures like this, they're feeling a little cockier about throwing their weight around.

    As soon as games companies decide they don't need bricks and mortar stores anymore, they'll go for the jugular on this, and IMHO, there's no doubt about it, that will be the end of specialist game chains. Maybe it's my GAME p45 screaming at me from the corner, maybe it's the perceptible slowdown in price attrition I can see in Gamestop now that they've got no direct competition, or maybe it's just the fact that Skyrim is still 60 odd quid on Live; but I don't believe for one second that's going to be good for the consumer.


  • Options
    #45
    TheDoc
    Registered Users Posts: 23,137 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    Actually no it's not. Once you buy something new the publisher legally has no right to make money from the sale of that copy of the copyrighted work and you are legally allowed to sell it. They can charge for the use of servers but selling access to the game itself if sold second hand is illegal in at the very least the US and the EU. It's how copyright law has always worked.

    I read recently that only 10% of game sales are second hand, it's just money grabbing by game studios to try and scrap as many pennys as they can.

    That figure is grossly inaccurate and probably misleading. What type of game sales? All game sales, if so then maybe that's true.

    If we are talking PS3 and Xbox, second hand sales accounts for a large portion of a retailers profit from gaming. In a store dedicated to game sales it is the majority, whilst in a cross-services store like Smyths or HMV, again the vast majority of profit from games, comes from second hand sales.

    I'll never forget reading a report based on the sale of a particular game for a PS2. Remember 50Cents game he brought out? Well all games are tracked obviously by their barcode, and there are reports that can breakdown how often a title returns back through the doors and the tills.

    This game retailed at if I remember correctly €40 on launch. The game shipped a few hundred copies during launch week. 30 days later, over 90 copies of the game had moved through the "revoling door" in excess of 10 times.

    So for simple maths.

    First sale of €40, portion is received by the publisher. (For info, retailers normally pay this cut in advance of receiving merchandise.)

    Game was retailed at €30 second hand, with 10+ resales.

    One copy made €300+, profit, for the retailer.

    There was over 90 instances of this, which generated €27,000+ of profit for the retailer, within the first 30 days of launch. On a game that was a marvellous flop.

    And that report was only stores in the North Dublin region, so you can imagine what it was throughout the organisation :)

    As I said, I'm backing the publishers on this one I'm afraid.

    It should also be noted that second hand sale information/data is not passed onto the publisher. There have been hundreds of instances where a game has had MASSIVE second hand sale turnover, but finds it's way back to the shelves due to length, or poor replayability. Yet a publisher will not receive this information.

    There is a graveyard of games that were considered a flop and failed project b devs + publishers, yet were a pretty big success due to the high turnaround of second hand sales, yet without getting fed that data they had no indication.


  • Options
    #46
    Zero-Cool
    Registered Users Posts: 29,634 ✭✭✭✭Zero-Cool


    For something that 'most likely won't happen', it's having an affect already!
    GameStop's stock price dropped six percent on Thursday following reports that new technology patented by Sony could eliminate the pre-owned games market.

    http://www.computerandvideogames.com/385005/sony-anti-used-game-patent-leads-to-gamestop-stock-plunge/


  • Options
    #47
    grizzly
    Registered Users Posts: 2,789 ✭✭✭grizzly


    jill_valentine wrote: »
    I can see in Gamestop now that they've got no direct competition, or maybe it's just the fact that Skyrim is still 60 odd quid on Live

    I picked up Skyrim for €25 from Steam a couple of days ago, competition like that will tempt people away from the consoles. I know it worked on me.


  • Options
    #48
    TheDoc
    Registered Users Posts: 23,137 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    sheehy83 wrote: »
    For something that 'most likely won't happen', it's having an affect already!



    http://www.computerandvideogames.com/385005/sony-anti-used-game-patent-leads-to-gamestop-stock-plunge/

    Gamestops profits are solely reliant on second hand sales, which makes them an attractive entity to investors.

    The profit generation is massive, and the dividends paid to investors is also massive.

    No suprise there really, anything to clamp down on second hand sales is going eat into a companies profits.

    God forbid they need to get inventive and perhaps generate sales through competitive pricing..........


  • Options
    #49
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    hooradiation wrote: »
    Ahh yes, the magic solution of making every game specific to your tastes will surely save us all!
    Why did nobody think of this before?

    Because that's exactly what I said! Hurrah for misrepresenting people snarkily!

    No. You make games that can be completed easily and quickly, people will tire of them and trade them in. If your business model is unsustainable, you change it, you don't try to force the square peg of consumer spending into the round hole of that business model.


  • Options
    #50
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    twinQuins wrote: »
    Because that's exactly what I said!

    It is, pretend otherwise if you must.
    twinQuins wrote: »
    No. You make games that can be completed easily and quickly, people will tire of them and trade them in.

    Of course, skill is a variable quality from person to person so asking that games be made so that they can't be completed "easily and quickly" is asking the industry to make games to match your personal wants and level of expertise.
    Plus it's coupled with a delightful "fuck you" to people who don't have your level of time invested into games and haven't mastered many of the transferable skills that make these games "easy" for you.


    Marvellous idea. Let's get on that right now.


  • Options
    #51
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,520 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    grizzly wrote: »
    I picked up Skyrim for €25 from Steam a couple of days ago, competition like that will tempt people away from the consoles. I know it worked on me.

    It's none sale price is still €49 and it can be gotten for near €25 normally for PC at retail for the same thing as it activates on steam, even the more expensive console versions can be gotten for €30.

    I got Far Cry 3 for €35 off PSN in there sale, after buying and returning it unopened for €50 which right up to Christmas was the price in most places. I'm not sure but I think the game only got 25% off during the steam sale down from €49.99. There are examples on all systems that are cheaper than one of the others.

    You can't share a steam account, if dads playing a online game of ARMA then one of the kids can't play COD on another PC in the house. I can do even better than that and have my two ps3s playing co-op in Far Cry 3. It's one of the main reason I buy games from PSN over a mostly cheaper retail copy of the game.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    hooradiation wrote: »
    It is, pretend otherwise if you must.

    Care to point out where I argued making games I want? Projecting your own meanings onto what I said doesn't really count because, you know, it's not what I actually said.
    Of course, skill is a variable quality from person to person so asking that games be made so that they can't be completed "easily and quickly" is asking the industry to make games to match your personal wants and level of expertise.
    Plus it's coupled with a delightful "fuck you" to people who don't have your level of time invested into games and haven't mastered many of the transferable skills that make these games "easy" for you.


    Marvellous idea. Let's get on that right now.

    Sure, whatever you say. I mean, the fact that I didn't mention myself anywhere in my post when discussing how these games are made actually means it was all about myself and I'm advocating making games I want.
    No, no! I won't reveal any details about myself but you just go right ahead and fill in the blanks to suit what you're trying to argue about me!

    Now, I think that's the reaction you wanted, would you like to let this go?


  • Options
    #53
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    twinQuins wrote: »
    Care to point out where I argued making games I want?

    I would have imagined that when you want to change the 'quality' and 'difficulty' of games, you're looking for them to change closer to what you would prefer.
    It's be a very strange (and most probably lying) individual who would want a hobby they enjoy to move away from what they want.

    Getting indignant isn't going to change that.
    twinQuins wrote: »
    Sure, whatever you say.

    Good.
    Glad that's settled. We can forever banish the "just make better games, durr!" response to the pit of terrible ides from whence it came.


  • Options
    #54
    edgecutter
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭edgecutter


    the_syco wrote: »
    2nd hand trading is legal pirating; the game devs don't get the money, but some dodgy middleman does.

    I don't fully agree with this. For example, I bought assassins creed 2 pre owned and thoroughly enjoyed the game that each time a new release of assassins creed came out I bought it straight away, which in turn added an extra customer to the developer.

    The pre owned market can make money for developers, but what I would like to see is when I sign into psn I don't see games that are 70 euro for a digital copy, rather sell them a lot cheaper then the phsical copies. This would potentially stop a lot of people buying the physical copies.


  • Options
    #55
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,946 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    edgecutter wrote: »
    I don't fully agree with this. For example, I bought assassins creed 2 pre owned and thoroughly enjoyed the game that each time a new release of assassins creed came out I bought it straight away, which in turn added an extra customer to the developer.

    The pre owned market can make money for developers, but what I would like to see is when I sign into psn I don't see games that are 70 euro for a digital copy, rather sell them a lot cheaper then the phsical copies. This would potentially stop a lot of people buying the physical copies.

    Whilst this obviously makes money for them, most people seem to argue that developers shouldn't be rehashing IPs over and over, yet there's instances in this thread showing why developers do it.


  • Options
    #56
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    edgecutter wrote: »
    I don't fully agree with this. For example, I bought assassins creed 2 pre owned and thoroughly enjoyed the game that each time a new release of assassins creed came out I bought it straight away, which in turn added an extra customer to the developer.
    Surely you realise that you're the minority in this though, similar to those who defend pirating a game saying they went out and bought it after playing it because they weren't sure if they'd like it. It does happen but the figures show it's pretty rare compared to the usual practices.
    titan18 wrote: »
    Whilst this obviously makes money for them, most people seem to argue that developers shouldn't be rehashing IPs over and over, yet there's instances in this thread showing why developers do it.
    Assassins Creed is actually a very good example which shows "rehashing" an IP can actually work out pretty well. The series saw a drastic improvement from AC1 to AC:B and it was only in Revelations where we saw some of the changes made be not as well received. I've not gotten a chance to play AC3 yet but even if it's as mixed a bag as I've read, it still seems pretty clear a hell of a lot of work went into it. That's on top of the fact that it's also become an absolutely massive seller so clearly there's a demand for more games in the series.
    grizzly wrote: »
    I picked up Skyrim for €25 from Steam a couple of days ago, competition like that will tempt people away from the consoles. I know it worked on me.
    And similar to the advantages that people see in second hand pricing with regard to units sold on paper, this kind of level isn't going to be sustainable in the long term. :(


  • Options
    #57
    Keith186
    Registered Users Posts: 3,202 ✭✭✭Keith186


    TheDoc wrote: »

    So for simple maths.

    First sale of €40, portion is received by the publisher. (For info, retailers normally pay this cut in advance of receiving merchandise.)

    Game was retailed at €30 second hand, with 10+ resales.

    One copy made €300+, profit, for the retailer.

    There was over 90 instances of this, which generated €27,000+ of profit for the retailer, within the first 30 days of launch. On a game that was a marvellous flop.

    And that report was only stores in the North Dublin region, so you can imagine what it was throughout the organisation :)

    As I said, I'm backing the publishers on this one I'm afraid.

    This is pie in the sky maths not 'simple maths'. It was already said earlier in the thread that if you buy a game for €40 they would give you €35 trade in so that's only €5 profit before any expenses as a more realistic example.

    ==========
    I think the whole thing is a stupid idea, if it ever comes into effect it'd make me want to pirate games (which I never do now). I'd get a PC and not bother with the new consoles if they have this crap on them.

    Can you imagine if you bought a new car and you weren't allowed sell it second hand? It'd be bullsh*t which is what this crap is.

    The online code is a good middle ground, they should stick with it.


  • Options
    #58
    dreamers75
    Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    Wonder who is making this Blu-Ray NFC replication machine. Serial in the box would be cheaper and bit more cost effective.

    Still means not going online with your game means it doesnt get linked to your account which is the same as the NFC disc.


  • Options
    #59
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,946 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    gizmo wrote: »
    Surely you realise that you're the minority in this though, similar to those who defend pirating a game saying they went out and bought it after playing it because they weren't sure if they'd like it. It does happen but the figures show it's pretty rare compared to the usual practices.


    Assassins Creed is actually a very good example which shows "rehashing" an IP can actually work out pretty well. The series saw a drastic improvement from AC1 to AC:B and it was only in Revelations where we saw some of the changes made be not as well received. I've not gotten a chance to play AC3 yet but even if it's as mixed a bag as I've read, it still seems pretty clear a hell of a lot of work went into it. That's on top of the fact that it's also become an absolutely massive seller so clearly there's a demand for more games in the series.


    And similar to the advantages that people see in second hand pricing with regard to units sold on paper, this kind of level isn't going to be sustainable in the long term. :(

    Definitely, AC2 and Brotherhood were huge improvements on AC1, although Revelations was a bit of a chore to play imo, and AC3 is kind of weak.

    I just don't agree with the line of thinking that if I buy it pre-owned or pirate it now and like it, I'll buy further entries in the series. If everyone thought like that, it'd completely kill developing a game that was just one game with no further sequels, and considering how often people complain about developers just rehashing the same series over and over, it doesn't make sense to argue for it.


  • Options
    #60
    PickledLime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭PickledLime


    A patent is far away from something that's actually being implemented. I don't this will happen as there isn't a good enough broadband infrastructure available to make digital delivery the main distribution method. The bigger picture is that Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo's customer base goes far beyond internet/tech savvy gamers.

    If Sony did do this, could you imagine what would happen with Gamestop and their ilk? I don't see them selling a piece of hardware that's partially designed to kill their business model.

    I'd refuse to buy the product. If i'm paying €50+ for a new game, it's mine to do whatever i want afterwards, whether that be lend it to a friend, trade it into a shop, fire it out the top window of my house or leave it on the shelf, and i won't be dictated to by a huge corporation or have my consumer rights trod upon. If that's not the case, then the companies are not welcome to my money.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    johnwd
    Registered Users Posts: 247 ✭✭johnwd


    When I buy the right to play a game its mine - including all online rights. If I sell that game then I give up everything to do with that game and confer the property rights onto someone else - just like anything else that I'm done with and wish to sell. What's the problem? If there is a middle man involved in the deal then what of it - are Ford pissed off because car dealers sell second hand cars? Have Ford patented a system that will prevent 2nd owners from driving their cars??

    On the flipside when I buy a game I'm really buying intellectual property more than actual property - so how comes if I scratch the disc (which is worth all of 20c) I have to shell out another €50 for the game again. Could they not come up with a system whereby if I produce my IP rights I can get the medium by which it is delivered at a really low price?

    The days of buying a disc are numbered - if I buy online I'm not going to be able to resell the game - surely then it's going to be a lot cheaper to buy online than via disc isn't it ;)


Advertisement