Reason 1: Monetise secondary, not just primary, markets

Typically, game companies have made money from the sale of game items by selling it to the gamer for the first time and that is the end of that. When gamers try to sell these items on secondary markets (typically in breach of the game’s end user license agreement — EULA), publishers receive no benefit.

This is a potentially lucrative market that they do not get a share of: Currently, the secondary trading market for ‘skins’ (decorative weapon add-ons in first-person shooter games) trading is worth $400 million annually.

The most expensive skin in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive — the Karambit Case Hardened Factory New for $100,000.

Historically, this is not something that publishers have stood for! When secondary markets were booming with sales of secondhand games, it didn’t take game companies long to shift to selling digital-only versions of their product. This enabled them to maintain market share, and because online channels and platforms resulted in greater audience reach, also increased revenue.

“But how exactly does a game publisher monetise secondary markets?”

Developers can embed certain rules when implementing the code for virtual game items. These can include baking in a fee that goes back to the game company every time a certain action is taken, including when an item is transferred from one player to another.

Clearly, freer and fairer policies will attract more gamers than others, however, with secondary markets rife with fraud, this is a way in which the game company can help to protect its gamers.

Further, different rule structures can incentivize or deincentivize certain in-game trades, enabling developers to maintain the vision of the game world and economy they are hoping to create.