Games are being traded in because they’re too short, says Mad Max dev

Monday, 17th June 2013 15:32 GMT By Dave Cook

Mad Max and Just Cause developer Avalanche Studios makes massive games, and founder Christofer Sundberg has suggested that the reason so many games get traded in is because they’re too short or offer little motivation to return.

Speaking with Edge about the recently thorny issue of used games, Sundberg said, “I’m sure it’s been an issue but that’s because games have been too short. I mean, when you can play a game through from 8 to 10 hours, I would return the game too, because there’s no reason for players to play it again.

“If you’re offering little variation, then there’s no motivation for the player to keep that game–unless they want to have a nice bookshelf. That’s why we answered that with Just Cause. I go into game stores each week and I always go to the used game boxes–I usually don’t find that many [copies of Just Cause].”

Sundberg added that hundreds of thousands of gamers still play Just Cause 2 on a weekly basis, backing up his claim that scale and variety can help hold a person’s attention.

Nintendo’s Reggie Fils-Aime on the other hand, said last week that the key to curbing trade-ins is to simply make better games that people want to keep. He has a point.

What do you think keeps a person from trading in their games? What about you personally? Let us know below.

Thanks Gamespot.



  1. ps3fanboy

    i don’t trade in anything i keep my shit!

    #1 2 years ago
  2. DrDamn

    No, you spew it all over this website (*BOOM-tish*)
    /am here all week ;)

    #2 2 years ago
  3. DSB

    Give that man a medal!

    #3 2 years ago
  4. Kieran

    @3 i second that lol

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Froseidon

    @2 Comedy gold!

    On the article: I think both people have a point. It’s rare I trade in Nintendo games, and nearly all 1st party Nintendo games are fantastic, I have no intention of trading them in.

    Length of a game also has something to do with it. Just Cause, I did trade in, but it took me a while, and nearly 2 full play-throughs. It is a really lengthy game, much like most of the Nintendo ones, but it was also a good game.

    I’m still to trade in the Mass Effect and Dragon Age games, which I don’t think I will. In the end, both people’s points make sense, however, a long game doesn’t always mean its great, but Avalanche’s Just Cause series are incredibly fun. If the game is large, then it needs to have something to do in it.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Bomba Luigi

    I would never give away my Just Cause2, its always fun just playin a bit here and there making some crazy stuff.

    And my Hopes for Mad Max are High.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Lengendaryboss


    #7 2 years ago
  8. GrimRita

    True as. Quick trade ins, yield the largest returns.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Samoan Spider

    @8 Yup. Great games stayed on the shelf getting played, but the games I wasn’t so sure about or just wanted to experience (CoD) I’d buy, finish and trade in as quickly as possible to get the most. Then plow that into the next purchase.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. Pytox

    i never traded in a game i dont like to trade a game in

    #10 2 years ago
  11. MFBB

    Well replay value is more important (for trade in/selling) than the game having like 50-100 hours gameplay.

    If you go back to a game to play more and more and more over the months/years, thats the reason i keep it and not because it took me a long time to play through.

    Like i am still playing Demons Souls/Dark Souls years after release, it is always fun to chop some enemies and you never become a superman (game gets way to easy if you play to long-power up to much etc).

    I do sell games like Red Dead Redemption/Mass Effect etc because I know I am never playing them again.

    Why keep them in some drawer for years till you put them in the basement or throw them away.

    Just went to Gamestop on Friday and gave them LA Noire/Red Dead Redemption, got The Last of Us new for 9,99 Euro and Season Pass for 10 Euro.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. backup

    buuuuuut PC gamers can’t even do that hahahahaha

    #12 2 years ago
  13. FeaturePreacher

    Single player DLC that you get for free when you buy new.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. wowtgp

    @12 But console gamers can’t get cheap ass discounts on games like us. Can they?

    #14 2 years ago
  15. Osric

    Not too short but with a very low replay value. You’re going to hate me for this but the last game (besides Mass Effect series, Metal Gear Solid series and Uncharted -except for the third one-) I remember playing THE HELL OF A LOT was Resident Evil 5. Unlocking EVERYTHING, weapons, costumes, secrets, modes, etc. and the game was pretty short (you could finish the story in less than 3 hours). Let’s not forget the CO-OP option, which, believe it or not, was a great addition to an action focused game like Resident Evil 5. Now, I’m not debating about survival horror, just replay value.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. macronia

    thank you good man , also the quality , there are number of games very big but boring as hell , hope that changes one day :)

    #16 2 years ago
  17. Hoika

    Length could have something to do with it. But I guess it also has to do with somekind of emotional attachement. If The Last of Us was just 8 hours long, had no replay value or Multiplayer I would still keep it. Cause it was the best 8 hours I’ve played in a long time. For me, the same goes for games like Skyrim, ICO, Bioshock, The Walking Dead, etc. Other people will have other games they adore and can’t part with…

    But games like FIFA 11, Rogue Warrior, Green Lantern: Rise of the Whatever or Assassin’s Creed 85 on the other hand… I personally would trade in those for something else after some time. No matter how long they’d take to complete or how much replay value… Because I don’t care about those series or because they lost value (both cash and emotional) after some time.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. Un-HolyMOTHERofGOD

    I kept Just Cause 2 for about two years before I traded it in. Even when I finally got rid of it, there was still lots of things left to do.

    Here’s hoping Mad Max offers just as much fun shit to do, and maybe I’ll be playing it for years too.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. xxJPRACERxx

    @17 100% agree.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. fuchikoma

    I almost never fault a game for being too short. Some of the best I’ve played are maybe an hour long. On the other hand if I play 20 hours of a 60 hour game, it’s probably already more than a bit stale and repetitive by then, and also for length calculation by progress does that 20h count as 30h, or 5h? Would I ever see the end of it? I don’t know, but I have a lot of other things to do, so too-long games just end up collecting dust, or not being bought in the first place.

    I’d rather have a complete experience than backtrack dozens of times, or look all over the place for a key or other macguffin, or play awful shoehorned-in sections with weird vehicles or other game mechanics that are only used in one level, etc. The longer the game, the less likely you are to get a “pure” experience of just the game you wanted, and the less likely it’ll remain creative and entertaining throughout.

    #20 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.