Gamestop price gouging Xenoblade.

[rob_simple]

If people are actually buying the game, then they're not "price gouging" anything. That's just supply & demand. Capitalism 1-O-1.

No, it's extortion. They're taking advantage of desperate people who have no other option, (except to not buy the game, of course, but such willpower isn't an abundant quality in most gamers).

This is why I believe there should be maximum pricing laws introduced (especially since they introduced minimum ones in the UK) to stop companies exploiting people like this, but of course no government is ever going to introduce a system than benefits the public over corporations and the tax man.

Uhhh, the Public are the people who own and run businesses. All this does is further fuck the average man who's trying to earn a living. Maximum price law? Who are YOU to say how much MY property is worth to ME? All you're proposing is a sugar coated socialism.

No, most corporations are owned and run by the upper 1% and they are allowed to stay there through shady bullshit like creating artificial scarcity and then driving prices up. They create monopolies that make it nigh on impossible for the 'average man' to even enter the market. Or to put it another way: how many independent game stores can you think of that exist today, not as part of a franchise, but as an actual independent store?

You want me to feel sorry for men and women who have spent decades over-charging us for all forms of media just because they could get away with it, (yeah, remember before the internet, when CD's cost £16? Or DVD's were £25? Cause I sure as shit remember,) and who are now resorting to back-handed tactics like creating fake used copies of a game in a desperate attempt to squeeze every drop of cash out the bloated carcass of an archaic retailing model before it finally collapses in on itself. I won't shed a tear.

Also what exactly is wrong with socialism? You think a corrupt capitalist society is better than one where mid-range goods have a price ceiling? Again the government, currently, is allowed to force sellers to charge more for their products, so why not less?

 

[rob_simple]

If people are actually buying the game, then they're not "price gouging" anything. That's just supply & demand. Capitalism 1-O-1.

No, it's extortion. They're taking advantage of desperate people who have no other option, (except to not buy the game, of course, but such willpower isn't an abundant quality in most gamers).

This is why I believe there should be maximum pricing laws introduced (especially since they introduced minimum ones in the UK) to stop companies exploiting people like this, but of course no government is ever going to introduce a system than benefits the public over corporations and the tax man.

You can't exploit a consumer with a luxury good. People's lack of self control is hardly a good enough reason to call for regulation.

So should we not bother regulating the sale of heroin, either? I mean, lack of self control is all that gets people addicted to that, so why not legalise it and let the chips fall where they may?

I'm exaggerating, of course, but I think, given how inclined the government is to interfere in most every other aspect of our lives, forcing companies of mid-range level luxury goods like video games (because nobody on a limited income is buying a Ferrari on a whim) to charge reasonable prices doesn't seem so unreasonable.

There is absolutely no justifiable reason on this Earth to charge $90 for any video game, other than because there are some poor saps stupid enough to pay it.

 

[ten.to.ten]

Welcome to my world, I live in Australia and I don't think it's ever dropped below $90 used here, wii games are all ridiculously expensive here and they stay that price for ages, Mario Kart wii, still $80 here (new and used), Twilight Princess, still $50 used, most of the Mario games, still over $60 used

Yep. When Xenoblade came out in Australia I waited a long time for the price to drop a tiny little bit from below $90 or $100, instead it just disappeared and I ended up having to import a European copy because I couldn't find an Australian copy, new or used, anywhere. If it was a PS3 or 360 game it would have at least halved in price within a year of release. Wii games, especially those published by Nintendo Australia, just do not come down.

As for the OP, does it make me evil that I just don't care? EB in Australia (owned by Gamestop US) often sells "used" games that aren't actually used for various reasons, all of which I'm sure centre around making more money. Sometimes the way they do things works out better for me too, most of the time it's still cheaper to get a genuine new copy from somewhere like JB Hi-Fi or Kmart, or ordering online from overseas. However, if EB does sell a game labelled as used which isn't used but is cheaper than I could get elsewhere, or is a game I can't find anywhere else, then I'm happy to buy from them.

If you can blame anyone for the situation, I'd blame Nintendo for making the deal in the first place which resulted it in being such a hard game to come by if you didn't get it as soon as it came out. Be thankful that they offloaded The Last Story and Pandora's Tower to Xseed so that you can actually get them at a fair price.

 

[Bluestorm83]

If people are actually buying the game, then they're not "price gouging" anything. That's just supply & demand. Capitalism 1-O-1.

No, it's extortion. They're taking advantage of desperate people who have no other option, (except to not buy the game, of course, but such willpower isn't an abundant quality in most gamers).

This is why I believe there should be maximum pricing laws introduced (especially since they introduced minimum ones in the UK) to stop companies exploiting people like this, but of course no government is ever going to introduce a system than benefits the public over corporations and the tax man.

Uhhh, the Public are the people who own and run businesses. All this does is further fuck the average man who's trying to earn a living. Maximum price law? Who are YOU to say how much MY property is worth to ME? All you're proposing is a sugar coated socialism.

No, most corporations are owned and run by the upper 1% and they are allowed to stay there through shady bullshit like creating artificial scarcity and then driving prices up. They create monopolies that make it nigh on impossible for the 'average man' to even enter the market. Or to put it another way: how many independent game stores can you think of that exist today, not as part of a franchise, but as an actual independent store?

You want me to feel sorry for men and women who have spent decades over-charging us for all forms of media just because they could get away with it, (yeah, remember before the internet, when CD's cost £16? Or DVD's were £25? Cause I sure as shit remember,) and who are now resorting to back-handed tactics like creating fake used copies of a game in a desperate attempt to squeeze every drop of cash out the bloated carcass of an archaic retailing model before it finally collapses in on itself. I won't shed a tear.

Also what exactly is wrong with socialism? You think a corrupt capitalist society is better than one where mid-range goods have a price ceiling? Again the government, currently, is allowed to force sellers to charge more for their products, so why not less?

"The Upper 1%" People love throwing that around. All it means to me is "People who either worked hard and gained for themselves or are the recipients of their hardworking forefathers' benefits. We store up for ourselves and for our children. Crying foul of "The 1%" or "The Rich" or "Corporations" is denying that all of those things that they have were GOTTEN by them at some point in time. God did not wave his hand and create an already wealthy 1% that had a magical infrastructure to support them. They made it themselves. You want a thing? MAKE IT FOR YOURSELF. Yeah, it's hard to go up against the big guy, but it can be done. Hell, I work at an independent, family owned garden center. We can't out-discount the Home Depots and the Loweses and the Walmarts, but we CAN out-QUALITY them. When you go there, you get some kid who was just transferred out of plumbing fixtures and can't tell an Aster from an Azalea. When you come to ME, I'll get you anything you want, tell you how it grows, when to water it, what to feed it, when it flowers, when it dies, what insects it attracts and what insects it repels. Putting a cap on a price HELPS the Home Depot: they can afford a 25% reduction in their prices, they buy in bulk lots of tens of thousands. When I buy a thing, we get maybe TEN of them. If we have to sell it at less than cost, we lose money. It's very simple.

I don't want you to "feel sorry" for anyone. I want EVERYONE to stop FEELING and start THINKING and DOING. Feelings don't earn a living. Feelings don't make you survive until tomorrow. "Fake used copies?" Do the games not work? No, they DO, so they're REAL. Used or brand new, what does that matter in the slightest? You're implying that they cost more because they're used? No, NEW copies cost more. If they were taking used copies and posing them as New copies, and charging more for them than for other copies that are labelled as used but in the same condition, then you'd have an argument here. But you don't have an argument, all you have are gut reactions and feelings. And feelings are not facts. If and when Physical Game Media disappears, I won't give a half of a shit. Whatever is Better should Survive. While I personally like physical copies, since I like to get a Real Thing when I give someone Real Money that represents my Real Labor, digital media is fine too, and I buy a crapton of things on Steam. I'm not crusading here, at all, let alone championing the idyllic pasts that you seem to think I am. Again, no feelings, FACTS.

What's wrong with Socialism? I don't know, only that it falls apart as soon as people realize that 1) Doing Hard Work and 2) Not Doing Any Work have the same outcome. Also that every instance of Socialism in history has ended in a hellhole that people are desperate to get out of. Also that I challenge you to show me ONE Socialist Ruler who didn't eventually turn into the kind of tyrant that nobody could possibly identify with.

Now, I do have to agree with one point: The government should NOT be able to force someone to charge more for their products. When someone makes a thing, the price he sets is what HE believes that product is worth to him. It is the amount of recompense would compel him to say, "Yes, alright, that is a fair trade and I would be willing to make more of this product if others would give me similar recompense for it." No one should tell him that he MUST charge more than he thinks fair, or less than he thinks fair.

 

[WindKnight]

Wait what?

Did I just warp into Australia or something?

Why is a year-old game that's mostly being sold in the "Used" section now (regardless of its status as "Used" or not) priced at $30 more than brand-new newly released games?

If it were because of 'limited stock' then practically every other game that isn't in print anymore would be at some ridiculous price on their used shelves as well, so I find it really hard to swallow that.

This is making my head hurt...

its rare, desirable therefore demand excedes supply and the seller gets to set the price. Tales of Vesperia used is about £40-50 due to its limited run

Heck, I want a Generations voyager springer, and it frustrates me to see what should be a £23 being sold for £50+, but that's the way of the after-sale market unfortunately.

 

[rob_simple]

Snip

I won't insult you by saying you're naive, when you're clearly not, but surely you must concede that, while I do agree that most people would benefit from more hard work and less complaining about how hard hard work is, there are some corporations, particularly in the game and electronics industry in general, who got to where they are by unethical business tactics which they continue to practise.

Surely you can't call EA's policy of hire and fire ethical or in favour of the honest man? Especially when it's their executive meddling that usually neuters the smaller studios games, resulting in their closure.

I'm all for working hard and earning what you've got --there's nothing I respect more, in fact-- but companies like EA and Gamestop have made it repeatedly clear that they don't care about the customer, they only care about their bottom line. Which brings me to the only part of your post I really found fault in:

When someone makes a thing, the price he sets is what HE believes that product is worth to him. It is the amount of recompense would compel him to say, "Yes, alright, that is a fair trade and I would be willing to make more of this product if others would give me similar recompense for it."

Absolutely true, but this is not what companies like EA and Gamestop do. They don't charge what they think is fair, they charge what they think they can get away with. You may remember, some years ago, the head of Activision saying that, if left up to him, he'd raise the prices of games even more.

I know that my comment about government-enforced price regulation may have come across a bit fascist state, but when these are the men we're dealing with, men who deal only in terms of 'how much money can I make; fuck the customer' I just worry about how far out of hand this will eventually get.

Yes you can say, 'if you don't like the price, no one is forcing you to pay it' but here's the thing: I love video games. I don't want to lose one of my favourite hobbies just because some asshole CEO got too greedy and priced all of his companies games out of the market.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Holy freaking crap! I thought I was being ripped off when I paid 45 dollars for it used.

Yeah, this is pretty damn awful. I was annoyed at how few copies they brought out in the US in the first place. And don't give me the "but if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have it at all" - bullshit. There was far too much demand for that game. It would've gotten here somehow.

As to the "well, then you should have preordered it" crowd - I don't own a fucking Wii! I wasn't going to preorder a game that I couldn't play. When I did buy it, it was after a friend loaned me a Wii to play it on.

Xenoblade is a pretty good game. A 90 dollar price tag prevents most people from being able to play it. And that is wrong.

Edit: And to the people going "but that's a fair price according to other websites" - well DUH. Gamestop set the price! Of course that's what it's going for now - they control 90% of the copies!

 

[Bluestorm83]

Snip

I won't insult you by saying you're naive, when you're clearly not, but surely you must concede that, while I do agree that most people would benefit from more hard work and less complaining about how hard hard work is, there are some corporations, particularly in the game and electronics industry in general, who got to where they are by unethical business tactics which they continue to practise.

Surely you can't call EA's policy of hire and fire ethical or in favour of the honest man? Especially when it's their executive meddling that usually neuters the smaller studios games, resulting in their closure.

I'm all for working hard and earning what you've got --there's nothing I respect more, in fact-- but companies like EA and Gamestop have made it repeatedly clear that they don't care about the customer, they only care about their bottom line. Which brings me to the only part of your post I really found fault in:

When someone makes a thing, the price he sets is what HE believes that product is worth to him. It is the amount of recompense would compel him to say, "Yes, alright, that is a fair trade and I would be willing to make more of this product if others would give me similar recompense for it."

Absolutely true, but this is not what companies like EA and Gamestop do. They don't charge what they think is fair, they charge what they think they can get away with. You may remember, some years ago, the head of Activision saying that, if left up to him, he'd raise the prices of games even more.

I know that my comment about government-enforced price regulation may have come across a bit fascist state, but when these are the men we're dealing with, men who deal only in terms of 'how much money can I make; fuck the customer' I just worry about how far out of hand this will eventually get.

Yes you can say, 'if you don't like the price, no one is forcing you to pay it' but here's the thing: I love video games. I don't want to lose one of my favourite hobbies just because some asshole CEO got too greedy and priced all of his companies games out of the market.

Then we've come to lots of a consensus here. EA and Gamestop DO have bastardly policies, but it is their right. I'm just saying that we should defeat them by simply showing them that we don't need them. I'd rather not have a victory when its forced on my enemy by a third party. I'd rather beat them myself.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Holy freaking crap! I thought I was being ripped off when I paid 45 dollars for it used.

Yeah, this is pretty damn awful. I was annoyed at how few copies they brought out in the US in the first place. And don't give me the "but if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have it at all" - bullshit. There was far too much demand for that game. It would've gotten here somehow.

As to the "well, then you should have preordered it" crowd - I don't own a fucking Wii! I wasn't going to preorder a game that I couldn't play. When I did buy it, it was after a friend loaned me a Wii to play it on.

Xenoblade is a pretty good game. A 90 dollar price tag prevents most people from being able to play it. And that is wrong.

Edit: And to the people going "but that's a fair price according to other websites" - well DUH. Gamestop set the price! Of course that's what it's going for now - they control 90% of the copies!

exactly, gamestop owns too many factors in this equation, so they can hide their numbers and essentially set the "supply" to what they want (a.k.a. rarer than a golden dildo) and the demand has to fucking deal with it regardless.

if they didn't hold the rights to distribution through america solely, and for reprints, AND they get all the profits off of "used" copies, this wouldn't be as much of a problem.