Not true at all. The used game market generates revenue for game makers by increasing the intrinsic value of new games being bought, and thus leading to more initial sales.

Considering that many lack-luster titles have limited replay value, the first sale market will plummet if you take away resale. Removing replay will only remind gamers that they don’t have $60 to spend on something they’ll view as disposable after a week. Especially in this economy! The used game market softens the blow of that reasoning, making you think that maybe you can get a few bucks back.

What happens when someone wants to buy a new game but finds their pockets empty. They look around to see if there’s a few duds lying around that they can pawn off. If the player finds their shelf full of titles that they can’t sell off that they haven’t played in months, they’ll think to themselves, “Eh, maybe I shouldn’t go run off and buy that new game after all.”

So of course it will reduce revenue! Whoever at Team XBox came up with the ridiculous idea of allowing resale to be restricted has no economic sense whatsoever.

I mean, hey, you really don’t know that you’ll like that game until you try it, right? Especially when it’s from an established franchise, like Call of Duty. Actually, of course you’re going to shell out for it. You always do. “Try before you buy” mantra doesn’t work with established series.

I guess I foot-mouthed earlier, although I still think it immoral to download pre-release copies of franchises you’ve tried before. Obscure imports on the other hand?

Yet another example of a pirate thoughtlessly regurgitating something the entertainment industry has been claiming for years. Don’t say it if you don’t actually have a reason for believing it.