. . . and the idea that used games are unethical is gaining following at an alarming rate.

I still don't get this at all. That's literally not the case with any other thing I buy. Used car? Fine, there's a huge economy built around used cars. Used books? Cool! Used albums? Awesome! Hell, used shoes? There's a market!

Why should video games be any different?

Well, I do get it to a small degree. It really wasn't a huge concern for companies until the digital age. Take cars for example, you're buying a product that has gone down in quality since it was first sold, and that was the case with MOST used items. It was a known matter that had to be weighed, do I want a new, perfect version of something, or a used I-get-what-I-pay-for version. After the digital age a lot of that pretty much went away. Now you're buying a version that is 99% of the time just as good as the version that I bought on day one, so there's a certain amount of horror over the idea of why would the customer buy it at full price when they can buy it for less? The unethical part is just a tool to try and get people to feel bad about buying used.

Heck I even wouldn't buy a used copy of an indie title because i want to support indie devs, but luckily most indie devs only have digital releases anyway so it's not a concern. (And I still wouldn't call it unethical)

That's not to say they are going about trying to resolve the issue in the right way, but there is absolutely some logic behind their fears.

When it comes to used game sales, I believe that publishers (and yes, some developers) have their heads planted firmly up their own asses. The assertion that used game sales are hurting profits or driving studios out of business is entirely false. Publishers love this claim because they get to blame someone else, rather than look at their own business models.

Here's the thing about used products in general: any time people are willing to buy a used product, it is because they believe the item has some level of intrinsic value or worth beyond it being "brand new". Used cars, CDs (less so, these days), clothing, musical instruments, furniture, etc. All of these items have such a high perceived value that people will buy them even if they're 20+ years old... In some cases, people are willing to pay MORE for older examples because of the rarity and historic value. And yet these industries are still able to make and sell plenty of new products without crying "used sales are killing us!"

As Xenos pointed out, many Devs and publishers have gone to great lengths to directly combat the used market. This is a HUGE mistake for the industry. Pre-order bonuses, digital sales, DRMs, aggressive sales and price decreases, even the nature of the games themselves are all creating an atmosphere of "play it DAY 1 or don't play it at all". And that is a huge step towards commoditization, or decreasing the inherent perceived value of any videogame. If I buy something knowing that I have no way of selling it once I'm done with it, it is no longer an item with inherent value. It is now, in effect, disposable. Use it until I'm done with it, and then.... what? Throw it out? Or in the case of digital sales, forget I even own it? (I'm actually a big fan of buying things digitally, but there is an insidious element to how quickly my purchases and all the money I've spent fade from memory without a shelf full of cases to remind me).

Once a product, in this case video games, slips into the realm of commodity, it becomes far more difficult to sell them. The only reasons people buy disposable products is a) they really NEED them, or b) the product is CHEAP enough that the consumer will still purchase them. When it comes to videogames, this process is well underway.

Cody mentioned the music industry, and it's a great comparison. Record labels bitched and moaned that napster, piracy, and used sales were all killing them. Far from the truth. Ultimately, consumers were sick of paying $15-$20 for crappy music. The labels spent decades shaping their own industry into a process where the quality of what they were selling was of no concern. They would spend millions on marketing (often at the expense of their artists) to convince the public to buy the latest crap record from their newest manufactured pop star. And it wasn't just music listeners who were sick of it. The artists were sick of getting screwed every which way by the labels that were supposed to be representing them. Retailers were sick of being strong-armed into ordering thousands of discs that they KNEW wouldn't sell, then being forced to blow them out at a discount which negated their already thin margin. That's why NOBODY came to the music industry's aid or defence when it crumbled. The labels had been exploiting everyone around them for so long that the artists, retailers, and consumers were all happy to see it burn to the ground.

Sound familiar?

Look at the state of the video game industry AROUND the major publishers. The people making the games are severely overworked, have little or no job security, and face increasingly shocking levels of abuse from their online "fans". Industry veterans are leaving larger studios like rats from a sinking ship, and forming their own independent teams so they can make their games without being treated like crap by a giant corporate structure. Retailers are shutting down all over the world, as the publishers keep finding new ways to bypass them completely. Retailers are forced to sell new games at roughly %7 profit margin (sometimes less, sometimes more), and they need to sell consoles at a 1% profit margin. That's right. When you buy a $400 console from a retailer, they make $4 profit (<- Canadian figures, not sure about other regions). How the fuck is any business supposed to survive on margins like that? OF COURSE they've turned to used game sales as a way to survive. It's their only option.

And finally, look at gamers. It's hard to think of a more bitter, jaded, sceptical bunch, isn't it? I'm not talking about the disgusting underbelly of the GamerGate movement or anything that extreme. Just everyday gamers. The gaming community is tired of paying too much money for games of too little quality. Tired of marketing campaigns that flat-out lie about the nature of the game being sold ("Hunt the Truth" indeed). Tired of pre-order bonuses that don't matter, deluxe edition crap that ends up in the garbage (I'm all for little deluxe pack-ins, when they're good. Love my Ghost). Tired of paying $60-$80 for a game that doesn't even work. No wonder so many gamers are now saying "I'll buy it used" or "I'll wait for it to go on sale". Many of us already know that games aren't "worth" $60, because it's so damn easy to pay less than that and still get the game brand new.

So when I hear publishers complain about used game sales, they get no sympathy from me. They have completely put themselves in this position. To then I say:

"Want us to pay full price for new games more often? Stop selling us broken, rushed crap, and stop lying to us. Want your developers to make better games? Given them more time, let them work more reasonable hours, and stop firing them every 8 months. Want retailers to push new games more than used? Stop taking so much damn money for yourselves and give retailers enough margin to survive."

/rant

If the experience is pick and choose, then it must not be that important to the overall experience. So, that's one reason why I don't buy. Almost by definition it's going to be stupid.

Choice is the entire premis of microtransactions

I refuse to participate in microtransactions.

Microtransactions are entirely optional.

Sure, but that doesn't make them good. Stabbing myself in the dick is optional.

Stabbing yourself would give you no gain, even if only cosmetic.
Microtransactions allow players to gain small additions to their game without giving them an advantage over players who don't partake

Large paid DLCs are not.

With DLCs you do get substance added to a game however, it's basically you pay to upgrade your game or your experience is limited.

That's not necessarily true. You could play Halo without the map packs and still get a good experience. I did it with Halo 3 for quite a while. Destiny obviously screws that up, for sure. It's all a matter of implementation, though.

Unfortunately it's been a very long time since Halo 3. I am sorry but you just can't compare games now as to how they were before.

And map packs don't really add substantial change to the gameplay like say, new subclasses and gear would in a dlc.

So the DLC might actually be a downgrade

He won't. He hates being constantly proven wrong.

I love being proven wrong. Because that means I can change my mind and later be right!

He won't. He hates being constantly proven wrong.

But yeah, I haven't even played Overwatch on my own account much. Playing the game for fun is fun enough that I don't even bother signing out of Sammy's account to hop into a match or two. Wish I could play with Sammy, but we're still not going to pay for a game with such barebones content (it's even worse than Titanfall, now that I think about it).

I don't find the lack of content that bad, it's about on TF2 launch levels as far as content in my mind. But hopefully that will change for you eventually since all new maps and heroes will be free.

You can't even see your character often enough to justify his annoyance over cosmetic items being grindy.

It would be like complaining about how much you have to grind in Destiny to get sparkly eyes on your character (if it had such thing), so you want to be able to pay for it.