Help me explain how GameStop is screwing over gamers and developers alike

[Owyn_Merrilin]

My argument is that they are screwing over the customer by charging far more than a used game is actually worth. Think about it, $5 of of $60 is roughly 8%. Once that shrink wrap comes off, the value of the game drops way more than that. They should be charging something on the order of 20-30% less than the new price, and even then only for as long as the game is current. But they get away with the 8% markdown, because they don't have any real competition on the brick and mortar front. I can guarantee you that individual used sellers on Ebay and Amazon knock off way more than 8% of the MSRP, and that the markdown in brick and mortar stores was similarly high before Gamestop beat out most of the competition.

This don't screw the customer over though. The customer sees the price and makes the decision as to whether the used game is worth $55. If they don't think it is then they can choose to attempt to source the game elsewhere at a different price.

Things that screw the customer over are things like the razerblade trap. You buy your shaver from Gillete, and in doing so are bound to buy the razers from them as well.

If Gamestop were doing things like bundling used games in packs of three, where you have to pay for two you don't want just to get the one you do, that would be screwing people over. As it is they put the used games up for a price they deem appropriate and you get to decide whether or not you think it's worth that price. Like you yourself have pointed out, individual sellers tend to knock off more, so if you want to find one of them and negotiate a price with them you're perfectly entitled to do so.

Again, there isn't a real choice here. Your choice is pay $55 for a used game, or pay $60 for a new game. The individual sellers here are selling over the internet, and are not really able to compete with gamestop. The smaller brick and mortar stores are practically nonexistant, and there are no national chains in competition with Gamestop, at least not currently. We'll see what happens to the prices when Walmart and Bestbuy get in on the used game market -- simple economics tells us that they're going to drop.

I have to say, I can't really blame Gamestop for charging as high as they do; they're in this to make a profit, and as long as they don't have any real competition, they are within their rights to charge whatever the heck they want. That doesn't mean it's good for consumers. However, I will say this; the real damage that they do to the consumer is by buying out their competition, and cornering the market on used games. They effectively have the ability to charge what they want, and the consumer's "option" in deciding what to pay boils down to "do I buy the game, or do I skip it and save my money or buy a completely different product, like a DVD or a book?"

 

[Bedewyr]

1) You guys (and anyone who has worked for these companies should know the same info) pay almost exactly 10 dollars per game more than it costs the company to bring it in. Collectors editions bring in even more; They average about 20 bucks per sale.

Ex. You pay 59.99 + taxes while the Company paid ~45-50 Dollars to bring it in. Sometimes depending on the developer even less but generally nothing below 40 dollars.

2) you get 10% off "Trade ins" and 10% more on "Trade in" value if you have a subscription to Game Informer. (their Magazine) 1 year cost $19.99 (meaning you need to trade in ~10 of your own games minimum or buy ~4 used games to make up just the cost and more if you want to "benefit" from this amazing offer. (Keep in mind this is a once a month deal as the coupon comes with the magazine. Don't worry though.

3) You can just buy an Edge card and get on the Edge! $15 dollars gets you an Edge card which you can use on Used stuff for an extra 10% off (excludes consoles... obviously) and 10% more on Trade ins! WOWIE ZOWIE an extra 2 whole dollars on that brand spankin' new ame you JUST bought 5 days ago or got for a present but, don't want.

4) This is all on store credit obviously... who gives cash anymore? No one since Gamestop bought out all the competition silly goose.

I'm not going to sit her and sprout that Gamestop is evil or anything like that but, they certainly put the absolute screws to their customers and gouge the ever loving shit out of them. The Edge card and Magazine Subscription ensures that people are more than willing to trade in and buy used to "save money" when in fact they're really just lining Gamestops pockets with even more cash due to a forced shopping habit. The store credit only for trade-ins (and I remember when trading in Super NES and NES games got me CASH at Microtrends and Megapower Games) also ensures that you come back to spend the not only the money they gave you but, then some.

Do you really think Gamestop cares that you saved a whole 7 dollars making the extra 10% on that trade in and saving on the used game you bought? Think you got such an awesome deal? Well... you didn't. It cost you 8 extra dollars from the Edge card you just bought. Possibly an extra 28 Dollars including the subscription. And you just ensured that Gamestop also made ~30 dollars profit off of a game that you now possibly have no book, no case, and no codes for your DLC for.

They have set up the perfect parallel economy for lazy, uninformed, sucker consumers from which they can make literally millions of dollars from all the while under the guise of "saving" the consumer money.

 

[Savagezion]

The way I see it the game industry would like to force you to buy blind with no possibility of return, only your aren't really BUYING.

This. OMG this! And yet you see people rushing to the aid of the developer lopsiding the arguement and saying "Poor, poor, EA/Activision/2K/etc." And then saying we should feel ashamed for buying used games.

To me, the insanity of saying "buying used is the same as piracy" is proof of the absurd ideas of the software industry and the gamers who swallow their BS.

This too. Extra Credits, and most of the links that have been spouted in here along with most arguements are overlooking one part of this and showcasing somewhere else. The statement "buying used is the same as piracy" irritates me to know that alot of gamers out there are this naive. They all probably were part of the people not buying pork in fear of getting swine flu.

(Man, alot of people are starting to quote and reference Extra Credits alot on here just like ZP. I am begining to think if you have a show that is basically you on a soapbox on the net, it influences alot of people on here who can't seem to think for themselves and think your arguement is flawless. No need to think for yourself when you are ready to take credit for someone else's opinion I guess.)

 

[Legendairy314]

As games are just being bought pre-owned the developers get less money for their products and, consequently, they may produce less games. Gamestop pushes the selling and buying of used games hard because it turns pure profit. The easiest solution would be to instigate some return of profit margin to the developers but that won't happen for a while.

 

[Worgen]

The unnecessarily high game prices. 5 years ago it was 50 bucks per game now its 60. The amount of "hardcore gamer" employees who will make fun of you because you are not buying some mega tbs game. These reasons hurt developers more because of the high prices i wont buy a game unless i know i will like it, and i will buy somewhere else or not at all because of the employees.

actually the current price was decided by ms and sony, thats why wii games are still only 50 at most at launch

really there is nothing that gamestop is doing that is screwing over anyone, they dont give the best trade in price but what do you expect, no one who plays middleman is going to give you 50 bucks for a 60 dollar game since they dont know how long they will have to hold it and if by the time its sold its not worth less, or if they will have to ship it to other stores

 

[PinkiePyro]

i dont see anything wrong with gamestop they price theirs at the same range as other store and they have the best selction besides amazon (but I dont really like ordering online because my family has had issues with ppl stealing our packages)

 

[Atmos Duality]

No, why would we want of get rid of retailers? So the publishers can have a monopoly?

Presently, we want to limit their commercial power. Ideally, neither should exist except solely as a means of distributing product/games.
In reality, both tack-on enormous mark-ups beyond what is necessary.

So lets not even try to pretend either retail or publishers are innocent here.

A used is not a lost new sale.

If I bought the game used, unless I go out and buy another copy new, the developer IS NOT SEEING ONE PENNY FROM MY SALE.

At best, the developer is now seeing HALF THE PROFIT FROM TWO CUSTOMERS.
That's mathematically identical to losing one sale at best for that copy of the game (unless you can somehow prove that that same game is occupying two locations at the same time).

This is not true for ALL copies of the game, but given Gamestop's wild success in marketing used games, I'd wager that it's true for most of those copies.

I would not have paid full price for many of the games I bought used so pretending that ever used sale is a lost new sale is as flawed as claiming every pirated games is a lost new sale.

Your opinion is not objective evidence for the claim it is attached to.
"I don't think most of my games are worth X, therefore Y is true."
I already gave you the math above. Even in the best possible scenario, for that given copy of a game, the developer sees half the profit/sale.

Further, I would like to know why software developers think that they are above the First Sale Doctrine?

They aren't. That isn't my point. It's about how abuse of the First Sale Doctrine is harming the industry, and the relative quality/variety of the games available.

The way I see it the game industry would like to force you to buy blind with no possibility of return, only your aren't really BUYING.

They already do that. I'm sad to be a PC gamer for that very reason.

They already have half of it, no returns but if they get their way you won't even be able to try the game before you pay full price. To add insult to injury, that game you just bought blind for full price, it isn't even yours. You are simply renting it.

Indeed. And if the developers had more say in their titles maybe we would have games that aren't just sequel after sequel. Maybe people would actually hold onto to those old titles like we used to. Because many of them were GOOD.
Today, there's no need to hold onto those old games. Fuck, Black Ops is about to hit store shelves here (as of this writing), and from what I've seen and read, it's IDENTICAL TO LAST YEAR'S CALL OF DUTY, but with new maps! And it's slightly better!

Rather than giving a game its own identity, lets just copy it and make a few minor adjustments!

Personally, I like the idea that when I buy something, it is mine to discard as I see fit. Throw it away, give it to a friend, keep it or SELL IT. I think that's is how it should be and I don't think the software industry is any different than any other industry.

If the primary/major players of distribution were not abusing arbitrage then this really wouldn't be a problem. Just as an example, most movies today turn solid profits in DVD sales, and their usage is akin to that of games today.

An individual committing arbitrage is one thing; but when major distributors are not only doing it, but have built their entire industry around it, it becomes a serious problem.
Why? BECAUSE IT HURTS OR LIMITS DEVELOPMENT. Developers are working with huge budgets but with limited design choices (due to mandates from the publishers), and if we want them to use those budgets to do better, it helps if the games we buy from them actually pay the developer.

However, my point was never about discarding First Sale Doctrine, but to point out that by defending the current Used Game Market (as in, Gamestop) you are in fact defending an exploitative business who intentionally rips off developers for profit, which in turn, harms the quality of games in the long run.

This isn't mere speculation anymore; we've sat and watched this scenario play out over the last 5-6 years, and we can only expect it to become worse in the future.

As with anything in history, abuse of any given right will inevitably lead to it being taken away or limited.

To me, the insanity of saying "buying used is the same as piracy" is proof of the absurd ideas of the software industry and the gamers who swallow their BS.

I...never made that claim. And never intended to.

I was simply arguing against the "pro-dev = insanity" quote. I did not mean to imply that I questioned the "Used games =/= piracy" argument. (A poor choice of quotation on my part).
Piracy is a crime, no matter how you slice it. Used sales can be part of legitimate economic processes.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Snip

Through its monoplolization of the gaming store and it's used game market. Since there is no real big chain of video game stores besides gamestop (the last one, EB games, merged with them), they sell a huge portion of the sold game market, especialy games that don't have the mass market appeal to be held by Target/Walmart. What ever they do directly shakes the industry, good or bad. Now, with that extreme power, they took and made it's used game market. The games that Gamespot sells at retail, it has to share most of the money made on that disk with the developer, and who ever packaged it. On used games? They get 100% of the money the game goes for. Not a cent goes to the developer. While big titles like CoD or Mario are generally are not that effected by this, the small guys tend to lose a lot in this deal. Since used games are cheaper, and most people like to buy what they know, the weird indie game will more often be bought used then new. This doesn't directly effect the customer, but the less indie developers make, the less risks the big guys are going to take, and stagnation will start to set in. We also been getting stupid attempts to fix the issue like Project 10 dollar and a massive increase in DLC production.

If you want to learn more, first watch the Extra Credit episode on project 10 dollar, and then find the gameoverthinker's video (that is what moviebob uses as his video game discussion things on Screw Attack, and no I do not know why he isn't doing that on the Escapist either) on the "Revolution."

 

[LightOfDarkness]

They screw over customers because they have the used games market cornered

Amazon has used games for way less.

Not to mention you can just use Kijiji or a local used anything website, or even your local newspaper classifieds.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

They screw over customers because they have the used games market cornered

Amazon has used games for way less.

Not to mention you can just use Kijiji or a local used anything website, or even your local newspaper classifieds.

I don't feel like answering this one in detail for the fourth time this thread, so I'm just going to point you in the direction of the posts I made after that first one, and point out that those options are small change compared to what Gamestop is capable of.

That done, here's the main reason I'm putting up yet another post in this thread: I feel sorry for the OP. He asked us to write one paragraph responses to his question, so that he could share them on IRC, and we wound up giving him several walls of text arguing it out. You've gotta love this site

 

[Evilbunny]

That done, here's the main reason I'm putting up yet another post in this thread: I feel sorry for the OP. He asked us to write one paragraph responses to his question, so that he could share them on IRC, and we wound up giving him several walls of text arguing it out. You've gotta love this site

Lol, it's the truth. Escapists don't have only a paragraph to say about anything.

 

[Racecarlock]

Honestly now, the prices aren't THAT high if you look in the games bin. Alot of those games have 15 dollar price tags on them. Some go for less. Honestly, although some used games are overpriced I think we should fight for them. Know why? Without used games as competition, developers or publishers can start charging ridiculous prices for their games, like, say, $110 for cod black ops or $200 for another recent game. Game prices skyrocket, and soon only the rich can afford them. Maybe this is a doomsday theory, but can you imagine what the developers could start pricing their games at in a world where no one can get them any cheaper? Yeah. Still don't believe me? Action 52 for the NES was $199 new, and we know how that turned out.

 

[Agayek]

So, could you give me an explanation of how GameStop is screwing over both Gamers and developers. I know how they're screwing us over, but I can't really put it into words without looking like a total prick. I only have one requirement: It has to be in only one paragraph. I'm going to be posting it in an IRC Chat, and the applet that I use doesn't let me have multiple paragraphs in a single post.

Customers: They charge excessively high prices for games (both new and used), and pay a pittance to buy games. People are willing to pay it, so I'm hesitant to call it "screwing over", but it definitely has a noticeable effect on the market.

Developers: The used game market. Because they stock new and used copies of the same game right next to each other, and the used is typically roughly equal equality for less price, they supposedly cut into developer profits.

Both of these are arguable, but they're the general arguments used against GameStop. I'm not sure I wholly agree with either, but that's the way it is.

 

[Agayek]

actually the current price was decided by ms and sony, thats why wii games are still only 50 at most at launch

really there is nothing that gamestop is doing that is screwing over anyone, they dont give the best trade in price but what do you expect, no one who plays middleman is going to give you 50 bucks for a 60 dollar game since they dont know how long they will have to hold it and if by the time its sold its not worth less, or if they will have to ship it to other stores

I don't expect to get anywhere near full retail price when I sell a game, but getting $3-5 on a $60 game is a bit ridiculous.

 

[Exort]

You buy a new game for $60, then sell it to Gamestop for $25. They sell it to the next guy for $55, and then when he sells it back they give him $20. They re-sell it again for $50, and then buy it back from THAT guy for $15. A fourth guy buys the copy for $45, and when he sells it back Gamestop pays him $10.

- The gamers who sell their games to Gamestop could probably get 100% more than they offer (i.e. sell it on eBay for $50 instead of accept the crappy offer of $25).

- Net profit to Gamestop in this scenario: $150 + the game.

- Net profit to publishers/developers: < $60 (some of the cost goes to the original retailer).

Multiply this by thousands of games, and you have some idea of Gamestop's negative impact on the industry.

Developer/Publish get a total of about 30 I think.

 

[Agayek]

Yes. As in, you were supposed to get $1,000 if 1,000 people bought your $1 game, but only 100 of the people buy it new, so you don't get the $900 that you were supposed to get. The Game Overthinker already talked about it.

Now, to open a new can of worms because I'm like that, piracy very much can be considered the same thing if we're talking about how they affect the developer, but with piracy you're dealing with hypothetical sales.

You do realize that it's not physically possible for people to buy more used copies than new copies right? I mean, somehow, somewhere, someone had to buy the game originally before it became "used". You can't have more than an even split, and most of the time it's likely significantly less.

That said, used sales do make a significant dent in software sales. It's just the nature of the beast.

 

[Nexus4]

The unnecessarily high game prices. 5 years ago it was 50 bucks per game now its 60. The amount of "hardcore gamer" employees who will make fun of you because you are not buying some mega tbs game. These reasons hurt developers more because of the high prices i wont buy a game unless i know i will like it, and i will buy somewhere else or not at all because of the employees.

your lucky, here in Australia our games sell new for about $100. They're set to come down, hopefully, in the future due to the strength of our currency at the moment.

 

[Broderick]

From what I understand, the reason why gamestop is "screwing over gamers and developers" is because of their used game market. Now buying games used is a good way to save money, but apparently NONE and I mean NONE of the money used to buy the "used game" goes to the company that made it; it goes to gamestop. This is bad because the company that made the games dont get any money, and yeah, one or 2 used games sales isnt bad, but remember that the number of used games sold is pretty high up there, and thats a lot of money not going back the the developer.

Now the first time that copy of the game is sold, part of the money goes to gamestop, and part of the money goes to the developer and anyone involved with making the game; If someone takes that copy back to gamestop however, it becomes "used" and any money that someone used to buy that specific copy of the game now goes only to gamestop.(probably butchered it pretty bad but I think you get the idea).

I have no idea how Gamestop is a monopoly though, I mean it isnt like they are the ONLY store that sells games. So I think people are using words in which they do not know the meaning of /princess bride quote here.

 

[minarri]

I recommend that you check out the Extra Credits video on Project $10. I feel that they summed it up pretty well there.