Support NeoGAF

[Lyte Edge]

Do Gamestop/Ebgames still take "new" games, open up the boxes, and put the discs into sleeves?

 

[jetjevons]

More profit to the developers means more and better games.

I don't think anyone here is saying that isn't the case. I think it's pretty clear that:

a) Buying a cheaper, used game = Better for consumer. Better for Gamestop.
b) Buying a more expensive, new game = Better for developer. Better for publisher. Better for industry.

 

[dammitmattt]

The biggest problem with used games isn't that they exist. First sale doctrine and consumer rights absolutely set up that once we buy something we have the right to do whatever we want with it. It's why I won't buy DD software: I don't own my copy. However, the big problem with Gamestop's business, and the one thing that sets gaming apart from all other media sales, is the HUGE conflict of interest that arises when the industry's biggest retailer of new material is shoving people towards used software instead. Nowhere but in Gamestop do you se new and used titles set next to each other as coequals. Sure you can buy used books, but you go to a used bookstore. Barnes and Noble doesn't sell used books, and Half Price doesn't sell new ones. Car dealerships have new and used lots, and they're clearly separated and often have separate offices. Same with music or movies. Sure there are independent stores that sell new and used both, but there are very few large chains that sell both products coequally (Hasting's is the only one that immediately sprints to mind).

Having your largest retailer also sell games second-hand and actively steer customers away from new games and towards used ones creates a very very different situation. It's a blatant conflict of interest on Gamestops part, and I can certainly sympathize with publisher's that feel as if their market channel is directly working against them.

But Gamestop, the sole gaming enthuiast retailer (responsible for 1/4-1/3 of the market, by the way) and one reliable place to trade in used games, wouldn't exist without used game sales. They have carved out their niche in the industry (hardcore new items + used games) and are succeeding where others are failing. Standalone music stores are on life support, standalone movie stores are dying, while Gamestop is succeeding. You tell me who has the better business plan.

 

[jetjevons]

Do Gamestop/Ebgames still take "new" games, open up the boxes, and put the discs into sleeves?

Why would they do that? They've already paid wholesale price for it.

 

[dammitmattt]

I don't think anyone here is saying that isn't the case. I think it's pretty clear that:

a) Buying a cheaper, used game = Better for consumer. Better for Gamestop.
b) Buying a more expensive, new game = Better for developer. Better for publisher. Better for industry.

I take issue with your last point. How exactly is it better for the industry? It seems to be that it's better overall for the industry to get more of the price-sensitive, casual consumers into the industry in the first place with cheap systems and cheap games so you can get them hooked and hopefully sell them new, expensive games in the future. These consumers will never enter the industry in the first place without tons of cheap, used titles, so are you willing to exclude this segment from the industry all together?

Please explain.

EDIT: Oh, and I completely forgot to add that I buy 5-6 new games a year that I would not otherwise purchase thanks to trading in my old games (I'm not really a collector). For instance, last year I bought Assassin's Creed, The Darkness, Stranglehold, PGR4, Uncharted, and GRAW2 because I had extra money with my trade-ins. These all would've been Gamefly games otherwise. This year, I've already paid off Devil May Cry 4 and I'll get one or two games this spring that I wouldn't have bought purely after trading in all of the crap that I accumulated last year.

 

[dammitmattt]

Why would they do that? They've already paid wholesale price for it.

They do that so that they can merchandise the games on the racks. Not all publishers send boxes, and EB/Gamestop doesn't have an extensive security system like the big box retailers. Without doing this, customers wouldn't be able to look at the boxes of your lovely games.

They typically only do this for one copy of each game (but sometimes two or more for new releases), and they'll always give you a new, shrinkwrapped copy if you ask for it. This only comes up if you're getting the store's last copy of a game or if you are getting a game after it's been out for a while.

I'm anal so I'm not the biggest fan of this, so if a "gutted" copy is the last option, I'll usually run across the parking lot to Best Buy or Target.

 

[bababa]

But Gamestop, the sole gaming enthuiast retailer (responsible for 1/4-1/3 of the market, by the way) and one reliable place to trade in used games, wouldn't exist without used game sales. They have carved out their niche in the industry (hardcore new items + used games) and are succeeding where others are failing. Standalone music stores are on life support, standalone movie stores are dying, while Gamestop is succeeding. You tell me who has the better business plan.

You're right, but some people in this thread act like the publishers and developers are assholes for pointing out that Gamestop's pushing of used right next to new hurts the new sales. They aren't whining, they're right. And Gamestop still has every right to do it. If it'd be possible to throw 1% of used sales to the pub/dev, I think that'd be great.

 

[Version 3.0]

You're right, but some people in this thread act like the publishers and developers are assholes for pointing out that Gamestop's pushing of used right next to new hurts the new sales. They aren't whining, they're right. And Gamestop still has every right to do it. If it'd be possible to throw 1% of used sales to the pub/dev, I think that'd be great.

There's no evidence that the used sales hurt the new sales. That's an assumption. It's an easy one to make, and though it's obviously true in individual cases, I very much doubt that it's as big an impact as is generally thought (especially by publishers). And even if it is detrimental, they do have every right to do it. As does eBay or any other outlet.

Launch day/week game sales are bigger than they've ever been, and Gamestop takes more pre-orders than any other store. Their percentage of new game sales vs. the entire retail world is also very large, and if I'm not mistaken, their piece has grown in recent years as their used game business also took off. That's evidence in favor of used game sales actually stimulating new game sales. And it's been pointed out that many people trade in used games in order to get credit to spend on new games.

 

[Evander]

I don't think anyone here is saying that isn't the case. I think it's pretty clear that:

a) Buying a cheaper, used game = Better for consumer. Better for Gamestop.
b) Buying a more expensive, new game = Better for developer. Better for publisher. Better for industry.

Not quite.

When you buy a new game 100% of the money you pay goes to Gamestop.

They already paid for that copy previously, whether or not you bought it.

Additionally, restocking on games is not a one-to-one thing. Just because you buy a copy doesn't mean that they will order another one. Restocking is based on a combination of new AND used sales.

They are ALSO less likely to order new copies if they have a lot of used copies in the system, so, in essence, buying used copies is ALSO good for the devs/pubs, since it makes less used copies, and a higher chance of re-ordering new copies when they run low.



Really, though, if you want to help the devs/pubs then pre-order EVERYTHING.

The same people who complain about used-sales killing the industry also tend to refuse to pre-order. Pre-ordering is about the BEST way that you can ensure your money goes to the developer, short of buying the game directly from the developer yourself. Gamestop orders copies of games DIRECTLY based on the number of pre-orders that they recieve, so if you want to help the devs make money, pre-order early, and encourage others to do so too.

 

[Hero]

Just to clarify, I'm not siding completely one way or another. It's a necessary thing. What I will argue though is how much they make off of used games sales. Offering 20ish dollars for a brand new game in credit and then selling it to consumers for a mere 5 bucks off is a little ludicrous. I know the consumers aren't being forced to do it but it's still pretty gimp.

I just personally hate Gamestop/EBgames for all the crap they've done over the years. They're the absolute last place I go for video games.

 

[shoplifter]

They are ALSO less likely to order new copies if they have a lot of used copies in the system, so, in essence, buying used copies is ALSO good for the devs/pubs, since it makes less used copies, and a higher chance of re-ordering new copies when they run low.

This is only true because they have the used copies in the first place.

 

[Dave Long]

Just to clarify, I'm not siding completely one way or another. It's a necessary thing. What I will argue though is how much they make off of used games sales. Offering 20ish dollars for a brand new game in credit and then selling it to consumers for a mere 5 bucks off is a little ludicrous. I know the consumers aren't being forced to do it but it's still pretty gimp.

I just personally hate Gamestop/EBgames for all the crap they've done over the years. They're the absolute last place I go for video games.

I don't think anyone's arguing that better trade-in values wouldn't be welcome. That's why I used to visit local retailers instead of the chain stores when those local guys were still able to compete.

The bottom line is that the industry wants money it can't have. I also question what they would propose to get it if they were somehow able to change the law? Is the game industry going to build an IT infrastructure to support transactional level reporting of every game store in the country, chain or independent, so that they can bill everyone for every single used game transaction? Yeah, not going to happen.

So can we please put this ridiculous quest for used dollars to bed once and for all? Either figure out a way to do it yourself as a publisher or find other ways of making money from your games. Even if it were legal, it's entirely unworkable.

 

[tanod]

So I'm calculating that Gamestop's 2006 revenue on new hardware, software and accessories is about $4 billion. Total NPD sales for 2006 was $12.5 billion.


So gamestop was responsible for almost a third of all new video game and hardware sales in 2006?

:O

Did I miss something?! Is this right?

Just wanted to repost this because it got buried at the bottom of page 1 and I'm looking for some feedback.

The figure seems lopsided so I'm wondering if I did something wrong. Does gamestop really have that much power in video game retail?

 

[Evander]

This is only true because they have the used copies in the first place.

And if they didn't, they wouldn't be in business at all.

Which would hurt the industry in more ways than you realize.

 

[f3niks]

Do Gamestop/Ebgames still take "new" games, open up the boxes, and put the discs into sleeves?

I've only seen one Gamestop in my area that does that. That's the main reason I avoid that store.

 

[Synth_floyd]

Why are people complaining that devs miss out on used game sales? It's called the reality of the marketplace. Ford doesn't get money when you buy a used Focus. The builder of that used house you just bought doesn't get a cut of the sale. The author of the used book you just bought doesn't get a piece of the sale. What's all the bitching? I mean it's good that you want the developers to do well financially but singling out this one aspect of the free market and ranting against it is just stupid.

 

[Hellraizah]

Publisher/developpers found a way to make money from used games. It's called micro-transactions.

Let's say you buy Resistance for PS3, used. You want the additionnal maps, pay. If you trade the game afterwards, you can't trade the additionnal map pack.

My guess is that this will (or you could say "has already") become common standard.

 

[dammitmattt]

Just to clarify, I'm not siding completely one way or another. It's a necessary thing. What I will argue though is how much they make off of used games sales. Offering 20ish dollars for a brand new game in credit and then selling it to consumers for a mere 5 bucks off is a little ludicrous. I know the consumers aren't being forced to do it but it's still pretty gimp.

I just personally hate Gamestop/EBgames for all the crap they've done over the years. They're the absolute last place I go for video games.

They might be charging $55 one day, but if it doesn't sell, it could still be sitting on the shelves at $25 weeks or months later. It's a calculated risk they take that the amount of games they sell at $55 will make up for the amount that they lose when they sell it for $25. If you want more money, sell on eBay. If you want to pay less, buy on eBay.

 

[bababa]

There's no evidence that the used sales hurt the new sales. That's an assumption. It's an easy one to make, and though it's obviously true in individual cases, I very much doubt that it's as big an impact as is generally thought (especially by publishers). And even if it is detrimental, they do have every right to do it. As does eBay or any other outlet.

Launch day/week game sales are bigger than they've ever been, and Gamestop takes more pre-orders than any other store. Their percentage of new game sales vs. the entire retail world is also very large, and if I'm not mistaken, their piece has grown in recent years as their used game business also took off. That's evidence in favor of used game sales actually stimulating new game sales. And it's been pointed out that many people trade in used games in order to get credit to spend on new games.

There is plenty of evidence that used sales take away from new sales. Walk into a Gamestop and watch each transaction. Person walks into Gamestop to buy a game, picks up the new box, goes to counter, clerk says "Hey want to save $3-$5 by getting the used copy?", person says "yes," new sales hurt. This is a direct impact on new sales, and takes money from the devs/pubs. But, you're right, there is no real proof as to how much used may hurt new, or how much of an effect it might have in actually stimulating new sales. My only point is that dev/pubs are not crazy whiners. They could have a valid complaint. And in a previous post I pointed out how GS has every right to do what they do and how they push new pre-orders hard as well.

 

[Hero]

I don't think anyone's arguing that better trade-in values wouldn't be welcome. That's why I used to visit local retailers instead of the chain stores when those local guys were still able to compete.

The bottom line is that the industry wants money it can't have. I also question what they would propose to get it if they were somehow able to change the law? Is the game industry going to build an IT infrastructure to support transactional level reporting of every game store in the country, chain or independent, so that they can bill everyone for every single used game transaction? Yeah, not going to happen.

So can we please put this ridiculous quest for used dollars to bed once and for all? Either figure out a way to do it yourself as a publisher or find other ways of making money from your games. Even if it were legal, it's entirely unworkable.

Yeah, while I'm sure developers would love to get in on the used game transactions, there's no model right now for that to happen. Even if they were to implement it, it would cost a lot of money and I doubt GS/EB would really be willing to share their profits. The only way I could think of is if every publisher pulled together and created their own game store, but I imagine the effort and work to create something like that would be too much.

They might be charging $55 one day, but if it doesn't sell, it could still be sitting on the shelves at $25 weeks or months later. It's a calculated risk they take that the amount of games they sell at $55 will make up for the amount that they lose when they sell it for $25. If you want more money, sell on eBay. If you want to pay less, buy on eBay.

That is true, you make a good point. I personally don't trade in too many games anymore so it's a non-factor for me, but when I see a kid and his mom in a store trading in a stack of games and he barely has enough credit to buy a new game I just cringe.

 

[mr stroke]

I don't think anyone's arguing that better trade-in values wouldn't be welcome. That's why I used to visit local retailers instead of the chain stores when those local guys were still able to compete.

The bottom line is that the industry wants money it can't have. I also question what they would propose to get it if they were somehow able to change the law? Is the game industry going to build an IT infrastructure to support transactional level reporting of every game store in the country, chain or independent, so that they can bill everyone for every single used game transaction? Yeah, not going to happen.

So can we please put this ridiculous quest for used dollars to bed once and for all? Either figure out a way to do it yourself as a publisher or find other ways of making money from your games. Even if it were legal, it's entirely unworkable.

+1

thank god Dave,
at least someone can look at this from a business standpoint..

Devs have zero right to get any money from used sales,plain and simple...
could you imagine the uproar consumers would have if they had to pay a "fee" back to there car manufacturer every time they sold or traded in there car?
Game devs for some reason want the ultimate double standard and I just don't understand it?