Is Gamestop really to blame ?

[sanquin]

Ah the used games debate again, and big companies trying to blame it on used games sales and the stores that push/sell them. While I think it's wrong to PUSH used games on customers, selling them is just...normal imo.

Here is a video that explains it far better than I ever could. It's from a guy that works in the industry.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

Well, that would mean that publishers should in fact be eager to sell these pre-order bonuses. As it would mean free advertisement on top of it; meaning they are actually getting more in trade for this content than they are actually selling it for. Paying me to advertise MY product in exchange for a dinky exclusive side mission/skin I can later sell as DLC? SOLD! Where is the downside exactly? The 20 hours or so it takes for my devs to whip something up?

Well, I'm not so sure it's fair. Most of the shops would do this without payment. Selling your product is their business after all.
I see your point tho'. I just think Gamestop and all other retailers are the "third man", and not having them would be for the better.

As someone who has worked in a supermarket for 6 months, I guarantee you that shops don't do that for free.
There are always shelves reserved for those who pay for product placement. The shelf on your eye height and the one below are being bought. If you don't pay the store, you get a lower shelf.

Shops that don't have this practice are few and rather so small that they distributor doesn't care about them.

Gaming companies compete with each other not only over costumers, but also over the product placement. It's same for everything that sells. But publisher seem to be either too retarded to understand that or they simply know they can brainwash the costumer and push the blame on GS and other retails when their mediocre games with bought reviews don't sell well.

GS has to place some products on the better shelves, there is no avoiding it. So why wouldn't they do it for the one who is willing to give them some extra?

GS isn't forcing publisher on anything. The market is.
If we remove used games, games won't drop in price. There is no used games market on the PC and I don't see lower prices for games.
Hell, there is no licencing and I see almost the same prices as on consoles. And guess who picks the prices.

This is capitalism. Publisher want to make as much money as possible. They won't give up some of their potential profit because of good will. They won't lower their prices after they have no competition. Used games are competing against new games. Removing used games could even have a negative impact on the prices because the publisher could increase the price. You won't have a choice of buying used. And since we know that the average game can't wait for even a day to buy the game, they will still buy it even at $70.

GS does have the power to influence publisher. They can stop selling EA games for example. But lets be honest here. If GS stops selling EA and Activision games, they will go under. And I doubt that GS would want to hurt EA at the price of going bankrupt.

 

[Requia]

Well I can't wait to see the legal battles Microsoft are going to be in when the Xbone is released.PC games to my knowledge are mostly digital unlike console games so the used game market for consoles is a free market that corporate greed can't control.But what happens when Gamestop and the used game marktet is put out of business and the game developers/publishers who bitched about them find out it has'nt changed a damn thing?Do you honestly think they won't find a new scapegoat for their uncontrollable bloat that's making them sink?

Who knows they might target the PC market next or retailers and would claim they are stealing money that THEY deserve.Greed is a insatiable beast and it is ruining the game industry.

There can't be any legal battles that will stick. Steam doesn't allow you to resell physical copies of third-party games at all. Germany are the only country to have challenged them on that (well also the EU) and they haven't succeeded yet. By all accounts we've heard so far, the Microsoft system is going to be far more lenient than the Steam system

Uh, yes there can, First Sale Doctrine in the US is the *result* of lawsuits (congress backing it came later). The tricky part is getting enough harm (in a legal sense, which mostly means lost money) to justify the lawsuit (class action won't work because you can't deomnstrate who would and wouldn't have wanted to sell their game). But if the last rumor on used games is true, that only people who agree to give MS a cut of the sale can be a used game retailer, then the exact same retailers making the deal can sue for all the money they turn over to MS.

 

[BrotherRool]

Uh, yes there can, First Sale Doctrine in the US is the *result* of lawsuits (congress backing it came later). The tricky part is getting enough harm (in a legal sense, which mostly means lost money) to justify the lawsuit (class action won't work because you can't deomnstrate who would and wouldn't have wanted to sell their game). But if the last rumor on used games is true, that only people who agree to give MS a cut of the sale can be a used game retailer, then the exact same retailers making the deal can sue for all the money they turn over to MS.

Then why haven't people sued Valve for doing it for years or Blizzard or Origin? Germany/the EU is but I haven't seen anyone build up a case in the US. And what they're doing is a bigger violation

 

[Requia]

Uh, yes there can, First Sale Doctrine in the US is the *result* of lawsuits (congress backing it came later). The tricky part is getting enough harm (in a legal sense, which mostly means lost money) to justify the lawsuit (class action won't work because you can't deomnstrate who would and wouldn't have wanted to sell their game). But if the last rumor on used games is true, that only people who agree to give MS a cut of the sale can be a used game retailer, then the exact same retailers making the deal can sue for all the money they turn over to MS.

Then why haven't people sued Valve for doing it for years or Blizzard or Origin? Germany/the EU is but I haven't seen anyone build up a case in the US. And what they're doing is a bigger violation

Please actually read my posts before responding.

 

[nevarran]

As someone who has worked in a supermarket for 6 months, I guarantee you that shops don't do that for free.

Well, I'll take your word for it then. Truth is, I never thought much about how it works. I made sense to me, that you put the product with the biggest selling potential to your best shelves. But then again, it may sell well even from your basement, so... I don't know.

I'll disagree with you on the game prices. Just because the used games are not the only option.
I've never bought a used game, yet I rarely pay full price for games.
I purchased Borderlands 2 for 14 buck a few weeks ago. There's a pre-order for Total War Rome II on amazon.co.uk for 35 euro. There's Alan Wake for 3 bucks on Steam. And tons of other offers flying around the net, and I don't think the used games are the reason for their existence.
Granted, I'm a patient gamer and I don't feel the need to play every game on day 1. But that's the same with used games, you can buy a used game during the first days of the release, right?

 

[BrotherRool]

Please actually read my posts before responding.

Now I'm even more confused, why did you respond to me saying 'you can't do this' with a post that said 'I disagree. You can't do this?' Did you think I meant that legally it was impossible? Because I was talking about practical

 

[mavkiel]

Yes gamestop is to blame. Its a barnacle on the side of every other retailer not to mention publisher.

Trading in games is essentially legal piracy. Multiple people get the full enjoyment of a product, and the people who made the game, or are actually trying to sell new ones get screwed. Take a hard look at gamestop, most of their revenues come from used games that *deny* the publisher any profits.

Now before people start throwing out comparisons of used book sales or cars.. They don't fit.

Books - If you had a bookstore in every mall that made its primary focus trading in used books, we might have a similar issue. The shear numbers of gamestop is killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Furthermore, the used book industry is undergoing its own revolution, with invention of ebooks.

Cars - Used cars are just that, used. People are willing to pay a premium in order to ensure their car is in perfect working order. For a used game? An old one is just as good as a new. Baring scratches.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Well, we know two things:

1) Publishers get no cut of Used Game sales
2) Retailers get a very small cut of New Game sales

It is logically impossible for Gamestop or any Used Game entity, to not shoulder at least some of the blame; at the very least half of it. But at the same time, discounting the publisher's involvement and pinning the blame solely on Gamestop is foolish.

Considering that there have always been major retailer monoliths (Walmart) who don't fleece Used Games that the publishers could sell to this whole time (and prevent arbitrage via supply contracting), I am not inclined to feel sorry for them when they bed the people they supposedly hate.

In the end, it does not matter who the consumer blames because they are going to pay for it all the same.
The shift to service-only is a cost to the consumer. Always-Online is a cost. This is the future the publishers want whether you like it or not.

And it is for that reason I am glad I am not buying another console or doing business with those companies anymore.

 

[Requia]

Please actually read my posts before responding.

Now I'm even more confused, why did you respond to me saying 'you can't do this' with a post that said 'I disagree. You can't do this?' Did you think I meant that legally it was impossible? Because I was talking about practical

You asked **why** it hadn't already happened, I discussed why in the original post, I even bolded it for you the second time.

 

[J Tyran]

So let me get this straight...you are blaming Gamestop for people trading in games?

You can certainly blame companies like GameStop for telling consumers that come to the desk with a new copy of a game "hey why don't you get used one instead?" though.

 

[Negatempest]

What Microsoft and Sony are not telling you is that Gamestop/EB games have existed since the ps1 existed. So if gamestop is "responisble" for Microsoft's choices than Gamestop is also the reason the ps2 library is so big and varied....oh wait gamestop isn't responsible for that.

Fact IS you can go way back to Microsoft's past and see so much BS "**** the customer" practices that seeing and hearing Microsoft blame used games for their not so new "**** the customer" practice it is just not that surprising. What is funny is seeing "loyal" customers back this up. Kinda sad really.

Long story short, Microsoft has been screwing over customer rights for years prior to the xbox and it should never be just accepted and should always be challenged.

 

[Colt47]

My hypothesis on the route the game industry has taken in the western world is that publishers have decided the easiest way to make money is to depend on front loaded sales models powered by marketing, so they have been green lighting projects like Remember Me, Tomb Raider, Uncharted, etc, that are linear and don't have as much replay-ability as older games in previous eras, but have a strong "cinema" style flavor. The early adopters buy the game, play through it in a week, and then go and get money back from GameStop or Best Buy. Then the next consumer comes in and picks up the "like new" game since it is slightly cheaper and still has all the books intact.

Then the publisher gets angry because for some reason there is this sudden surge of used copies of their purposely engineered short lived cinema game, and are throwing tantrums because "consumers shouldn't be able to do that to me!"

My answer to the publishers: Then don't publish games that perpetuate a model you don't want? It's not like there are a whole lot of people turning in copies of Skyrim: Some people are on their 10+ playthrough on that. Also it seems like publishers haven't realized that the preorder model looks good on paper, but is designed to work against them and for the used game economy, since people are more likely to turn in a preordered game to a store than a game they had the chance to rent or see for themselves via some other means.

 

[Colt47]

In contrast, look at Nintendo. They have never complained about used games, and they published the ten best selling games ever.

as of summer of last year they had 3 of the top 10, Actilizard has more.

1. Over $10 billion ? "World of Warcraft" (2004)
2. $1.5 billion? "Call of Duty: Black Ops" (2010)
3. $1.4 billion ? "Mario Kart" for Wii (2008)
4. $1.35 billion ? "Grand Theft Auto 4" (2008)
5. $1.25 billion ? "Wii Play" (2006)
6. $1.2 billion ? "New Super Mario Bros" (2006)
7. $850 million ? "Gran Turismo 3" (2001)
8. $780 million ? "Modern Warfare 2" (2009)
9. $740 million ? "The Sims" (2000)
10. $700 million ? "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare" (2007)

And one of those they just got because they sold so many systems that came with it.

Where did you get these figures? I got mine from vgchartz.
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/
Ah, I have found that I am wrong. Those charts do not combine sales on all platforms. Adjusting for that, "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3" is in the number 6 spot. So there is at least one game in the top ten that Nintendo didn't publish,

Eh, your point still stands, though. Nintendo games tend to have good replay value, so people keep them longer and don't often turn them in to used game stores until much further from the launch date. Really can't say the same for Tomb Raider, Uncharted, Bioshock Infinite, etc.

 

[MetalDooley]

Take a hard look at gamestop, most of their revenues come from used games that *deny* the publisher any profits.

You realise that the profit margin on new games is ridiculously low right?It's been estimated that retailers make between $2-$4 profit on every new sale so it's no wonder that places like Gamestop push used sales so heavily.Maybe if publishers weren't being so greedy to begin with then GS would promote new sales more

Don't get me wrong I don't particularly like GS but publishers have had a big hand in creating this problem for themselves

 

[Lovely Mixture]

I don't see how Gamestop is the problem.
People would do this anyway, Gamestop is merely an outlet. If people sold their games on ebay, wouldn't that be the same thing?

I don't pay full price for games unless
1. They're under $40 and look to have good replay value.
2. I'm really excited and/or it's part of a pre-established series

My friend bought me a used copy of Dark Souls. I liked it so much that I bought the PC version to support the developer and get it on another platform, and I'm going to get Dark Souls II. I'm pre-ordering Dragon's Crown because I like the director's style of games.

I am critical of Gamestop for things, but the used game market is not one of them. I don't see how giving your custoe

The Xbox One just exacerbates the problems that can occur with consoles (the PS4 does as well, but less so).

Is Gamestop to blame for why MS(and possibly Sony) are implementing used games DRM

Sony has flat out said that they won't do that.

 

[Colt47]

I don't see how Gamestop is the problem.
People would do this anyway, Gamestop is merely an outlet. If people sold their games on ebay, wouldn't that be the same thing?

I don't pay full price for games unless
1. They're under $40 and look to have good replay value.
2. I'm really excited and/or it's part of a pre-established series

My friend bought me a used copy of Dark Souls. I liked it so much that I bought the PC version to support the developer and get it on another platform, and I'm going to get Dark Souls II. I'm pre-ordering Dragon's Crown because I like the director's style of games.

I am critical of Gamestop for things, but the used game market is not one of them.

The Xbox One just exacerbates the problems that can occur with consoles (the PS4 does as well, but less so).

If anything the used game market is more of a reaction to publishers trying to expand the audience for game titles to people who have little to no interest in certain genres of games. The only thing GameStop is guilty of is exacerbating the issue via blind faith pre-sales in order to expand their profit margins (and with the X-box One, attempting to kill off E-bay and Amazon used game sales by forcing a bar code scanner scheme to detach titles from peoples Xbone accounts.)

 

[Lovely Mixture]

If anything the used game market is more of a reaction to publishers trying to expand the audience for game titles to people who have little to no interest in certain genres of games. The only thing GameStop is guilty of is exacerbating the issue via blind faith pre-sales in order to expand their profit margins (and with the X-box One, attempting to kill off E-bay and Amazon used game sales by forcing a bar code scanner scheme to detach titles from peoples Xbone accounts.)

Could you explain your points with a little more depth? I think I understand, but I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything.

 

[Snotnarok]

Of course not, it's more to do with the industry unwillingness to change, they see how well games sell when there are frequent sales or games priced to their value but instead for console releases it's 60 dollars no matter what. Even if we know the game is unfinished,barely playable we gotta reel in that sucker quota to make back our money!
But no it's actually used games fault, because people buy it used because they don't understand we don't make money when they buy used (they found out the game wasn't great and wanted to save money any try the game out).

They would rather make sure the price stays at 60 bucks, charge for content on disc, put HORRIBLE DRM that gives pirates the better deal than actually try and fix the problem at hand when the answer is right there.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

In the end, one view is that Gamestop and other retailer can hardly turn a profit with the 10 dollars they get from a new sale (in Australia), so they turn to used games because the margins are larger. The other is that Gamestop has, unprovoked, decided to aggressively market used games over new ones and is pressuring publishers and developers into all the shit we accuse them of pioneering. Either way, as a consumer I should be allowed to resell something I buy, $120 is a ridiculous price for a new game, and used games have funded new purchases in the past and do so for a significant amount of people.

I'm inclined to believe the former, because 1. I haven't seen any retailer aggressively marketing used games over new ones in Australia, 2. instead of developing online distribution services with lower prices than retailers and/or not doing business with them, publishers continuously support retailers, and 3. Publishers have had opportunities to lower prices before and they haven't. Even in digital distribution, where as far as I know there is no way to resell your games.