GameStop CEO Says Next Xbox Won't Block Used Games

[harvz]

Piracy is illegal for one thing. Generally worth obeying the law considering the laws on piracy (not to stop it like SOPA but against copyright infringement) are pretty legit. Also a used sale represents a game already bought once new whilst a pirated game represents one copy being bought then being copied an infinite number of times. When someone buys something physical they have a right to what happens next. If they choose to sell it further down the road then that is their right. Whther it is harmful to the industry or not it is not aquaitable to piracy and to do so is absurd. Pirates dont pay for jack. They are scum. Parasites. You attack used gamers, who are legit consumers engaging in legal and rightful trade, yet defend pirates. Pirates are entitled, whiny douchebags who have no right to anything in gaming. To defend them is moronic. If I buy a car and then choose to sell it later then that money does not go to the person who made the car. However they have no right to that money because they sold the car. It is now mine and they have no right to it or any money made form it. The same is with games.

sorry for jumping in here. I think what the problem is here is not the pirates but used sales.

you say that used sales represent a resale (with no money going to devs, granted) but a pirated copy always represents a lost sale, this is completely wrong, well, the second half. A pirated copy can (and often does) represent something completely different.

1) leaked copies get counted as pirated copies, if you look at the top most pirated games, many were leaked before the release date. There are a sizable chunk of people who would love to get a start on the campaign or even just have the game installed on the computer before the release date hits. This can mean that they are still buying their copy and just got a pirated version
2) there are cases where games can't be bought legit/easily (example, I cant get the new syndicate or mortal kombat here without shipping).
3) multiplayer, a game with this will definitely not be accessible in a pirated copy, unless the dev is a major screw up.

the used sale also represents a loss of a/some possible DLC purchases as those who sell their game will have no use for them. Dont get me wrong, Pirates are the lowest of the low, but both are issues, the one that should be elevated is the one that has a huge (and legal) impact on devs while only profiting brick and mortar stores.

One last point, your car analogy is wrong, the dealer will often try to push you to get the more expensive car, they wont take you inside, tell you all the details of your new car and then, just before you sign say "Oh, did I mention that there's one of these cars, identical in every way except someone owned it for 6 days and decided he didn't want it so we can sell it to you for 5% less". That is what used game sales are, identical in every way to the consumer and they will often ask you at the register if you "accidentally" pick up a new copy.

 

[Treblaine]

Snip

Your games won't be on your hard drive, they will be on a cloud server somewhere. Unless you think you can fit all those games onto your hard drive and DVDs. I seriously doubt it. You may think you have enough space but between downloading games, downloading patches for those games, downloading DLC for those games, data from just browsing the internet, and OS updates your hard drive(s) will fill up faster than you think.
That's what they're trying to push for anyway. The "Almighty Cloud!" Right... I'd rather be responsible for my files instead of some other person I don't know. Thank you very much.

"Oh Valve had their PSN moment blah blah blah," whatever. They got lucky. No system is flawless. They'll push for people to use their cloud servers and that's when they'll get hit. The most venerable are the one's who feel the most secure.

Let's address the issue that not having a high speed internet causes. Keep in mind that in addition to people who can't afford it, there is a large number of people who just can't get it due to lack of availability. They can afford it, but no one is selling it.
(Side-note: Satellite internet sucks worse than dial-up. I speak from experience.)

I told this little story on the comments to Jim Sterlin's video where he completely gushed over digital distribution and overlooked it's shortcomings.
The 4.0 patch to World of Warcraft was a little over 1 gig in size. It took me two days to download! Here's the scary part, that was before I had to downgrade to 1.5 DSL because I moved.

Now imagine trying to download a full game like Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, or Shogun: Total War 2. These games range from around 6 gigs in size to around 32 gigs in size.

Streaming isn't the answer either. It's been 10 years and it hasn't shown any improvement that I can see. Just look at YouTube. They have a lot of users, but so does Steam. I don't relish the idea of my game being constantly interrupted by a dotted circle.

I'm not saying that digital distribution should be abolished. Not at all, I won't deny the good it's done when it comes to indie developers. I'm saying that it shouldn't be the only option.

There is nothing wrong with used games. Game publishers just want to gouge us with game prices. The reason used sales are up is because new is too expensive for a significant number of people. If they're that worried over it, then try to push a bit of regulation that states that a game store must share the profits from used sales with the publisher.
Better yet, open up their own stores and sell used games themselves, or *gasp* create an Amazon-ish service and sell used games themselves. Fighting fire with fire, what a novel concept!
Don't need high speed internet to put in mailing information.

Also, what the hell is wrong with wanting things to be like "pick up and play like the N64 days"? Seriously, what's so great about putting in a password just to play a game? It's understandable for a online-centric game like an MMO, but not for an offline single-player game. Don't give me that "your Xbox requires you to log on" nonsense because you're wrong... kind of. My Xbox logs on to my profile automatically, no password input required at all. (It's even instant due to being offline.)

This might be a petty complain, but having to constantly write down and remember password after password is annoying.

"Hey let's shoot some hoops?" ENTER PASSWORD
"I'll grab a beer out of the fridge?" ENTER PASSWORD
"Walking the dog." ENTER PASSWORD
"I'm going to take a shower." ENTER PASSWORD
"Hitting the sack." ENTER PASSWORD
"Slitting my wrists in frustration!" ENTER PASSWORD
"F***!!!!!!" ENTER PASSWORD
*facedesk*...... ENTER PASSWORD

Finally, shut up Yoda! You failed to see the Sith right under your nose before it was too late. He even kicked your butt. Talk about failing you little green turd. Jedi Master, my ass.

Nope. Your games WILL be on your hard drive. Why would anyone stream the data content in when hard drive capacity is so cheap? I HAVE got ALL of my games on my £50 hard drive, like about 50 of them at 10GB on average per game that's only 500GB of a 1TB capacity drive. And TODAY, a 1TB drive isn't even the biggest you can get. It doesn't fill up. So I'll ignore your "Almighty cloud" argument because it ain't happening.


""Oh Valve had their PSN moment blah blah blah," whatever. They got lucky."

Prove it.


"No system is flawless."

I never said Valve was, Steam had an intrusion but it was contained where they learned and pursued the intruders under he law. It was the equivalent of a mini-van ram raiding Fort Knox and a Division of the US Marine Corps responding in force. The PSN Debacle was the same Mini-van ram raid only suddenly discovering their security guards were all legally blind! That's how much they dropped the ball on PSN.

I've addressed internet availability, you can take your console to a gaming cafe to download games. If you are in a part of the world where you can't even find an internet cafe then you probably can't even find a store that sells boxed copies of video games either. Really, does the industry have to kowtow to the lowest common denominator of some lumberjack in the mountains who can't download his games but COULD have a disc be brought by via a helicopter airlift or something. If you can travel to a store to buy a game disc, you can travel to a place with high speed internet.

Do you have anything better than an unnamed and still anonymous source of this 1gigabyte = 4 days downloading? What YEAR was this because if it was 2005 then that's not exactly relevant as the pace of technology doesn't stand still. The rate they describe (assuming no exageration) is a mind bogglingly slow 3kilobytes per second. Three. That was slow in 1989. Either he is lying or something went wrong. That's like objecting to using paper mail because a package took 2 years to deliver... most likely it was a cock up and the package was lost and then found again. Even if this was accurate and has yet to be rectified and will NEVER be fixed, the internet-cafe scenario applies. Internet service around the world is improving all the time, phone lines have been ubiquitous and now we are all moving to mobile phones these phonelines can be converted 100% to broadband.

"There is nothing wrong with used games."

Apart from all the problems I've listed, and you have ignored. You haven't even refuted what I have said.
Particularly the VERY MECHANISM that that allows used games is bad, Like:
-developers only getting 10-30% of list-price with disc retail model, developers getting 70-90% of list-price with Digital Download
-Lower prices with price cuts, money goes to developer. While reselling old games ZERO money goes the developer
-Lower prices from the very start with digital downloads by entirely cutting out the retail stores, yes they can just die, but the gamers and game developers live!

You can't just "open a service" that competes with amazon on hardware, they have cornered the market, they own the most efficient distribution channels. The only way to compete is digitally, expand Xbox Live Arcade to selling the mega-budget games, leverage how they can directly sell to people as soon as they turn on their console.

"Also, what the hell is wrong with wanting things to be like "pick up and play like the N64 days"?"

I don't know, were you even alive in 1997? I was and I remember distinctly a very awful aspect of that time, the PRICE of those cartridges. £55 in 1997. That's the equivalent, today, of paying $120 per game. You PAID for that convenience and it wasn't worth it. You seem to only be enjoying the best that lasts this way down not the costs at the start and the WORST part of that huge price? Developers only got a tiny fraction of the vast sum I forked over. Not very fair. There is a cheaper, fairer and more convenient way. It's called: click and play.

On my computer, once it's booted from sleep in about 10 seconds to launch a game all I need to do is look at the list of all my games and double click on the icon I want. Much cheaper per game and MUCH more convenient. Console gamers could have this too if they weren't such luddites resisting progress with ignorant naysaying.

You Do NOT need to put in your password every time with steam. You can set steam to save your password or auto-login on boot or just SAY logged in every time you set your computer to sleep. The SAME THING would work with a console and does already. In fact, whatever Xbox has today could be applied with digital downloads.

It seems like you have never used steam as you don't seem to be aware of:
-offline mode
-ability to say logged in offline or entering sleep mode
-the automatic logging in on boot with saved password

Also, WELCOME TO 2012! if you don't like having to remember passwords then I suggest you give up on being a part of electronic entertainment and take up tennis or something. This is modern life, remembering passwords. The good news is if you remember your password then even if your entire house burns down you haven't lost a single game. Not one. You can write down you passwords if you like, just keep them very VERY safe and in a non-obvious form.

"Finally, shut up Yoda... Sith even kicked your butt."

Referencing prequel trilogy in anything other than a dismissive sense of how they bastardised the original trilogy: -9001 nerd points.

 

[Treblaine]

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).

Right. They're sticking with it. Because they can still sell used 360 games.

You keep missing the point. In order to make up the money that they got from a pre-owned game, Gamestop would need to sell approximately 30 new copies of that same game instead of one used copy. That means that in order to justify keeping the next Xbox around in their stores, that console would need to be 30 times more popular than the 360 - in other words, it would need to be bought by 1.5 billion people.

Normally I dont care whether you have evidence or not because sound logic usually makes sense. Here however with figures evidence is required. 30 new=1 used? I dont believe that. And I wasnt talking about the 360 I was saying if they either dont sell any used copies but still sell the new stuff or dont sell any of the new stuff they will go for the former option because they are at least making money from those sales. You drew the conclusion out of nowhere that I was talking about 360 sales.

Profit margin on a new game - approximately $1.50. Profit on a used game - $45 (buying it at $10, selling it for $55).

And once again, you're missing the fact that there are things they could sell instead with a better profit margin than all new games.

That's not a source. That's just repeating what you originally said in a different way. I have a source to contradict you:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/02/anatomy-of-a-60-dollar-video-game.html

$15... not $1.50 retail mark up. Actually more like $22 with the $7 returns.

Cutting out the retailer's markup and having the platform licencing fee be contiguous with selling the game on Xbox Live Arcade or similar service means you could pay only $34 for a game and the people who MAKE the console and MAKE the game will get the exact same amount of money per game. Retailers don't add anything to the game experience. Hell, let's make it $40, $28 to the publishers/developers, $12 to the console manufacturer. $20 saving to the customer. Everyone who matters gets more or pays less!

And why are we fighting to keep allowing gamestop to keep doing bullshit like buying used games for $10 and selling them on for $55?!?! A 5 fold markup. That helps no one but a bloody shop that has ZERO part in the actual design and development of games nor even their enjoyment. Just cut these retailers ENTIRELY out of the loop! Direct sales between developers and consumers via the internet.

You may say it's perfectly legal to resell a game. True. It's also perfectly legal to sell a digital copy directly that cannot be resold.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

And why are we fighting to keep allowing gamestop to keep doing bullshit like buying used games for $10 and selling them on for $55?!?! A 5 fold markup. That helps no one but a bloody shop that has ZERO part in the actual design and development of games nor even their enjoyment. Just cut these retailers ENTIRELY out of the loop! Direct sales between developers and consumers via the internet.

The problem here is that Gamestop has a monopoly on used games sales. Hopefully with Best Buy getting into it, they'll start selling their used games at a lower rate, thus forcing Gamestop to do the same in order to keep up. After-all, why would I buy a used game for $55 at Gamestop if I can buy the same game for $40 at Best Buy?

Only time will tell, but the bottom line is that Gamestop is the reason why Monopoly laws exist. Gamestop would never have the ability to charge $55 for used games if they had competition.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Still rumours and still a pants on head retarded idea for Microsoft to do and an excellent chance for Nintendo and Sony to fuck them over in the next console generation if it proves true.

 

[madster11]

All gamestop need to do if the next generation of xbox's stop used sales is buy every single unit of the new console they possibly can, and then order all of the next batch of production for 3 months.
This would cost them a lot of money.

They then do NOT sell any of the xbox's. They burn the fucking things if they have to.
This would cost them even more money.


It would also mean nobody buys any games published for the next xbox for a few months, which would mean nobody would develop games for it in the future, and as such gamestop will have completely fucking ruined the new xbox and cost microsoft billions upon billions of dollars.

Meanwhile, gamestop make the money back when Sony give them a 10% discount on the next console over everyone else, while literally being unable to stop laughing their asses off at microsofts profit margin getting smaller and smaller every day nobody can get the new xbox console.

 

[Spygon]

You're the CEO of GameStop.

You're not the one actually MAKING it!

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

Yes, a whole hell of a lot of ^this^

Seriously? why even bother saying it if its nothing more than a perdiction based on speculation.

Excatly so why are we even listening to the xbox 360 will block used games.It was a prediction made with speculation and i dont even know why we are taking the rumor seriously to be honest.

 

[DANEgerous]

Am i the only one who when they hear "anti-used game technology" It sound like "Please hack us and pirate all our game to bypass this bullshit!" just like so many do with games that have overbearing DRM?

 

[Treblaine]

And why are we fighting to keep allowing gamestop to keep doing bullshit like buying used games for $10 and selling them on for $55?!?! A 5 fold markup. That helps no one but a bloody shop that has ZERO part in the actual design and development of games nor even their enjoyment. Just cut these retailers ENTIRELY out of the loop! Direct sales between developers and consumers via the internet.

The problem here is that Gamestop has a monopoly on used games sales. Hopefully with Best Buy getting into it, they'll start selling their used games at a lower rate, thus forcing Gamestop to do the same in order to keep up. After-all, why would I buy a used game for $55 at Gamestop if I can buy the same game for $40 at Best Buy?

Only time will tell, but the bottom line is that Gamestop is the reason why Monopoly laws exist. Gamestop would never have the ability to charge $55 for used games if they had competition.

Well there is still the problem when the actual people who MAKE the game only get $27 out of every $60 you spend even when buying new.

"why would I buy a used game for $55 at Gamestop if I can buy the same game for $40 at Best Buy?"

Why would you buy used when you could buy new - via digital download - for $40? That's the deal with Witcher 2 on PC and so many other games. Or even 50-75% off on sales as seen frequently on Steam GoG.com and iOS.

When I buy a game I COMMIT. I don't plan on getting rid of it as soon as possible before it devalues in price. And if I want to try then Xbox Live Arcade has set the precedent that every game must have a demo.

It seem many console-only gamers are paranoid that games can only be affordable if they have the option to sell their games and buy others cheaper as used. But this is unsustainable as a widespread practice. What IS sustainable is what is seen in practice with established digital download services with:
-start with a lower price
-Higher return to the publisher/developer from that price
-frequent and significant sales
-soft funding with premium non-essential DLC like Hats in Hat Fortress.

 

[Tanakh]

That's not a source. That's just repeating what you originally said in a different way. I have a source to contradict you:

$15... not $1.50 retail mark up. Actually more like $22 with the $7 returns.

Cutting out the retailer's markup and having the platform licencing fee be contiguous with selling the game on Xbox Live Arcade or similar service means you could pay only $34 for a game and the people who MAKE the console and MAKE the game will get the exact same amount of money per game. Retailers don't add anything to the game experience. Hell, let's make it $40, $28 to the publishers/developers, $12 to the console manufacturer. $20 saving to the customer. Everyone who matters gets more or pays less!

And why are we fighting to keep allowing gamestop to keep doing bullshit like buying used games for $10 and selling them on for $55?!?! A 5 fold markup. That helps no one but a bloody shop that has ZERO part in the actual design and development of games nor even their enjoyment. Just cut these retailers ENTIRELY out of the loop! Direct sales between developers and consumers via the internet.

You may say it's perfectly legal to resell a game. True. It's also perfectly legal to sell a digital copy directly that cannot be resold.

Thanks for that post, I wanted to know that precise info for years now. It baffles me how people say Gamestop "needs used games to survive" when currently they are making more net profits than any publisher or developer sans Activision.

 

[CapitalistPig]

physical copies are becoming an obsolete industry. Sure, we're still a generation or two off from it, but its gonna happen eventually. The physical gaming industry should be pushing for digital sales because that's how its gonna be one day. Besides its all relative. Sure they have $1.2 billion in sales of used games but thats relative to the amount of physical game copies sold and resold. If you don't have to spend the cost to make physical copies, The team to adapt the digital copy to a physical disc, the mark up at retail, then entire sectors of the rising costs of games would be cut right out. I'd be of the opinion digital copies will even push indie games back into the fore front since the cost to produce would go down. Hell, we wouldn't even need a physical store anymore, just warehouses to buy console and related console gear mailed to your door and a one stop shop website to run the whole thing. Leave it to top dogs to push back progress to make a buck. As a compromise we could sell digital key codes back and forth? Thats a pretty simple system to implement. And if people are all so pissy cause they want to beat a game and sell it back in three days then maybe that's an industry to be filled? can anyone say digital game rental service? buy the licence for a week for $5. only a suggestion.

 

[CapitalistPig]

You're the CEO of GameStop.

You're not the one actually MAKING it!

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

Yes, a whole hell of a lot of ^this^

Seriously? why even bother saying it if its nothing more than a perdiction based on speculation.

Excatly so why are we even listening to the xbox 360 will block used games.It was a prediction made with speculation and i dont even know why we are taking the rumor seriously to be honest.

I think gamestop is just salty (pissed off) cause they don't know how to be as successful as steam. They're holding their "good relationship" with microsoft and sony over our heads to say, we could screw you but don't worry we won't (even though we are anyway.)

**Solve media= face the music. I think its appropriate for gamestop.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

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.

He does have a valid argument. If people can't afford to buy games, they shouldn't be buying games and then complaining about how much games cost, because they are on a small budget.

I for one don't buy used, because I like my games to have everything they come with. The only time I buy used is if I buy off a friend because I know they don't treat their games and boxes like shit and everything will be there and intact.

I probably could afford more games if I bought used, but I like to have everything nice and neat, so I wait to pay the big bucks and I don't complain, because it is silly to do that with a want.

And what about those it does bother? Are they just SoL? Do people who live on a budget deserve nothing? Do people who live in a rural area deserve nothing?

I understand about the not having a fast and non-capped internet connection, and the problem that DD has when it comes to being able to play games not connected. I hate that it seems we are moving more and more to DD. Of course it wouldn't hurt me since I have a good connection and all, but I do have hard drive space issues(Xbox360), and of course I do get pissed every time I am at a person's house that doesn't have good internet, so I can't play my indie games on my 360. Other than that the only reason I don't like DD, is that I like having physical copies.

But really, if the used game market dried up and I could only buy new, it wouldn't effect me.

Now to my big point about that last comment of yours that I quoted:

Seriously, if you don't have the budget to buy new games and then you find that it is the only market since the used market dried up, you really are shit out of luck to keep buying as many games as you did when you could buy used.

Basically, your hobby got more expensive. If that means that you will have to save up and make fewer game purchases, then that is what you will have to do. The money part of your argument is invalid because you used the word "deserve".

Games are a "want" product, people can live without playing games, so if you can't afford them, you can't afford them. It is a privilege to be able to afford to play games. After you pay for all your needs, if you can't pay for expensive games, then yes, you are shit out of luck.

And finally, even though I don't like that they are pushing to a point where if you don't have a connection, you can't play games, I'm not going to argue on the point that people deserve to have that ability. It is the company's product and if they want to do it they can. On that front, the only thing I can say to them is that they will see that they will be losing a great deal of money from the large amounts of single players, bad to no connection players.

 

[Beautiful End]

AS B.S.-ish as this sounds, coming from, I guess, my superior, it's kinda obvious that the next gen. consoles are not gonna have that anti-used game feature.

First of all, this would mean your game would only play on one console. So what if you wanna let someone borrow it? What if your game sucks? You can't force people to possess an item forever. Come on, it's not like they're our kids.

Second, I have nothing against used games, especially PS3 used games because they're, for the most part, in pristine condition. But if they really wanted to alienate the used market, digital copies of games are the way to go.
The corollary of this would be that digital games don't sell that well. No, no, wait! Before you all point your fingers at Steam and stuff, I'm talking about how it doesn't sell well with the average customer. I've talked to tons of customers, families for the most part, who don't play online or don't even have an internet connection at home. This technology is still pretty foreign to them. They prefer to go to the store, buy the pretty game for their kids and be done with it. They don't wanna go online, buy some credits/pull out their credit card, choose a non-refundable game that their kid might like, buy it and then figure out how to play it. It's pretty simple, the process, but some people just don't wanna go through that. They just wanna pop in the disk and boom. Done. Myself included. I buy some digital games, but for the most part, I rather have the hard copy of the game with me.
For better or worse, we're still not there yet.

Third, they do get a profit of the used sales. Come on, you'd think that if they were milking Microsoft or Sony or whatever for all they're worth, they would just sit idly by and reply with a pout and a shrug? Hell, no! These are big corporations that could do without GameStop! If Microsoft sold their games at the top of Mt. Doom, people would still go buy a CoD Hardened Edition there. They just don't get all the profit, which is why some developers are complaining, which is understandable, of course. But it's also inevitable, the used games' sale. The way I see it, if they can get someone to buy that one crappy game they released years ago used for 5 bucks, whatever profit you get is always welcomed.

Finally, it's marketing. GameStop's job is to go all "Oooooh! Look at this pretty game that you know you're gonna get!". Again, not a bad thing, for the most part. Otherwise, I would have never found out they're bringing Xenoblade Chronicles over here. Without GameStop, those companies don't have a direct way to reach all customers. Parents would never know Mario Party 9 is already out. Mothers would wander Wal-Mart aimlessly looking for that one game their kid mentioned once and he wants for his birthday. I'm not saying GameStop is a lifesaver and our lord and savior. No, no. It's just a way to reach all kinds of customers. It's like the game's central due to lack or proper competitors out there (Best Buy could get there, but they don't specialize in games the way GameStop does).

tl;dr. I just don't think that's possible. It would affect more people that those who would benefit from it...somehow.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Well there is still the problem when the actual people who MAKE the game only get $27 out of every $60 you spend even when buying new.

"why would I buy a used game for $55 at Gamestop if I can buy the same game for $40 at Best Buy?"

Why would you buy used when you could buy new - via digital download - for $40? That's the deal with Witcher 2 on PC and so many other games. Or even 50-75% off on sales as seen frequently on Steam GoG.com and iOS.

When I buy a game I COMMIT. I don't plan on getting rid of it as soon as possible before it devalues in price. And if I want to try then Xbox Live Arcade has set the precedent that every game must have a demo.

It seem many console-only gamers are paranoid that games can only be affordable if they have the option to sell their games and buy others cheaper as used. But this is unsustainable as a widespread practice. What IS sustainable is what is seen in practice with established digital download services with:
-start with a lower price
-Higher return to the publisher/developer from that price
-frequent and significant sales
-soft funding with premium non-essential DLC like Hats in Hat Fortress.

Glad to see you aren't wrong on only ONE topic.
"Why would you buy used when you could buy new - via digital download"
Because some people don't have access to online purchasing, and even among those that do, many prefer to have a physical object they can store, not a nebulous file that they can lose access to
"...on PC..." Well, here we have the problem that was mentioned on the other thread... Not everyone plays games on the pc. If you don't remember why that is, check my posts again, along with many, many others in said thread.
"Xbox Live Arcade has set the precedent that every game must have a demo"
XBLA titles do. But not the games you buy in the store, which is what you are discussing. Remember to focus, or else you lose credibility and cause others to question your faculties. And again, demo's are DLC, and not everyone has access to the internet.
"...sell their games and buy others cheaper as used. But this is unsustainable as a widespread practice"
Ok, I can't even be nice about this. This statement is ridiculous, and makes you appear so for having said it. If it isn't sustainable, then why is it a longstanding, profitable industry? Did you mean to say that it can't be sustained FOREVER? Because it's a pretty wide-spread practice already. Don't confuse supposition with a contradiction of blatant fact. It makes you appear delusional

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

double post because the new anti-spam device is balls, and whoever put it in place is a chucklefucking moron

Why would you intentionally make your site LESS appealing?

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

And yes, a used game buyer is exactly the same as a pirate.

By that logic, half price books and every pawn shop in existence are guilty of banditry

 

[Gnoekeos]

GameStop CEO Says Next Xbox Won't Block Used Games

The CEO of GameStop predicts that Microsoft's next console won't block used game sales because the preowned market is too important to the health of the industry.

The rumor went up in January that Microsoft's next game console will feature some sort of "anti-used game" technology [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/115490-Rumor-Next-Xbox-Will-Feature-Blu-ray-Anti-Used-Games-System] to help combat the grievous losses suffered by the videogame industry at the hands of people who like to help finance the purchase of new games by trading in their old ones. It struck me as kind of a crazy idea and it turns out that I'm not alone in that feeling, although GameStop CEO Paul Raines phrased it a little more gently, telling investors that it's "unlikely" to happen.

Implying that he's already spoken to Microsoft on the matter, he said that Microsoft and Sony both "have great relationships with us" and noted that used games sales "have a residual value."

"Remember that GameStop generates $1.2 billion of trade credits around the world with our used game model," he said. "So, consider taking used games out of that, you'd have to find new ways to sell the games."

Cowan & Company analyst Doug Creutz echoed Raines' position, dismissing [http://www.develop-online.net/news/40295/Analyst-Xbox-720-could-launch-fall-2013] suggestions that the new Xbox could be a disc-free console. "We believe a digital-only next-gen Xbox is unlikely given risks to both Microsoft's market share and the gaming ecosystem as a whole from any attempt to kill used games," he wrote in a research note. "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 and speed up new console adoption, which would be bullish for software publishers."

Source: Develop [http://www.develop-online.net/news/40297/Next-Xbox-wont-block-used-games-says-retail-boss]


Permalink

I was going to explain what the problem is with used game sales but I'm pretty sure that has been covered already so I'll just say a much better reason Microsoft wouldn't bother blocking used games is that they just needs to sell the Xbox. Once they've done that and you're paying for the gold account and have spent enough money on that (and any other digital products that they don't have to physically replenish) to cover the production costs and materials of the unit they could careless where you got the games you're playing. If you're paying for a gold account on a used xbox that's all the better for them.