GameStop CEO Says Next Xbox Won't Block Used Games

[NiPah]

I'm sure they've all done the math, but just because they've done the math doesn't mean they're not going to continue crusading against them, anyway. As it goes for the publishers in general.

I'm not sure crusading is the right term, all that most publishers have done is either add a 10 dollar DLC pack for used buyers to play multiplayer, oh and a few press releases to make used buyers feel bad about themselves. There was one publisher, Capcom, who released a game without a save delete feature and they went on record as saying it wasn't to stop used game sales... If I remember correctly this also resulted in Gamestop not stocking the game, I wonder how much that helped Capcom.

Thing is Game not being able to sell Mass Effect 3 didn't seem to hurt its sale in the UK much. If the Publishers and Console makers ever do decide to play hardball the big retail chains would be screwed. Places like Amazon and the Supermarkets would be happy to carry on selling the titles and they couldn't care less about used sales.

Not that I think they would be like that, just that if they did it wouldnt hurt the publishers as much as some people think it would. The loss of good will from the consumer is the biggest problem they would face, not the loss of the gaming retail chains.

In the US where Microsoft is based and has the most profit at stake Gamestop is a huge market force.

 

[putowtin]

You're the CEO of GameStop.

You're not the one actually MAKING it!

Why the fuck should we care what you have to say about it?

Bravo, your ability to take the words right out of my mouth is incredible!

 

[Jegsimmons]

xbox has no reason to do the 'anti used' bullshit.
besides the fact they get enough money and used games still allow for dlc to be bought, the only thing that will do is just hurt them in the long run and cause people to jailbreak xboxes

 

[ablac]

Duh. I will eat my own face if they actually (completely) block used games being playable. And then you'll have seen everything.

You're the CEO of GameStop.

You're not the one actually MAKING it!

Why the fuck should we care what you have to say about it?

Cause Gamestop can refuse to stock it and the games for it. That'd put a huge dent in Microsofts sales.

So of course, IF the new X-box actually DID include "anti-used game" tech, they'd be SURE to tell GameStop wouldn't they?

You're absolutely right: GameStop would sell the consoles for years, completely oblivious to it's limiting functionality. There is absolutely no way they'd be able to find out about it blocking used games from being played unless MS told them.

They'll keep selling the consoles for years because people will still be BUYING them for years, weather they play used games or not.
Never underestimate the power of commercialism:

You're not listening. If Gamestop can't sell used games for this thing, they won't make enough of a profit to be worth carrying it. So why would they keep selling it if they don't make any money on it?

Because then they have nothing to sell and stand to go out of business while the console is bought and sold at other retailers. It would be more harmful to gamestop but they do have power and I doubt microsoft want to see them go.

Because as we all know, Sony and Nintendo don't exist.

Hmm maybe go out of business was a dum thing to say and i take that back i wasnt thinking though i thought this was Sony as well. However the point still stands that Gamestop wont simply stop stocking all microsoft stuff because they stand to lose more giving up the new console rather than simply taking a hit to used sales.

Not by much. Plus, you have to realise that shelf space is itself a commodty. If they could fill the same shelf space that they would devote to new copies of Microsofts games, and new Microsoft consoles, with new and used Ps4 and WiiU games, they would easily make more money back.

They would make a huge loss of sales. If they stood to gain from abandoning the xbox then they would have already. At present it seems to be the most popular of the two (nintendo is playing its own game to a very different market).

 

[xPixelatedx]

However, we do believe that Microsoft may be targeting a cheaper physical solution in an effort to get the initial price of the box down

lol what? You mean the actual game box/disc? Because I am not sure cutting down on the PENNIES they pay for each disc will make a difference.

 

[FoolKiller]

Only used games have minimal deprecation over the first 6 months ie the used game is worth 95% of its retail price. So the other retail models have been around longer but have much higher deprecation than the games and thus cannot be used as model.

Where are you getting this data from?

Maybe some of the AAA titles aren't depreciating all that much but the rest are. Fallout: New Vegas was 50% less than launch at 6 months, and that was arguably one of the better titles. Mass Effect 2 dropped like a rock in a similar time frame. And I've seen games that lose 70% in two weeks because no one buys it. And this is the new game's price.

We're talking about the amount you get for a game when you trade it in used because that is where the depreciation lies. Yes, a car loses thousands in value when you drive it off the lot but games lose a lot too. I have seen at most $40 dollars being paid (as trade-in never as cash) for a $60 game. Most of the time I see a new-release game within a week only getting $30 to $35 in trade-in because the early adopters got bored and decided not to keep the game around. Nowhere do I see $57 dollars being paid for a game that is $60 brand new.

http://www.amazon.com/Fouls-Chronicles-Thomas-Covenant-Unbeliever/dp/0345348656/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1332537466&sr=1-4


Look at the price change 7.99 to 1 cent used, is the deprecation on games as extreme as that? Obviously not. So in the real world, guess what, used book are worth less than used games. How many books at 1 cent would you have to sell to make the same amount of money that they make at 7.99 price? 1000s at least. It costs more to have the book delivered than it does to buy.

Well with math like that, who could argue? Especially bending the information hoping I don't look at the link I guess. And hoping I didn't notice you change the point. Tsk tsk.

1. We were talking about the depreciation of something after 6 months on the market, not after 25 years.

2. The used from 1 cent cost should be compared to the new from 3.99 column
if you are going to use that argument.

3. Since you are determined to use this example, I shall give you a clear example where all of the ratios that you seem to want to use are given. Note Final Fantasy having a used from price around $10 and a new from price around $2000.

http://www.ebay.ca/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_npmv=3&_trksid=p3910.m570.l1313&_nkw=nes&_sacat=1249

4. You still haven't given data supporting the concept that a video game retains 95% of its value 6 months down the line. With the exception of a collector's edition or games that have a higher retention rate that requires more time to beat(say an RPG), most games drop 35 to 50% upon opening the game.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Not everyone can afford to buy games new all the time.
Not everyone has high-speed internet.
Not everyone has their consoles connected to the internet.

Then they should choose a cheaper hobby, or buy less games. I never thought this argument carried any weight. If you can't afford to do something, don't do it. Same could be said for smoking, drinking, phones, cars, shopping, and other things.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Keep dreaming buddy. Gamestop's business model was doomed to fail eventually.

 

[Something Amyss]

It's not like You get physically hurt by not being able to buy used games, sorry if You feel that way.

I don't, nor did my expression come anywhere close to that. I'd like to know how that makes the effects in any way not negative.

hey, if PC gaming went under tomorrow, you wouldn't be physically hurt, so it's okay if it happens, right?

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not sure crusading is the right term, all that most publishers have done is either add a 10 dollar DLC pack for used buyers to play multiplayer, oh and a few press releases to make used buyers feel bad about themselves.

If, by a few press releases, you mean persistently blame piracy and used sales for non-existent financial problems for years, using the profit loss bogeyman to campaign against used sales and also to scare people into thinking DRM and stopping the used market is necessary, while using the same measures to placate investors who have been hit by the same fear, then yes.

But then, their systematic attack on the used market almost sounds like a crusade when you don't dismiss it as a "few press releases."

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Not everyone can afford to buy games new all the time.
Not everyone has high-speed internet.
Not everyone has their consoles connected to the internet.

Then they should choose a cheaper hobby, or buy less games. I never thought this argument carried any weight. If you can't afford to do something, don't do it. Same could be said for smoking, drinking, phones, cars, shopping, and other things.

So If I lived somewhere that couldn't get high speed internet or had a cap on my bandwidth it's my fault cause I can't afford it? Because that would be out of my control and something I have to deal with from the ISP, not due to lack of funds. Thankfully I don't have to deal with that but there are people who have capped ISPs, and gimped bandwidth speeds.

Also to the people who hate the sale of used game products, why can we do it legally on ebay and amazon with more then just games? No one else is so damn gung ho to stop it, the only people who are getting made about it now are game publishers (and they always blame used game sales when a game doesn't sale well which is almost hard to blame when they go by the first two weeks of sales, the game was just crap).

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

I'm not sure crusading is the right term, all that most publishers have done is either add a 10 dollar DLC pack for used buyers to play multiplayer, oh and a few press releases to make used buyers feel bad about themselves.

If, by a few press releases, you mean persistently blame piracy and used sales for non-existent financial problems for years, using the profit loss bogeyman to campaign against used sales and also to scare people into thinking DRM and stopping the used market is necessary, while using the same measures to placate investors who have been hit by the same fear, then yes.

But then, their systematic attack on the used market almost sounds like a crusade when you don't dismiss it as a "few press releases."

I like how they blame used game sales for poor sales on poorly reviewed games or releasing a game the day a bigger name game is coming out (Sega is releasing Rythem Thief R for the 3DS around the same time as the Final Fantasy Rythem game) and whine about used game sales or piracy. Yet if it's a big name game they will gladly brag about the sales after a week it came out. I never see publishers like Atlus get made at used game sales not giving them a lot of money (then again they don't print a lot of games so they don't have to worry because they always sell out ).

 

[CardinalPiggles]

So If I lived somewhere that couldn't get high speed internet or had a cap on my bandwidth it's my fault cause I can't afford it? Because that would be out of my control and something I have to deal with from the ISP, not due to lack of funds. Thankfully I don't have to deal with that but there are people who have capped ISPs, and gimped bandwidth speeds.

Also to the people who hate the sale of used game products, why can we do it legally on ebay and amazon with more then just games? No one else is so damn gung ho to stop it, the only people who are getting made about it now are game publishers (and they always blame used game sales when a game doesn't sale well which is almost hard to blame when they go by the first two weeks of sales, the game was just crap).

There is nowhere in the world that every single ISP has caps on downloads, some countries have ridiculously expensive ISP's but that goes back to my earlier point saying if you can't afford it, don't bother.

Also I have nothing at all against used game sales, because I buy used sometimes if it seems worth it, but saying not everyone can afford new games is such a bad argument because again, if you can't afford it, don't bother.

If you can afford a gaming PC, you can afford to buy games new, if you can afford to buy an Xbox, you can afford to buy games new. Other forms of media like books don't require anything else to work so the argument works in that case.

 

[Lord S. Binkleheimer]

I'm pretty sure Microsoft would be doing something similar to Steam then, should they go for a unabletosellusedgames model.
And like Steam, you'd probably just have to log onto their LIVE network and access your library or some such.

Maybe.

 

[Grunt_Man11]

Not everyone can afford to buy games new all the time.
Not everyone has high-speed internet.
Not everyone has their consoles connected to the internet.

Then they should choose a cheaper hobby, or buy less games. I never thought this argument carried any weight. If you can't afford to do something, don't do it. Same could be said for smoking, drinking, phones, cars, shopping, and other things.

Really? You using the "go tip a cow, you hick" argument?

"Can't let them filthy poor people play our games."

That's what you're saying, and it is what truly carries no weight. Way to act like the 1% there pal.

Reality check, get one.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Snip

As a PC gamer, it really doesn't bother me. I have a PS3, but I haven't really touched it since I built this beast.