New Resident Evil Game Tries to Rip Off Consumers, but Does It Badly
CapCom's new Resident Evil game is designed so it can only be played once. This is the latest -- and dumbest -- attempt to take control of a game away from the person who bought it.
Resident Evil: Mercenaries 3D for the Nintendo 3DS is a game that once finished, cannot be reset for complete replay. If you want to play again you have to play as whichever of the eight characters you chose the first time you played. This decision is clearly an attempt to cut into used game sales, although the company denies it. In a statement to the game site GiantBomb the company said:
Secondhand game sales were not a factor in this development decision so we hope that all our consumers will be able to enjoy the entirety of the survival-action experiences that the game does offer.Riiiiiiiight.
Despite these limitations Resident Evil costs as much ($40) as a regular game that actually has a resale value. Although its value even without these restrictions is being questioned by reviewers: "With Mercenaries 3D, what was once a free bonus mode is now being priced as a standalone title."
It won't work
CapCom's effort to control all revenues from a game is ham-handed and unlikely to succeed. Other game makers are accomplishing the same thing in a way that consumers don't mind via digital downloads and free-to-play micro-transaction models.
While Resident Evil's restrictions only benefit the company, downloaded games also give something to the consumer. The convenience of getting the game immediately has so far out weighed the loss of the ability to resell the game.
The benefit to consumers of free-to-play games like Team Fortress 2 and Dungeon & Dragons Online is self-evident. The companies make their money from the sale of virtual goods -- like weapons or clothes -- and access to more parts of the game. This not only avoids the resale problem, it also lets the company make more money than it could have otherwise by selling goods which can only be used in their game.
Cyber-protests in EVE Online
In general this has increased game revenue but it has also given more leverage to the consumer. Over the weekend, players of CCP's EVE Online held a virtual protest, shutting down one of the in-game places where these virtual goods are sold. Because of how EVE is designed this came close to shutting down the entire game for a day.
The players were furious over CCP's decision to sell goods that gave buyers a disproportionate advantage (special ammunition or weapons) or that went for exorbitant prices (a set of shirt, pants, and boots costs anywhere from $40 to $80). CCP management got the message and yesterday announced plans to fix the problems.
"The free-to-play model makes makes the game maker more responsive to customers," says David Chang, CEO of game company OnNet Europe. Further they have to be sensitive to the needs of a relatively small number of those customers: The 10 percent who generate so much revenue that they subsidize the game for the other 90 percent. (This 10/90 split is seen in nearly all the free games, according to game executives I spoke to.)
Despite this, the sale of virtual goods is a highly lucrative business. The goods themselves cost nothing to produce so all income is profit. Further, game companies make money on the resale of these items. Nearly all these games have an auction house where players can sell goods at whatever price the market will go for. The company typically takes a cut of anywhere from from 5 percent to 10 percent of that price. This far more than eBay -- and they don't have to pay for shipping.
Related: