Microsoft survey asks "Would you sell back your digital games for 10% of purchase price?"

The Wolf Among You

Superstar
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
6,005
Reputation
1,805
Daps
29,134
S3oQozm.png


From Reddit.


How do you feel about this, brehs?
 

teacher

All Star
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
4,901
Reputation
-432
Daps
7,286
I'd rather have the option then not....:yeshrug:

but the #'s stink....i'd rather a discount towards another game if you return it within a certain amount of time without beating or something along those lines :manny:
 
Last edited:

Cladyclad

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
42,409
Reputation
4,432
Daps
108,268
Reppin
Detroit Lions, Michigan Wolverines & LWO
They've been talking about thinking of a way to allow sharing/selling of digital games.

10% is pretty low, but I just deleted a bunch of games and got nothing for them. Woulda been nice to get something:manny:
But if u ever wanted to play them again u could right?
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
66,127
Reputation
3,521
Daps
102,779
Reppin
Tha Land
And people like @MeachTheMonster felt like it would have been some incredible offer if they kept some of their "old policies" to help people sell/trade digital goods.

FOH, 10% is a slap in the face straight up. That is even WORSE than gamestop/amazon trade in values for decent stuff.
Aww quit tagging me fakkit.

The OG plan was way better than this.
 

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,625
Daps
59,898
This whole thing is dumb as fukk. I get what Microsoft is trying to do, set it at a number so that if you sell a game you will likely need to sell back multiple items or not get enough for things you really want in the store. That way you have to spend money on top of giving away your license.

You buy a game for $60, sell it back for $6
Buy something that costs $20, sell it back for $2
Rinse, Repeat

They just got $72 after "2 sales" and you don't even have access to your titles anymore.

Why not just aggressively lower prices and not deal with the extra layers of BS? If you want to give people the option to sell it back for $6 or so...why not just lower the price across the board to $54? Less transactions, less headaches across the board for everyone...cheaper prices which makes people happier in the long run. I am not sure why Microsoft and Sony just straight up refuse to look at what Valve is doing. Valve is the monster it is because of their aggressive pricing, not gimmicks.
 

Cladyclad

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
42,409
Reputation
4,432
Daps
108,268
Reppin
Detroit Lions, Michigan Wolverines & LWO
This whole thing is dumb as fukk. I get what Microsoft is trying to do, set it at a number so that if you sell a game you will likely need to sell back multiple items or not get enough for things you really want in the store. That way you have to spend money on top of giving away your license.

You buy a game for $60, sell it back for $6
Buy something that costs $20, sell it back for $2
Rinse, Repeat

They just got $72 after "2 sales" and you don't even have access to your titles anymore.

Why not just aggressively lower prices and not deal with the extra layers of BS? If you want to give people the option to sell it back for $6 or so...why not just lower the price across the board to $54? Less transactions, less headaches across the board for everyone...cheaper prices which makes people happier in the long run. I am not sure why Microsoft and Sony just straight up refuse to look at what Valve is doing. Valve is the monster it is because of their aggressive pricing, not gimmicks.
Sony & MS still depend retailers tho.
 

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,625
Daps
59,898
Sony & MS still depend retailers tho.
fukk them, it is inevitable that retail for software is going away. Why delay the inevitable? Force retailers to come up with new solutions to get people into the stores. Gamestop/Walmart/Target should only be selling limited editions of games as far as I'm concerned.

Games on PSN/XBL should be 10% less than retail across the board starting out. There is less for them to do, no manufacturing/shipping to get together. They charge a yearly fee to access XBL/PSN so don't give me the sorry ass excuse that they need the same price to support their servers.

Steam alone is bigger than PSN/XBL and they are able to be aggressive, why can't huge companies like Sony and Microsoft?
 

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,625
Daps
59,898
Start with 20% off games when you pre-order. Amazon and Best Buy already do it and don't have the same risk of getting stuck with a game that bombed.

Start there and keep going. Steam should be offering 20% off pre-orders as well, I am going to email Gabe about this soon.
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
66,127
Reputation
3,521
Daps
102,779
Reppin
Tha Land
fukk them, it is inevitable that retail for software is going away. Why delay the inevitable? Force retailers to come up with new solutions to get people into the stores. Gamestop/Walmart/Target should only be selling limited editions of games as far as I'm concerned.

Games on PSN/XBL should be 10% less than retail across the board starting out. There is less for them to do, no manufacturing/shipping to get together. They charge a yearly fee to access XBL/PSN so don't give me the sorry ass excuse that they need the same price to support their servers.

Steam alone is bigger than PSN/XBL and they are able to be aggressive, why can't huge companies like Sony and Microsoft?
Because steam is all digital. All profit.

On consoles physical games still sell a hell of a lot more digital.
 
Top