User blog comment:Lancer1289/MICROSOFT PROVES IT LISTENS!!!!!/@comment-1440333-20130622003820/@comment-1440333-20130623010521

Actually companies like Gamestop make most of their pure profit on used games. In the UK GAME(essentially the same thing) will buy game X for £10. They will then sell that same game for £20 or even £25 pounds. You can see this information on the websites of certain stores - look at the price they will pay compared to the price they sell. There are even several of these stores in the UK that run ENTIRELY on used game sales. This is also another reason why they give less for cash than they do on trade - on trade they make more profit out of you, so are willing to offer that incentive.

The fact is that second hand gaming/shared gaming is a tricky horse. In effect what Microsoft was attempting to do is no different to sharing restrictions on a PC game, a tablet app, or a Kindle book. Yet because the used game market has survived for so long, and has in fact boomed while many publishers and developers have made substantial losses, there is an audience that won't let them get away with changing things this late in the game.

I am on the fence - I really can see the merit to both sides of the argument. I have used the second hand market both as a buyer and a seller, and on one hand it is comforting to know it is there. However if I see a game I really want, or plan to own for a substantial if not indefinite period, then I will always buy new in order to support the creators.

Not that the next console war matters to me. There are at least half a dozen new games coming to my 360, including Dragon Age 3, Destiny and Watchdogs, that I will get. There are also dozens of gems like Witcher and New Vegas that I havent yet been able to afford. If I do change console I will probably go back to Nintendo and get a Wii U, purely for the backwards compatability.