UK Retailer Won't Sell Ubisoft Titles For Vita Launch

[IckleMissMayhem]

"the only specialist store in the UK"? Gamestation says Hi.

Gamestation is owned by the GAME Group PLC, so it's possible that both chains may suffer the same problem.

Even so, they're not by any means the only places you can buy games and consoles in the UK. CEX, whilst being utter wankers, and only selling second hand products, already have posters up in their stores about the Vita and games... Grainger games are raking it in, in the NW at the moment. AND their staff don't seem hell-bent on dishing out spoilers as you're paying for a game.

EDIT: I wonder what this means for GAME in Australia if they're going shit over in the UK.

It'll go to shit, just with a two week delay. Ithenkyou!! ;O)

 

[JaredXE]

Oh, I just thought that the retailer was taking a stand against Ubisoft being a corporation of cunts selling overpriced iOS games on the Vita.

 

[Yetipumper]

I always thought GAME was a store for kids parents to shop. There are specialist video game shops in every city in the UK that undercut GAME not to mention provide the product earlier with superior customer care. I suppose gaming sales are still governed by the children(s parents) though...

 

[Woodsey]

also "the only specialist store in the UK"? Gamestation says "Hi...

... we're owned by Game!"

Oh, I just thought that the retailer was taking a stand against Ubisoft being a corporation of cunts selling overpriced iOS games on the Vita.

You are a very optimistic fellow.

 

[GeorgW]

Wow, that sucks. Not about Ubisoft, heard their Vita games sucked, with the exception of Rayman Origins, but for GAME. Didn't know things were this tough for them, almost makes me want to buy some used games...
We have GAME in Sweden, as well as Gamestop, but I usually always shop at Gamestop, cuz they have better costumer service and better deals. Maybe they can't afford the better deals? Would like to know more about this.

 

[Bluecho]

Me thinks small game retailers in the UK finally have a chance at a foothold, by way of offering Ubisoft games for the Vita. Not that I think the Vita sales will be game changers. Just that GAME is no position to gamble with its future against Ubisoft.

 

[Elate]

[It's never "good" for a company to struggle. Struggling companies lay off employees, who have nothing to do with store policy and the such, and are just there to pay the bills.

Change = good.
Failing = bad.

A failing company means they are doing something wrong, if they're doing something wrong that means they are forced to change the way they do business or close down.

So

Failing = change
Change = good
therefor
Failing = good.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

[It's never "good" for a company to struggle. Struggling companies lay off employees, who have nothing to do with store policy and the such, and are just there to pay the bills.

Change = good.
Failing = bad.

A failing company means they are doing something wrong, if they're doing something wrong that means they are forced to change the way they do business or close down.

So

Failing = change
Change = good
therefor
Failing = good.

You completely and utterly misconstrued my opinion.

A company failing is bad, because a company doing poorly cannot afford to employ people and thus individuals go without a job--very bad.

People celebrating or otherwise expressing joy that a company is doing poorly is negative, nonconstructive and very cold.

Suggesting change is good.

Delighting in the suffering of others, even indirectly, is not.

 

[Elate]

You completely and utterly misconstrued my opinion.

A company failing is bad, because a company doing poorly cannot afford to employ people and thus individuals go without a job--very bad.

People celebrating or otherwise expressing joy that a company is doing poorly is negative, nonconstructive and very cold.

Suggesting change is good.

Delighting in the suffering of others, even indirectly, is not.

But frankly, Game is SUCH a poor company, that I don't care. Sure those people losing their jobs is a bit of a bummer for them, but they chose to work at Game, so they chose to agree to the way it does business. Call me all the nasty words in the world, but my opinion remains the same, this is a good thing whether it forces the company to change or close down.

Frankly, I would prefer the latter. It has had too greater grip on the UK Market for far to long. It shutting down would hopefully bring rise to more smaller stores which won't get bought out/competitively destroyed by Game.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

But frankly, Game is SUCH a poor company, that I don't care. Sure those people losing their jobs is a bit of a bummer for them, but they chose to work at Game, so they chose to agree to the way it does business.

Or, more likely, it's just people who need work. I don't know about you, but everyone I know, including myself, work for our respective employers due to them being the easiest location to get to, the best pay, the steadiest work, or whatever else along those lines (barring of course specialty jobs that require greater education, like nurses). Not everyone in the world can afford to coast around, waiting to work for Green Peace. Rent and food isn't cheap, yo.

It's easy to just see 'that greedy, faceless giant' of a company. But the average person working there is just doing a job. They need to get paid and they found a job. You act as if these people are working for Dream Stealers inc. -- Robbing Orphan Children of their Dreams since 1906. Yeah, they aren't Santa Clause and they have some shitty business practices, but so what? They got so big and popular for a reason and every company in the world undercuts someone, makes it harder for another company and strives to make the most money.

Besides, I'm sure those clothes you paid for were made by a large company that does some shitty stuff. How about your computer--made by a big group? Your internet? The store you purchase your groceries at? The company your house was purchased off? Would you be so eager to revel in their demise?

People losing honest jobs is not good and you'd have to be pretty damn self-centered to be glad for it.

 

[Olrod]

So are GAME refusing to stock Ubisoft's Vita games, or are Ubisoft refusing to let GAME stock their Vita games?

 

[Elate]

-snip-

The main difference is those stores I buy things from, clothes, my computer, don't screw ME the customer over right in front of my face because they know I would just go somewhere else. So yeah I guess you could say I'm self centered because I'm not the bleeding heart type, I don't care about people losing their jobs, it's happening to other people in much more important jobs that I could care about, oh say, the NHS.

Again, call me all the names you like, I don't like the company, I'm glad they're possibly closing down. I don't care about undercutting, I care about one company having market domination to the point where they can dictate releases on which platforms in a country, that is not healthy no matter what way you spin it.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I care about one company having market domination to the point where they can dictate releases on which platforms in a country, that is not healthy no matter what way you spin it.

Like the company you purchased your computer from--including the operating system?

You can spin it any way you like, but you're a hypocrite to bash one company for being a so called monopoly while no doubt handing over much of your income to similar groups. Purchase any EA games lately, hmmm? But hey, maybe that massive chain store you buy your groceries from doesn't buy out it's competition, black mail farmers, screw over agents and spend millions on advertising to brainwash you into thinking they aren't screwing you over every time you step into their building.

GAME isn't a monster and you only care because it's right in front of you. I'm sure every other label you've spent thousands with over the years is glad you haven't noticed them yet.

 

[Elate]

I care about one company having market domination to the point where they can dictate releases on which platforms in a country, that is not healthy no matter what way you spin it.

Like the company you purchased your computer from--including the operating system?

You can spin it any way you like, but you're a hypocrite to bash one company for being a so called monopoly while no doubt handing over much of your income to similar groups. Purchase any EA games lately, hmmm? But hey, maybe that massive chain store you buy your groceries from doesn't buy out it's competition, black mail farmers, screw over agents and spend millions on advertising to brainwash you into thinking they aren't screwing you over every time you step into their building.

GAME isn't a monster and you only care because it's right in front of you. I'm sure every other label you've spent thousands with over the years is glad you haven't noticed them yet.

Funny you should say that, no I haven't purchased any EA games lately, I bought Battlefield 3, second hand, so they don't see a penny and I will probably do the same with Me3, I don't buy EA games from anything other than second hand stores, same with Ubisoft and other developers I don't agree with. I bought my version of Windows 7: Ultimate for £70, which is a reasonable price in my eyes, compared to the prices I saw it at elsewhere. I built my own computer for half the price of any store bought one, so nope again not there, and that grocery store (Tesco) gives me the cheapest food, without screwing ME over, I don't care if they have to screw someone else over to do it. Thousands? I've yet to spend thousands with any single company, the closest I came was the components for my PC, and that was at scan.co.uk, hardly a huge chain wouldn't you say?

So your assumptions were wrong, for the most part. Now however, when a company like Game can stop a game from being released on Steam (PC no less, one of their smallest areas) because they threaten to not stock it, well, that's somewhat different isn't it? At least I know I can find the same brands of food at two different grocery stores.

And yes, Game ARE right in front of me, since they have directly affected me in the past due to their business techniques, even though I refuse to buy from them. If they were doing it WELL I wouldn't even know, but they're being so blatant about it, as if they think it's ok to do so, they have gotten to bold.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I don't care if they have to screw someone else over to do it.

Clearly someone with an opinion as selfish and immature as that cannot be reasoned with.

 

[Elate]

I don't care if they have to screw someone else over to do it.

Clearly someone with an opinion as selfish and immature as that cannot be reasoned with.

Again, call me all the names you like, but it's a fact of life that no matter what someone, somewhere will be getting a shit deal for my benefit. It would be immature to pretend that we can live in a happy world where that wasn't the case. Most companies are just smart enough not to do it to their customer base.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Most companies are just smart enough not to do it to their customer base.

They sure are glad you believe that.