GameStop is A-Okay With DLC

[Andy Chalk]

GameStop is A-Okay With DLC

GameStop [http://www.gamestop.com] says that DLC programs like Online Pass, which are designed to discourage pre-owned game sales, will actually have a positive impact on its business in the long run.

EA Sports [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100582-EA-Sports-Unveils-Launch-Day-DLC-Program-Online-Pass] that requires purchasers of used games to pay extra to gain access to features like online play, would by all appearances look like bad news for GameStop, which enjoys healthy profit margins on used game sales that new games just can't match. But that's not the case, according to CEO Dan DeMatteo, who said in a conference call with investors that the company actually sees downloadable content as a positive factor for "extending the life of titles and broadening the base of players."

Instead of approaching DLC as a threat, DeMatteo said GameStop was working to help publishers sell the content to gamers, a tactic which benefits everyone. The sale of DLC helps game companies "better leverage their [IP]... through downloadable content sales to both used players and new game buyers," he explained, and can give GameStop a boost at the register too: He said the company sold "notably more Xbox Live point cards" when it promoted the Modern Warfare 2 [http://www.modernwarfare2.com/] Stimulus Package DLC in its stores.

"GameStop consumers are ahead of the mass market in digital adoption. Our investments in proprietary point-of-sale tech have put us in a position to partner with publishers as they grow their digital offerings," he said. "We're having convos with multiple publishers on leveraging the potential of digital sales at GameStop stores."

In no small part, I'm sure, because "multiple publishers" are joining EA on the DLC bandwagon: Both THQ [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100755-Ubisoft-Planning-Its-Own-Project-Ten-Dollar] recently announced that they plan to launch their own Online Pass-style programs in the near future.

Source: Gamasutra [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28637/No_Impact_On_GameStops_Used_Games_Biz_From_Online_Pass.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GamasutraNews+%28Gamasutra+News%29]


Permalink

 

[Jared]

So glad to hear they are ok with it...despite the fact we didn't ask them! I'm sure some of that statement though is smoke dnd mirrors though

 

[Irridium]

What they may do is just reduce the used game prices a bit to compensate.

At least I hope so.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Everyone have fail to realize that while use games give them a big profit margin per game sold, the vast majority of their revenue still comes from selling NEW games <.<

Kinda came to that realization when standing in line to pick up red dead redemption when you see that 3 out of ever 4 customers were buying new. so yeah 25% sales (From my extremely tiny sample size) is still pretty damn good. But the company didn't get to where it is only selling Used games.

By encouraging new games to be bought your not hurting Gamestop your just shifting their profits to new game sales. In doing so doesn't everyone(publishers and retailer) win?

 

[Kevlar Eater]

This is our future, and it is fucked up. Once more, the gamers are being cuckolded by the industry.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

That sounds promising. Now let's wait a few months and this guy might be cursing what he said.

 

[Matt_LRR]

What they may do is just reduce the used game prices a bit to compensate.

At least I hope so.

It'll happen or it won't. There are two possible outcomes here, and the one that happens will depend on Gamestop's consumer base.

If the average GS consumer actually is DLC savvy, then sales on games with a DLC component will dry up, and prices will come down to make used games + DLC less than a new copy to compensate.

If the average GS customer actually isn't DLC savvy, then there will be no significant change in the sales of used gaes with a DLC component, and therefore no need for GS to reduce the price to compensate, as customers have demonstrated that DLC is not a deciding factor in purchasing decisions.

-m

 

[squaminator]

wow that picture is old. PS3 for 499? Halo 3 posters?

 

[Eldarion]

Great, so everyone wins except the customer. Who is being forced into buying new products for the first time in gaming history. I can't imagine what would happen if any other industry tried the same BS. "Oh, you're buying a USED car? Well you'll have to pay an additional $2,000 for the doors."

Except that most DLC is just extras you don't need to play the game. This is more like saying "Here is a new car, for an extra 100$ we will throw in a GPS system."

 

[Marter]

Good to hear they don't believe it'll negatively impact their business. I'd hate to hear that they'd need to let employees go because of a move like this by publishers.

 

[RowdyRodimus]

Thank the maker, I can stop my hunger strike knowing that Gamestop is ok with companies having DLC that doesn't affect them in any way. Now the online pass type thing is a different story, so I don't know why that wasn't brought upo by the GS CEO, then again hide the negatives and accentuate the positives.

 

[theaceplaya]

Smart. If you can't beat 'em...

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

I almost never buy 2nd-hand games anyway (except if they're old titles that can't be bought in stores anymore), so the whole thing isn't affecting me either way. Sucks for those who rely on second-hand games to get their fix, but still if you get a used game for half the price (dunno what the going rate is, but 50% seems reasonable for all parties involved) and then pay $10,- for the DLC, I bet you'd still walk away with more money than buying a game unused.

I'm glad this could be a positive thing for both publishers and retailers, in stead of screwing over retailers because the publishers want to get their hands on a few extra pennies.

But how about a program that benefits the developers? Directly, I mean. After all, publishers and retailers are little more than middle-men in the whole affair, convenient at best and game-ruining (through unrealistic deadlines and stuff) at worst.

To quote Steve Ballmer:
<youtube=KMU0tzLwhbE>

 

[katsabas]

The key phrase here is 'a positive effect on its business'. What about us, gamers in general or those that do not have webcards or credit cards? Screwed over. Again. Just another reason to revile this chain store, along with their incomprehensible-pre-order only-dlc mania.

 

[ItsAPaul]

Yet used games are the same price as always... seems like Gamestop doesn't get it.

 

[VirusHunter]

Everyone have fail to realize that while use games give them a big profit margin per game sold, the vast majority of their revenue still comes from selling NEW games <.<

Kinda came to that realization when standing in line to pick up red dead redemption when you see that 3 out of ever 4 customers were buying new. so yeah 25% sales (From my extremely tiny sample size) is still pretty damn good. But the company didn't get to where it is only selling Used games.

By encouraging new games to be bought your not hurting Gamestop your just shifting their profits to new game sales. In doing so doesn't everyone(publishers and retailer) win?

Gamestop doesn't win because when they sell a new game, more than 50% of the profit goes to the game publisher and developers (Gamestop buys games from the publishers and sells it at higher prices so that they can make profit, that is how the economy works). When they sell a used game, 100% of the profit goes to Gamestop. Also Gamestop has said that they can make up to 9 times the profit by selling the same used game over and over again. SO basically they can make just as much or even more profit by selling the used version of a game as opposed to the new version.

On another note, this article doesn't actually tell me HOW the $10 plan gives games longer life-spans. All it tells me is that Gamestop sells DLC. Are they unaware that there won't be a middleman involved in the selling of these "online passes"? (If a middleman does become involved, it kinda defeats the purpose of the developer trying to make profit off of used games)

How does making a game inaccessible to ANYONE in the future give a game a longer lifespan? Won't this limit the lifespan to when the developer stops supporting it? There are plenty a game that no longer have developer support and yet they still thrive in gaming culture because of their replay value.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

what's a convo ?

 

[Xersues]

What a bunch of shit. I said it once and I'll say it again. The day I have to pay an activation fee for a game is the day I stop gaming.

I even mostly buy new games, but when the used copy of a game that you were interested in drops down to 20 bucks and you haven't seen it new anywhere and you pick it up. You should NOT be punished.

If the online features are going to be disabled, the 360 base is getting double screwed. Not only do they pay yearly for a service, they now have to activate their used games' features.

Fuckers.

 

[MrBrightside919]

Of course they like the idea...because it will make consumers spend more money and buy new copies instead of waiting for a used copy to appear on the shelf and save a few bucks...

Still, doesn't really affect me so I won't ***** about it because I don't really play sports games anymore (Madden 94 and NHL 99 ftw)