So this coming Sunday one of the topics on this weeks show will be this story. Read it. There is much to discuss from it.

Have you read it? Good then we can begin.

Developers over the past few years have been getting screwed. With the high cost of making games and the market having set a ridiculously low price of only $60 dollars for new games developers are doing everything they can to try and make the same profit they used to make. And to make matters worse customers have been breaking the very fabric of consumerism by trading games back in used! The horror!

Truthfully this debate isn’t so simple. Games ARE more expensive than ever to produce. One time use codes to unlock multiplayer aspects of the game were once an annoying gimmick have now become standard. Game expansions that were once full downloads are now just unlock keys for stuff already on your disc. This is annoying and maybe shady but in the end inevitable. Gaming budgets haven’t just ballooned they’ve exploded in the HD age. Think of it this way. It used to be that when a game sold one million copies it was an all time best seller. Now even modest budget games have to sell close to that to break even.

So most companies are being creative in their attempts to desuade the end user in reselling their games or buying used. Makes sense the developer doesn’t see money from these second hand copies yet have to support the online functions (if they have them) and the game itself with bug fixes. This isn’t unique to the gaming industry. Just ask the Car industry about supporting third or fourth owned cars. They’ve figured this problem out though by having warrantees that only are in effect for the original owner and having ‘certified pre-owned’ on their lots. Works for them but can’t work for the games industry. Can you imagine a Capcom Store? Cool at first, sure, but it’ll fail quickly.

In the end I don’t mind entering a code for multiplayer to prove I bought the game new because I don’t mind buying games new. And if I can’t afford it I can wait a month for the price to drop. I believe gamers are annoyed by it but in the end don’t care. If you were trying to save 5 bucks by buying it used only to find that you now need to purchase a 20 dollar add-on for multiplayer that sucks for you.

What can’t ever happen is what was reported above (as it turns out the original article was a bit misleading but forget that and be angry with me!). Raise your hand if you ever put a game down and came back to it a few months later only to have no clue what to do and having to restart the whole game. I’ve done it more times then I can count. Let’s put aside certain games that use Save limits as a way to increase the challenge of the game like “One Single Life”. A game saying you can have one save and no more is asinine and hurts the player. You can NEVER replay the game. You can’t restart the game if a game breaking bug comes up. You can’t have multiple saves so you can do different things and see different endings. If you missed something on your first play-through you’re screwed as it is your only play-through.

I wonder if this will and could become the norm. Could game companies actually do this? And if they did how would it affect their designs? Would they be willing to have hidden gems or side quests if some players would never find them without the help of a guide? Or worse, you will have to purchase a DLC token for a new save at a quarter of retail price. That’s easily circumvented now on todays consoles but what about next gen? Will we have to pay per play-through?

In the end, yes, we can vote with our wallets and not buy games that do this but didn’t we end up here by voting with our wallets in the first place?