It's a fight that's been raging for a while - games publishers shaking their fists at retailers for selling second-hand games (and coming up with bizarre counter measures), retailers shaking their fists at the publishers for threatening to crack down on one of their revenue streams (and coming out with debatable statistics). But the recent surge in public laundry-airing from both camps has taken many by surprise. Notably, the consumers - often the lost souls in this debate - have begun to take an interest in the outcome, and with their dollar-might on the side of the retailers (and the current status quo), how likely is it that the publishers will win their battle and enforce registration on players?
Personally, it seems to me that banning games from playing on other machines is unfair sour grapes. After all, other industries allow it, from film to music to cars. Heck, entire business models are based on second-hand sales. There are even government benefits and breaks in place for second-hand content sellers.
What appears to rankle the publishers is that the retailers are making money, not necessarily that the games are being sold (though that ruffles their feathers too), yet even this isn't unprecedented in consumer space. What are used car lots but the bargain bins for automobiles? And isn't it better to share an existing resource rather than bring another one into the world?
Grrrr.
Read up on the latest in the debate on MCV where the comments are on fire.
