I meant, it's more than they're getting if they aren't switching to this stupid online pass system that really needs to die.hitheremynameisbob said:It's not more than they're getting from the online pass, though. That's earning them ten dollars per game that has it, more or less, because most people that buy the games that have online passes want to play multiplayer. Hence, it's the same solution they're already trying, just without involving Gamestop and possibly being applicable to non-online games.
Besides, given how huge a cut GameStop takes of the used game sales, I don't think it would be that difficult to get 10 and still make it cheaper. Especially if, like Amazon z-shops, the clients swallow the shipping costs.
As long as GameStop is relied upon to move "a large portion" of their new products, they won't go out of business, because they'll still be doing that. Providing a cheaper alternative to their USED game sales, however, might force them to drop their price-gouging a bit (and make no mistake, they are pulling a HUGE profit margin off their used-game sales, they're in no danger of going out of business if they play a little more fair).The other unstated problem with this proposal is that it potentially puts Gamestop out of business, which is unquestionably BAD for developers, who rely on them to move a large portion of their new products.