Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 6:18 AM
Mon Nov 16
24 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
02/23/09
I'll take a Beach Ball Blitz, please. =)
02/23/09
Now can we add microtransactions to other things?
02/23/09
I nominate microtransactions for sex. "Insert coins here"...ahem.
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/23/09
Pick your friend's nose, $5.
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/23/09
02/24/09
02/20/09
Could he deny that it's the Gamestop business model that causes games to either be instant successes or failures? The truth is, if GameStop didn't exist, the game makers would be able to make more money over a longer span of time; as a new title sitting on a retail shelf would still be a viable product for longer than the amount of time it takes for someone to finish the game and sell it back to the store.
02/21/09
02/20/09
No. That's like going to a place that only has oranges, and offering people the choice of an apple instead of an orange. Sorry, dipshit, but your apples have had a negative effect on the consumption of oranges.
02/20/09
New is when the game is fucking sealed and never taken out of the goddamned case in the first place.
02/20/09
02/20/09
02/20/09
Gamestop, of course, has no excuse.
Still, it's never bothered me- I'm down with being able to handle the packaging instead of looking it behind glass.
02/20/09
02/20/09
That's really mature. Thousands of people out of work and one less retail location to shop for games. Really forward thinking of you.
02/20/09
02/20/09
No, used games sales don't hurt new games sales like used books/CDs/DVD sales don't hurt new sales of those items. The consumers of the two are different and don't much overlap. The fallacy of the game developers is that their unstated belief that people who buy used games would buy new games if they couldn't buy used games, which is not true. Those consumers simply won't buy games, period.
The game developers' logic is no different than the MPAA or the RIAA, which argues that every act of piracy is a lost sale to their industries when in fact many people would have never purchased the movies or music at all.
02/20/09
Honestly, the only accuracy in your "it doesn't hurt other things so it obviously can't hurt this" defense is with CDs. Used books and used DVDs do target different markets than new: books are damaged rather easily, so used purchases are normally inferior to new; and DVDs are repackagings of old materials (as the "best" way of experiencing a movie is usually considered to be in a theater).
You argue that there's no overlap in the audience for used and new product, but I really don't see how such a thing could really be true. There are different types of stores that cater to different customers in other media, but what about video games? Yes, places like Walmart sell exclusively new games, but most "game stores" strive to be both a merchant of new product and a pawn shop. The argument that GameStop tries to make about the trade credit from used games being used to purchase new ones is all you really need to invalidate that claim.
There are people who would not buy games if they were unable to buy them used, but I'm sure there's many more who would. Likewise, I'm sure that the sales of used games would be much lower if game stores weren't so aggressive in pushing used over new; in trying to do everything they can to persuade the customer to save a few dollars in order to let the store pocket the money that usually goes to those who developed the product they're pawning.
I don't know to what extent it does apply, but I know that at least SOME used game purchases are lost sales. There's a big difference between getting a CD instead of paying $15 for it, and getting a game for $50 instead of $60.
Oh, look at me, I'm arguing on the Internet. Oops.
02/20/09
And if you don't like GS's prices on trade ins, stick to a mom and pop outfit. People keep forgetting that GS at one time had very reasonable trade in values. What happened? More people traded games in and the value fell though the floor. When you've got something hundreds of copies of one title, you can't give anything.
02/20/09
They can't compete because of the margin on new games, and distributors don't really like servicing mom and pop businesses, so they get shafted on selection.
Heck, you don't even see as many regional chains anymore for the same reason.
02/21/09
So maybe for your area there's not any, but i've got three mom and pop gaming stores, my PSP 2001 series and PS3 60 gig came from them both due to them offering far better trade in prices.
02/20/09
I was even told by their assistant manager that next time I should pre-order it in order to get a copy. I told him that the target across the street has a better selection of PC games then his store. I now drive an extra two miles to either Best Buy or MicroCenter and buy my games since they actually have new PC titles in stock.
02/20/09
The shrinkage of the PC section is hardly the result of used games sales. It's just indicative of the market.
Target and the big box stores have bigger margins, so they can afford to carry more stock on hand.
02/20/09
02/20/09
02/21/09
Very true. I buy new when I can, but a lot of times a used copy of a game is the only one in town.
I guess in those cases it doesn't hurt sales of the original though since there is no original to buy...
02/20/09
Anecdotal evidence of standing and listening to employees and their company policy pretty much refute the "4%" figure.
02/20/09
Okay.
02/20/09
I wonder how hard he had to bite his tongue to keep from laughing.
02/20/09
See this article which supports his assertion.
Used game sales stay fairly consistent while new games sales rise and fall throughout the years, suggesting there is no correlation in sales.
Additionally, you'll see what a small part used games sales are overall.
02/20/09
Now can that COO give us a reasonable explanation why a new game trade-in is $24.99 and then SOLD for $54.99?
Please, I don't want to hear how it helps generate more money.
02/20/09
It's simple.
They set a level of stock on used games they want to maintain and a goal for used games they want to sell.
Then they set prices they think will achieve those goals.
As long as someone is willing to sell the game at the price they'll pay and someone else is willing to buy it at the price they set, they will continue to do it that way.
It takes two to tango, and Gamestop's not dancing alone.
Not only that, but Gamestop is one of the only game specific retailers that can stand up to the big box might of Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy. Their used games sales are the only thing that allow them to stay competitive.
If you don't like it, don't shop their, but don't act like they peed in your Wheaties just because they're doing what they need to do to stay alive in the market. The last thing any gamer should want is less retail options.
02/21/09
You seem to forget that used game sales is what keeps game prices artificially high.
GameStop will cry about publishers going Digital Distribution and threaten to not stock their game if prices of digital copy of game is any lower than retail, saying that's "unfair advantage". Yet they will turn around the try to sell customer a used copy every time one brings a new copy to the cashier.
Also we have enough retail options as it. If I can get by getting all my gaming needs without going to GameStop, so can everyone else. Game industry would be much better without GameStop.
02/21/09
You seem to forget that used game sales is what keeps game prices artificially high. -SuperD
That's not true at all. Game prices are set by the publishers, and the very small amount of used games sold compared to new has absolutely no effect on new prices.
Also we have enough retail options as it.
You're worried about the price of games being artificially inflated, but you think increased competition is irrelevant.
These are basic economic principles that you and the other haters are, on some level, purposefully overlooking to justify your dislike of a retailer.
Open your eyes, we've already lost one major games retailer because of the recession, Circuit City. How many more do we have to lose before you're concerned about you dwindling options?
02/21/09
As you said game prices are set by publishers. One less retailer is not going to inflate the prices. Do we actually feel the effect of Circuit City closing down other than the deals we're getting?
I have no figures on hand but I doubt used game sold is a "very small amount". GameStop select their figures in order to back up their point; we have no idea what "current titles" mean. What I meant was without loss of profit in used game (for the publishers), they might not have set new game prices that high.
Their way of dealing with the used game market and customers is only a small part of their faults. The most I dislike about them, which I mentioned a bit before, is their tyrannic ways of doing business. Them being the biggest game retailer they can pretty much do whatever the hell they please. Remember Dawn of War 2?
02/22/09
Them being the biggest game retailer they can pretty much do whatever the hell they please.
Wal-Mart is the largest video game retailer. By far.