Originally Posted by Athrun Zala
I'm confused about what's going on in this thread. Isn't consumer rights a good thing? Shouldn't we have the ability to sell games? How much will the prices jump that really makes this a bad idea?
You have a one sided perspective sir. Yes if steam implements this you will get a little more for what cost?
Lets look at this economically:
Counter-Strike (whatever version) is, lets say, 10$ from the steam store.
Well a new digital copy or a used digital copy has no difference right? There is no physical wear and tear or even signs of usage.
Meaning the used copy will sell for 10$ also.
This means the developer will make little to no extra money (extra if valve allows developers to take a cut).
Thus the developer will make less money in the end. Which in the long run will mean more expensive games, less games, less game-population(people playing the game), and most likely lower quality games.
This is a loss to the gaming community which is the costumer.
Also, if valve implements this then they would make it for Steam trade for steam credit. This will make valve much richer and feed money back to itself. And in the end the customer would sell the used well under 10 - "valve cut" - "developer cut". Valve will never let you sell back your game for a fair price either. Developer is at a loss and so is the customer.
If this trading is implemented, DRM will be greatly increased due to making sure each acc has only the games its supposed to have. Which means more internet usage/checks plus 24/7/365