COOPER HEINRICHS
COMMUNITY WRITER
Default_picture
Followers (0)
Following (0)
LOCATION
TWITTER  -NONE-
FACEBOOK  -NONE-
WEBSITE  -NONE-
LINKEDIN  -NONE-
XBL  -NONE-
PSN  -NONE-
WII   -NONE-
STEAM  -NONE-
COOPER HEINRICHS' SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
POST BY THIS AUTHOR (0)
COMMENTS BY THIS AUTHOR (1)
"style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> To fully understand the 'gaming piracy' situation, it is important to consider the idea of durable goods vs nondurable goods. A durable good is a good that does not easily wear out and provides services or utility over time rather than wearing out. A nondurable good is either used up immediately, or has a lifespan of less than three years. In their current form video games are mostly sold in a medium that allows them to become a durable good. The problem is that once a player plays through a game once or twice (which is almost always within the timespan of three years), the game is consumed. With a few rare exceptions the games become mere mementos, paperweights, or trophies on shelves. In most cases, The games value to the player has been completely reduced but the physical state of the product hasn't changed. This format is what allows the resale of the game.

 

I believe that consumer rights are not really what's being argued here. The gaming industry as a whole needs to realize that they have created the means for the used game industry's 'piracy' by allowing their innately nondurable product to become durable and available for resale. Instead of taking jabs at players of used games in the press, and whining about lost revenue, companies should work to protect themselves by changing their products. Through innovation like the use of CD keys, Battle.net and downloadable content, companies like Blizzard have been able to almost completely shut down the resale market for their games."

Monday, August 30, 2010