I guess I'm alone in saying that I enjoyed these ideas. I've never been a fan of Gamestop and I was always a gamer renter first and foremost. Still, like he said, they were only suggestions that may be beneficial to the entire game industry. Heck, it's a nice suggestion to purchase fresh whole foods from your farmers market so that the farmers see more of a profit. Oh well, I say good job Movie Bob and keep up the good work.
Poll: The Anti-GameStope Revolution
- Thread starter nuba km
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Even though I'm apparently one of few people who genuinely likes Moviebob (you do know he plays up the ego thing for humor, correct?), when he talked about how gamers buy mainstream releases new and later buy indie games used, he neglects the fact that for a game to be used, it had to be bought new in the first place. Mind, he still has a point about how buying used doesn't contribute the way buying new does, but the supply of used copies is proportional to new copies sold, meaning most failed releases are more the result of broader, much more familiar factors than secondhand sales.
My fantasy of being a competent economist aside, I still have a large supply of store credit at Gamestop, and as such I'll continue using that. Of course, I also rather like my regional small store, so I'll shop there when I can.
My fantasy of being a competent economist aside, I still have a large supply of store credit at Gamestop, and as such I'll continue using that. Of course, I also rather like my regional small store, so I'll shop there when I can.
Gamestop is a corporation. Corporations exist to make money. We can't fault them for doing what they were made to do. Hypothetically if we did support a small store until it became big, it would just do the same thing as Gamestop. It's smart. And other companies (Amazon) already do.
100 new copies to 900 used copies is not a realistic figure. Maybe 400 to 600 on a bad day. I know a lot of people that prefer new just so they know their cartridge doesn't come with bubblegum on it or the game case is pristine.
-And the obligatory-
I'm a PC gamer, all my games are new. And nowadays they're digital as opposed to physical.
100 new copies to 900 used copies is not a realistic figure. Maybe 400 to 600 on a bad day. I know a lot of people that prefer new just so they know their cartridge doesn't come with bubblegum on it or the game case is pristine.
-And the obligatory-
I'm a PC gamer, all my games are new. And nowadays they're digital as opposed to physical.
Microsoft collects a 30% rakeoff for titles sold on XBox live, but yeah, it does put more of each dollar in the developer's pocket.Kyman102 said:
OT I will go to Gamestop for new releases (at least on launch day) but if I'm buying a new copy of an older game-such as Bayonetta-I'll go to another big box store to ensure that it actually IS a new game. I don't necessarily trust Gamestop on that count. For used titles, the independent shop down the block is my first choice.
There is actually another thing you can do that he didn't list (or rather he did mention part of it but never specified it), you can buy the game direct from the developer. I've done that a few times with both smaller and mainstream games. That way damn near all the money goes to the developer.nuba km said:
I do agree with him though, the system is flawed.
One of the largest faults in this video is this piece of screwed up logic:
If I have the choice between a new indie game I might like and a new branded game I will like then, all other variables being equal, I will choose the latter.
Note the operative phrase in the above argument: all other variables being equal. This is where the games developers need to act, not the consumer. One of the biggest reasons that new games are avoided is that games developers seem to think that the industry standard price is $60 so therefore they too can charge $60 for their game! Bravissimo. That logic has fail vomited all over it.
Prices are not static, they are relative: relative to how much people are willing to pay for the perceived value of your product. In all other markets except digital media, nobodies trying to break into the market have to make use of all sorts of cunning tricks to get people to switch away from brand-loyalty and try something new. Tricks like offering products at very low prices (sometimes even at a loss) in order to build up some brand awareness, offering brand-focussed deals which allow a customer to make a large saving on a selection of games all from a particular developer and thus build up brand-loyalty (e.g. 10 [insert game developer here] games for just over cost) and other such tactics. And know what? Let's say GameStop decides it's not going to play by that system and the devs attempts to grow brand awareness all fail because GameStop just chooses to sell all the new indie games at $60 and with no deals: choose a method of getting your product to market which offers you more control. Deliver straight to peoples' door from a website company so that you get complete control over distribution with massively reduced costs (know how much money it takes to run a retail outlet compared to a website and a warehouse?).
If you have an untested product then you have to adapt to the market, not cry and whinge because the market won't adapt to you. This reminds me of the music industry.
If I have the choice between a new indie game I might like and a new branded game I will like then, all other variables being equal, I will choose the latter.
Note the operative phrase in the above argument: all other variables being equal. This is where the games developers need to act, not the consumer. One of the biggest reasons that new games are avoided is that games developers seem to think that the industry standard price is $60 so therefore they too can charge $60 for their game! Bravissimo. That logic has fail vomited all over it.
Prices are not static, they are relative: relative to how much people are willing to pay for the perceived value of your product. In all other markets except digital media, nobodies trying to break into the market have to make use of all sorts of cunning tricks to get people to switch away from brand-loyalty and try something new. Tricks like offering products at very low prices (sometimes even at a loss) in order to build up some brand awareness, offering brand-focussed deals which allow a customer to make a large saving on a selection of games all from a particular developer and thus build up brand-loyalty (e.g. 10 [insert game developer here] games for just over cost) and other such tactics. And know what? Let's say GameStop decides it's not going to play by that system and the devs attempts to grow brand awareness all fail because GameStop just chooses to sell all the new indie games at $60 and with no deals: choose a method of getting your product to market which offers you more control. Deliver straight to peoples' door from a website company so that you get complete control over distribution with massively reduced costs (know how much money it takes to run a retail outlet compared to a website and a warehouse?).
If you have an untested product then you have to adapt to the market, not cry and whinge because the market won't adapt to you. This reminds me of the music industry.
Interesting video, won't make me stop buying from GameStop though.
I'm not entirely convinced on his "revolution" idea, but I see where he's coming from. While GameStop is not necessarily a monopoly, they do have a huge stranglehold in the US market at least, and used game sales do hurt the developers.
But I don't think he really touched on the actual topic, namely how the system itself can be reformed. He only stated how to bring down GameStop's (supposed) monopoly, but he never mentioned any alternative of the GameStop method. Used games will always exist, gamers want convenience and affordability, and GameStop provides that. I don't see how participating in this "revolution" will provide a better alternative other than GameStop having a slightly less strong hold on game sales. The system is going to stay the same, just distributed more evenly.
Personally, I just shop at GameStop for the convenience, and overall it's been a good store. I tend to buy my game new anyway since I love that new game smell.
I'm not entirely convinced on his "revolution" idea, but I see where he's coming from. While GameStop is not necessarily a monopoly, they do have a huge stranglehold in the US market at least, and used game sales do hurt the developers.
But I don't think he really touched on the actual topic, namely how the system itself can be reformed. He only stated how to bring down GameStop's (supposed) monopoly, but he never mentioned any alternative of the GameStop method. Used games will always exist, gamers want convenience and affordability, and GameStop provides that. I don't see how participating in this "revolution" will provide a better alternative other than GameStop having a slightly less strong hold on game sales. The system is going to stay the same, just distributed more evenly.
Personally, I just shop at GameStop for the convenience, and overall it's been a good store. I tend to buy my game new anyway since I love that new game smell.
I voted "I'm going to do some of those things" because I already do. I am not interested in a revolution. My reasons:
1. Numerous bad experiences with Gamestop. I don't support stores that jerk me around.
2. No local shops that aren't chains, so I can't really support the little guy.
3. I don't really trade in games much. For that, I use eBay and the like.
4. For used purchases, I can buy on eBay/Half.com, and Amazon is more reliable than Gamestop.
1. Numerous bad experiences with Gamestop. I don't support stores that jerk me around.
2. No local shops that aren't chains, so I can't really support the little guy.
3. I don't really trade in games much. For that, I use eBay and the like.
4. For used purchases, I can buy on eBay/Half.com, and Amazon is more reliable than Gamestop.
I think the more important thing to take away from Bob's idea is to make your purchase decisions that will benefit the industry. Will buying used or from Gamestop hurt the industry? Maybe, maybe not. Will trying to get other places to have more variety in their games help the industry? Probably. Will spreading the word about really good games that aren't already franchises or hugely successful to both stores and people in general help the industry? Also probably.
I never go to Gamestop in the first place, does that count? I find that things there are overpriced and I don't trade my games in anyways.
I'm not buying used games from Gamestop (usually EB Games in Canada), so that's a start. Then again, I wasn't their best customer to begin with.
I am interested in this little manifesto, though...
I am interested in this little manifesto, though...
If buying used is a problem, then what does it matter where you buy the used games from? I see a lot of people here saying "I won't buy used from Gamestop" then turning around and saying that they'll buy from the indie store down the street that sells used. Essentially its the same thing. Every "indie" store I've been to around here has worse prices than Gamestop for used titles (and crap trade-in value) and are crappily managed by uber-geeks with no social or organizational skills. I even had one "lose" my store credit and then proceed to tell me it was my fault he fucked up.
Not saying all indie stores are bad tho, just the ones I've been to.
Back to my original question, if the whole used market is "bad" then why go to another store for used games?
Pretty hypocritical.
Not saying all indie stores are bad tho, just the ones I've been to.
Back to my original question, if the whole used market is "bad" then why go to another store for used games?
Pretty hypocritical.
I don't buy at Gamestop, but it has nothing to do with a "revoltuion", as your poll so inelegantly puts it. It's because:
1) I'm not a console gamer and Gamestop doesn't sell PC games, at least the one near my house doesn't.
2) I <3 Steam with all my heart as a gamer.
3) I have better things to get outraged about than a game retailer---they're not a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination (Best Buy, Target, Wal-Mart, Steam, Amazon...need I go on?)
4) What do independent games have to do with this? You can enjoy New Vegas AND Minecraft, last I checked.
5) I'm not enough of a self-absorbed d-bag to claim I'm supporting a revolution by spending my dollars where they'll bring me the most satisfaction.
1) I'm not a console gamer and Gamestop doesn't sell PC games, at least the one near my house doesn't.
2) I <3 Steam with all my heart as a gamer.
3) I have better things to get outraged about than a game retailer---they're not a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination (Best Buy, Target, Wal-Mart, Steam, Amazon...need I go on?)
4) What do independent games have to do with this? You can enjoy New Vegas AND Minecraft, last I checked.
5) I'm not enough of a self-absorbed d-bag to claim I'm supporting a revolution by spending my dollars where they'll bring me the most satisfaction.
The current business models used by publishers are antiquated and detrimental to the developers and the publishers. I have no desire to even moderately inconvenience to bolster the profit margins of any corporation. It doesn't take an MBA to figure out how publishers can release their games in different ways to claim a larger profit. It's their complacency and stupid that's causing their problems.
Gamestop consistently offers the best service of any games retailer I've shopped at. They keep the widest select of current generation games of any store, they have a no fuss return policy on used games within 7 days. Most importantly I've never had any issues with customer service or inconvenient rules, such as "no open beverages" or "bags must be checked." I do have access to independent games retailers, and none of them are actually as good as GameStop. If a store were to open and try to compete by either providing better prices or a better shopping experience I'd give them a shot, but I'm not going to support a worse middleman just to give publishers a larger cut.
I do give some sympathy to indie developers and I do make an effort to buy directly from them, which in terms of effort just visiting a different website.
Gamestop consistently offers the best service of any games retailer I've shopped at. They keep the widest select of current generation games of any store, they have a no fuss return policy on used games within 7 days. Most importantly I've never had any issues with customer service or inconvenient rules, such as "no open beverages" or "bags must be checked." I do have access to independent games retailers, and none of them are actually as good as GameStop. If a store were to open and try to compete by either providing better prices or a better shopping experience I'd give them a shot, but I'm not going to support a worse middleman just to give publishers a larger cut.
I do give some sympathy to indie developers and I do make an effort to buy directly from them, which in terms of effort just visiting a different website.