What I don't understand is people that get WAYY too obsessive over ownership of certain things. "I need xxxx thing because it's $300 now". Well you didn't want it when it was $80 new, or $20 when it was in the used bargain bin at GS so...no, you don't. Or else they get triggered by Ebay listings. Like seriously, who cares? People become way too attached to items just because they get this perception that something is worth a lot of money. Like I can't believe that some people here didn't sell their Hyperdimension Neptunia Re;Birth 1 Vita Limited Editions as soon as they reached $600+. Why wouldn't you. Why become attached to something so silly, just because the dollar price went up? Something is only worth as much as you can sell it for, and items don't remain hot forever. I sold my Dark Souls trilogy hardcover compendium for 400 bucks on Amazon a couple months ago without a moments hesitation as soon as I saw what it was going for. That will pay for an entire console or an entire year of brand new video games. It's a no-brainer. Anything seminal will get re-printed or remastered eventually anyways.
There will always be more new interesting stuff to buy. No reason to get so attached to your stuff. No one is going to care about the dozen brand new-in-box 3DS systems that you own in ten years.
Buy all of the collectables you like, and sell a couple of them that you can live without when the value goes up astronomically 500-1000%. That's how you maintain this hobby and keep buying cool collectables.
I never buy collector's boxes, at least not on purpose. I'll pick up a steelbook or "limited" edition here and there, but only because it was either cheaper than the standard edition or on deep clearance.
As for whether it's a "no-brainer' to sell one's games if/when they reach high values, I don't entirely agree with such an absolute view. There are many reasons one may not wish to part with their games, regardless how "priceless" or "expensive" they might now be, and those reasons may not have anything to do with what the game may offer in liquid "return" on the market.
This is false. Gaming changes through the years and you might not like the new stuff as much. This is why many retro games and consoles have gone up in value, people miss the good old days. They made the mistake of trading in their games years ago and would rather play classics instead of newer games which for many are not as interesting. The old games are scarce now so the values are high. I personally think this is the worst generation of gaming yet and would rather have back many of the old games I sold through the years but are too expensive now. I would rather hang on to expensive items instead of making the risk of selling them. Also, if you have a real job all of a sudden a few hundred dollars for a game isn't really that much profit like it was when you were in hs or college. Also, I am attached to material items because in my experience people will let you down, abandon you, etc. but my games are still there and will always be there for me.
I think caggamer1 is onto something here. There is a charm to going back to older games, which are indeed hard(er) to find. Similar to caggamer1, I too think the gaming industry today - which seems obsessed with making open-world or always online/never-ending games that are either shipped broken or in need of countless patches - is becoming less and less attractive in terms of both the sorts of games published, and how those games must be played.
And the thought that popular older games
will be reprinted and remastered down the road just isn't true. There are more than enough examples of games out there that have come and gone, have a worthwhile base of gamer interest, but are never going to get an HD re-release, or any treatment whatesoever, because of logistical, legal, and other costly labyrinthine obstacles.
Of course, what is popular now may not be what was popular then, and while "seminal" games - as that term may be regularly used - are more likely to be revisited (e.g., the Resident Evil series is probably the most obvious example), a person's interest in games - not unlike with books or movies - eventually extends farther/deeper than just seminal or mass-market titles. Someone who finds he/she enjoys gaming isn't going to start and stop with Assassin's Creed or the Super Mario series. It may reach out to AA titles like the Shadow Hearts trilogy, or evolve into a love for obscure card-based games like Lost Kingdoms, or a passion for Capcom fighting titles like Project Justice or Tech Romancer.
All of this is to say that people's tastes change, and time is money. Trying to find old games now, time included, and paying those values is not an option for many people (i.e., me).
Also, collecting games (or for that matter, any pursuit that involves collecting) is a hobby that is for many divorced from tracking liquid value. All my friends who collects games or movies have little to no interest in selling or even keeping any eye towards what something may be worth. They collect because they have fun in owning
and playing games (that latter one may bring chills to some here - Yes, we open all our games and actually
use them; no new/minty fresh items here).
Others collect because they care most about value. That's fine, of course. All I'll say about game speculating is that the idea of buying games where the prime motivation is not whether the game itself will give one enjoyment, but on some speculative notion that the item will be worth something more in the future (again, we're talking about a video game, not some metaphysical stock or bond) is a strange and foreign concept to me. That said, it's your money - and no one but you decides how to spend it.
I only buy games and movies I want to play and watch, and while I may have limited time to do so, I do get around to opening them, and playing/watching them. I've never bought a game or movie because I decided it should be worth something down the road. Any worth it has comes from my enjoyment of it.
![Zenax[zd]](/data/avatars/m/166/166897.jpg?1700966672){kind=avatar}
