An employee of Canada's EB Games (read: GameStop) has let us know that, in one of the company's ****ier moves in recent years, the distinction between "new" and "used" games (at least in Canada) is apparently going to be all but removed.
what the hell.
is a rumor guys is a lie i used to work at gamestop 2 years ago used game is where they get their profits from, this is why their business been so successful
You're clearly replying to the title, which indicates you didn't read the actual article. Gamestop isn't ending their used game sales. If the rumour is true, they will be hiding the new games behind the used games, so the more profitable used games are more likely to sell.
@Quod.. The local Gamestop's by me have been doing that for years now.. the closest one to me doesn't even put new releases out on the shelves, they keep them in closed/locked cupboard behind the register. You have to actually ASK if you want a NEW release.
@Qoud, I'm a firm believer in reading the article before commenting, but you have to admit this is a very misleading title to get hits.
This is what happens to companies that are slowly going down the tubes. They don't get as many people in the door, then do sales every month, (some of which have been good much cheaper than steam sales) then start to mix things around. Australia EB is the only store that even sells PC games on the shelf anymore all these rest don't even bother to stock them. Some of the places the staff whinge when they have to look it up on the computer for the PC platform as they don't know it off by heart. STeam is ok, but it is scrwing up the gaming biz big time, soon enough there won't be any gaming store companies and some people will think it's great by those who buy a game and want to trade it back lol forget about that happening. As steam doesn't even let you remove or delete a game, so every demo you get you have to keep it on the list.
This is awesome news, now everyone can support the devs by buying games new. Buying second hand is like pirating, since the devs dont get anything out of it. Personally games are so cheap already i dont see why people buy second hand.
Hey, T900, guess what? You're an asshole! That's right, you're the lucky winner of today's giant asshole award for calling buying used games pirating! And saying that they're so cheap that everyone should be able to afford them! Guess what, retard? Not everyone can afford brand new games all the time, and if a retail outlet offers a game you want at a lower price, it obviously makes sense to a consumer to find the best deal possible. You're still paying for the game, and where that profit goes isn't your problem. It's not MY fault that retailers and game developers haven't figured out some type of arrangement to break up used game profits. So until then, as a consumer, I'm going to keep going for the best deals I can. Idiot.
It be soo empty... Like COD on one wall, And Mirrors all Around, and you can Pose, see if it fits your Style
In either case I just highly recommend selling your games on ebay. Sure there is a little added hassle of shipping the games yourself but trust me the amount of $$$ you save opposed to selling to Gamestop makes it worth it.
If they do that it would mean they plan on selling used games at new prices.
that's like saying Activision will get rid of CoD
@bobrea Games are already so cheap, check out www.steampowered.com i dont see why you would want to buy second had with those prices.
Trust me, I'm well aware of Steam's awesome prices and sales, and I've picked up plenty of games through them, which speaks to the exact point I was making. As a consumer, I'm always trying to find the best deals on things that I want, so when it comes to PC games, I take full advantage of Steam sales. But you can't buy PS3 or 360 games from Steam, can you? So now used games become the cheapest way for me to get what I want for my console. And as I said before, the fact that there is a rift between developers and retailers in terms of profit is NOT my problem.
I don't see that. Used games are still the only way they make any real profit. So cut the price down to $50 to compensate for the $10 online passes, still make millions upon millions.
you guys obviously never read the article. Basically the only way to differentiate new games from used games will be to look at the price tags and see whether it says new or used (tiny letters), as they will all be mixed together. No more 'used game section'. Now it will just be organized by genre with the new mixed in with the used.
its just bs, but it would be nice to see a full wall of PC games in gamestop someday again.
Lol now I understand why my gamestop has one tiny little rack with mostly the WOW games on it...
When people can already get Skyrim or BF3 on PC at launch for £28 (bout $44US) and have it at their door day 1 what's the point in having PC games in-store? Or pre-order online for ~£35 if you don't want to risk the post being late.... Gamestation were trying to flog off the PC version for £45 ($70US) with the console versions for some reason. Spunging up all that extra profit for themselves! High-street game retailers are trash. They often sell 2nd hand copies for just £5 less than new for years after launch. The sooner they die, the better it will be for developers and customers. At least the big chain stores are trash, I used to get new console launches for £30 at an independant store (or £35 for GTA4 :O). While major retailers always charged £40+ and complained they were struggling to pull a profit... The only problem with their demise would be a lot of part-time jobs disappearing.
lmao who would believe this. why would they ditch a section where they make 60% more profit? haha
people who actually read the article and know what its about...
THEY AREN'T DITCHING USED GAMES They are only simply getting rid of the section and merging it with new games. So what does that mean? It means us Gamers are gonna get more F'd when it comes to developers making choices with Online passes. Gamestop/EB are throwing their used games in front on New games displays. PLUS as mentioned i the article consumer are going to end up buying a used game only to have to buy an online pass now. It just seems stupid.
My friend works at gamstop, he said they might get rid of the used PS2 and GC games. If that's the case the rumor is somewhat true.
True or not, this & other GameStop practices is the very reason:
I take my $2,000+ annual gaming habit dollars to Best Buy, Toys r Us, & Walmart.
Many of my friends have done the same.
I believe this story is legit because it makes sense as a good business move as it WILL help Gamestop sell more used games.
sigh its true.... I live in Canada, and our EBs are so bad, they will lie to anyone inexperienced enough buying video games into buying used. I was so pissed that EB tricked my sister to buy a used copy of uncharted 2 for my birthday, that I made sure to return it to Eb and buy it new from Best Buy, with my own cash, I gave her money back. It pisses me off that Eb does this crap and money does not go to the developers who make these incredible games Eb games has way to much product pushing, its way worse in Canada than it is in the US
Used games are their 'bread & butter', highly unlikely.
And this is exactly why we have crap like online passes. Some people like to place all the blame on the greedy, evil, publishers, but if GameStop is now going so far as to basically bury gutted shelf copies of new games (which look, and basically are used) under used copies and do as little as possible to differentiate the two, it's damn obvious publishers need to do something to fight back. It's just a damn shame that gamers get stuck in the middle.
I agree, plus they always tend to tell you, oh why don't you buy it used, it's cheaper... I have no idea why Gamers complain about online passes, but don't mind Gamestop doing shit like this though.
BULLSHIT and you know it!!! Used sales exist since FOREVER.... WHY it is bad now?? Because the multibillion biggest gaming publisher in the WORLD said so???? What about countries that doeant have gamestop stores, why punish them too for teh evil gamestop?
You have one more bubble. I suggest you read the ARTICLE and try again.
Games cost more now thats why its bad. I understand used games are great especially when I'm looking for games they don't make anymore but it hurts publishers. With this there will definitely be more used games sold, but what can you do.
Dark-hollow is right. Used sales exist in all walks of life. Used cars, used houses, used furniture, some people even buy used clothes. But now, all of a sudden, I am supposed to believe that used sales are the bain of my existence. I call BS. On of the first lessons in economics is about efficient markets. Consumers benefit from more efficient markets. Wall Street exists because the efficient trading in used stocks allows more people and thus more money to flow into businesses. Similarly, used resellers make the market MORE EFFICIENT. Gamestop is doing this expressly because there is NO DIFFERENCE between a new and a used game. It is a MORE EFFICIENT use of your money if you pay less for a game that is used than if you pay more for a game that is new. Gamestop makes the market MORE EFFICIENT by taking games that would otherwise be sitting on a shelf collecting dust and selling them to people who will use them. The people who can't afford new games get to enjoy the game and MORE IMPORTANTLY donate their money to the game market. The people who sell the used games spend that money on new, cutting edge games. The game developers go back to the drawing board sooner to develop another new game. Gamestop uses the profits to build new stores in more far-out places, and to stock more exotic games that the big department stores can't give shelf space to. People who live in the country, far away from big departments, get to buy games cheaper, and get to experience more games and more of the exotic games. The game market gets money from the person who can only afford to spend $30 on a game and not $60. The cycle then repeats, everybody get more. The market grows because the people who can afford $30 outnumber the people who can afford $60.
If a game costs $60 new, it costs $55 used, not $30, so that's a very flawed argument. If you only have $30 to spend you still can only buy a $30 game. And used games are never substantially cheaper than new games at any price point, at most $10 cheaper, and that's very rare. Only trash games get that designation for the most part.
A new released game may cost $60 new and $55 used. However you can get back $25 - $30 if sell back a newly released game to Gamestop, so it balances out. The big retailers will often have 1 - 2 year old games still listed at $60. Plus they take lots of games off the shelf aftet a year or two. I just bought Final Fantasy X about 3 months ago. That's right, FF10. I was able to do that because Gamestop makes a market in used games. I paid $28 for FF13 about 8 months after it released. (it was clearly nerfed for 360 so I refused to buy it new) What did I do with the money I saved, Force Unleashed 2. $60 + 28 = less than $100. I can't spend more than that at one time on games because I actually have bills to pay. Lots of people only play 1 year old games. We who post on N4G, examining games before they are even released, stay on the cutting edge of gaming. Most people are not like that. The entire PS2/Xbox generation I only paid $20 or $30 for almost all my games. I only bought 2 or 3 titles new. But I probably bought 15 or 20 games overall. Even though that money doesn't go directly to the publisher some of it does get to the publish and it wouldn't get to the publisher otherwise. The argument isn't flawed at all and it holds up even if every case was Gamestop buying it for $10 and selling it for $55, but every case is not that extreme. Used games lower the entry point into the games market. The people who sell the games use the proceeds to buy new games.
@dark-hollow Used sales have existed forever, but they haven't been promoted anywhere near as heavily as GameStop pushes them (10% off with a Power Up card or Buy 2 Get 1 free on used only, for example). And new product has never been gutted to appear exactly the same as used, then placed under a pile of used games. If you don't think that poses a problem, you're crazy. @Darrius Cars, houses, furniture, and clothes? Give me a break. You even said it yourself... there is NO DIFFERENCE between a new and used game. Used games don't have 100,000 miles and rust on them. Used games don't smell like a dog has been sleeping on it for ten years. Comparing games to any of those is absurd. You say GameStop is a MORE EFFECIENT use of your money yet you're only thinking about the store/customer relationship while ignoring that the entire industry is dependent on new sales to survive. GameStop might give you a minor discount on a new game, but it's leeching off the people who actually make the games. Without new copies, there are no used copies. Sure, MW3 will be just fine if GS sells a used copy instead of new, but what about the smaller games out there that need the new business? What happens for games like Enslaved? You bring up the fact that GameStop sells obscure games, but if the companies that make those games don't get a worthwhile return on their investment because GameStop's used business cuts into their sales, what incentive do they have to keep making obscure games? But hey, putting another nail in the Enslaved series' coffin by not buying new is totally worth it to save $5 on the first game in the series, right? And don't give me that nonsense about being able to afford games. GameStop's used prices are terrible. I had Modern Warfare 3 on release day for $47 dollars new. The new WWE game is $47 on Amazon and comes with $10 credit. If not being able to save $5 by buying used is a deal breaker, they shouldn't be buying games at near full price to begin with. GameStop is a joke when it comes to new game pricing as well. It's all MSRP to keep used games looking attractive by comparison while tons of other retailers offer deals on new copies that would save a customer more. I would know. I've bought hundreds of games, many at release, yet haven't paid MSRP without getting at least a $10 credit bonus in five years. And you make it sound like used trade ins drive sales of new, but if people are so budget-conscious, wouldn't plenty of those people buy used rather than new? And for everyone that buys a new copy via trade in, it seems perfectly logical to assume a new sale is lost because someone bought that traded in used copy just to save $5 and therefor negating the benefit of trade ins driving that new sale. Oh, and GameStop is using profits to build stores to reach all those towns in the middle of nowhere and bring more choice to them? Seriously? It's called internet. It's a magical little place that sells just about any video game you'd ever want, and can ship it to any backwater dirt farm you live on.
I think that developers should get into the used game business. It might increase their sales more than a simple play pass.
Used sales haven't been promoted? That's not right. Entire industries are built around second-hand product sales. Real-Estate agents, used car salesmen, stock brokers, all exist to sell second hand products. There are more players here than publishers. The industry needs all of them to survive. Each party has to do what is in its own best interest. The publisher do that; Gamestop does that; the developer try to do that (sometimes they are too stupid to know what that is); the consumers should do that too. If the consumers spend all their time worrying about helping the developers then the consumers will get less and less for their money. Yes, used game resellers make the market more efficient. Used resellers allow the market to service the same number of people with fewer units. That is very definition of more efficient. I buy it for $60; play it; sell it to EB $20; you buy from EB for $40. That's two people served by one unit for a net of $80 spent (60 - 20 + 40 = 80) instead being served by 2 units for $120. Again this is the very definition of more efficient. The game developers sold the consumers an asset, the game. The gamer owns it. He can do whatever he wants with it. Selling it to someone else is not leaching from anybody else. They set their price and the gamer bought it, fair and square. You should be aware that you and people who support your argument are trying to take something away from the consumer unfairly. The consumers right to do what they wish with there lawfully purchased property. Whether you think it helps the industry or not it is their right. Used games sales do drive the sales of new games. People trade in the their old games toward the purchase of as new game. That is the way most trade-ins go. People not being able to afford new games is far from nonsense. Money is finite and people can only spend so much on video games. A better way to look at it is entry point. Some people can buy games at $60, some at $50, some $40, etc. on down people who can only afford $5 or $10 per game. Not every used games sells for $55. Lots of them sell for much less, later on. The market is still helped either way though. Regardless of whether or not the used copy sold for $5 or $55 somebody sold their new copy back and thus had their net purchase price lowered. I bought the Force Unleashed 1 new for $60. Sold it back for $30, then bought it back again for $10.
"Used sales haven't been promoted?" I was talking specifically about games. And I'm right. GameStop pushes used sales hard. The evidence in the article points the GameStop now pushing them harder than ever before. And your mention of housing, vehicles, and stocks is flat out ridiculous. People aren't going to buy a new house if they have to keep their old one. Same with vehicles. But would owning one game ever keep you from buying a second game? Do Steam customers buy fewer games than console gamers because they can't resell them? I highly doubt it. And houses and vehicles aren't based on a business model in which the vast majority of production costs are spent upfront on development as is the case with the games industry. Publishers spend upfront to create a game and hope they recoup costs via sales. Houses and vehicles are produced to accommodate demand and production can be scaled back on the fly. The game industry doesn't have that luxury. And stocks!? New and used STOCKS? Seriously? What are you going to bring up next? "Used" land? "There are more players here than publishers." I never said there weren't. You sure do make it sound like publishers aren't a player though by boiling down your whole "efficiency" argument down to a store + customer relationship. It's not efficient if it's killing profitability for games, thus reducing your choice of games. What's more "efficient"... Having Enslaved and Modern Warfare to choose from, or just Modern Warfare? Because that "efficiency" you seem so fond of encourages used purchases over new, meaning publishers see less direct revenue per project, meaning they take fewer chances on riskier projects and new IP like Enslaved. Every game sitting on the shelf no longer collecting dust is one less game being sold by the publisher, and one less reason to create a sequel or equally risky IP. Your "efficiency" is stifling innovation and creativity in the industry. "People not being able to afford new games is far from nonsense." I didn't call it nonsense. I called your implication that used games make gaming more affordable or "lower the cost of entry" nonsense. Price drops and sales on new games make it equally, if not more affordable. All it cost to the consumer is a little time and effort to find a deal or wait for a price drop. Buying used however, costs the publisher the revenue they would have made from selling new. Case in point, if you wait or search around, you can buy two new games for $30 each NEW and get to keep both, or you buy a game for $60, trade it in after a few weeks for $30, then spend $30 more to get a second new game, costing you $90 total and leaving you with just one game. You seem pretty big on "efficiency" so you should be able to appreciate that. And finally, people like me aren't advocating online passes and taking away what we rightfully bought. We're just people smart enough to realize that games can't be made if used sales keep games from being profitable enough to justify the risk associated with development. It's common sense. I don't like online passes. But I also don't like that a company like GameStop, which does nothing but take a huge cut from publisher profitability by taking a huge profit for themselves by selling you a used copy at a small discount. GameStop can only cut into publishers profitability so far before it starts negatively affecting the variety and quality of content gamers are being offered.
Another d!ck move by gamestop.
I don't believe it.
this seems highly uncharacteristic.
lmao, i actually wouldnt doubt this. alot of people dont pay attention to the "new" or "used" condition to begin with and its those people who will all be f*cked when they cant play online....i for one dont like how gamestop pushes used sales on me and the employess act like a holes if you ask for a sealed new copy, ill shop there even less now....
THIS is obviously not happening, used games are a big part of EB/GAME-STOP sales. This is common sense my friends.
you guys need to read the article, there not getting rid of them at all. there prioritizing them. there putting new and used in the same row with the used copies on the top of the stack and the new copies buried behind them. then there making all the stickers white and just writing new or used on them. if anything it will generate more used sales if the consumers arent paying attention.
Oh the title was misleading, but when it comes to articles like this it seems like you dont have to read it because it kinda summed up in the title. Thats my bad
Read the article again. The move is to help gamestop SELL MORE USED games by hiding new games.
read my reply to QWARK 9
Getting rid of their primary source of profit? Wait till the Grand Nagus hears about this!!!! Been watching too much DS9...sorry.
Read. The. Article. You're replying the headline thinking you know what it's about. You don't.
Actually I was replying to rumor. This isn't the first I've heard of this.. The title is misleading and is the reason why I stopped by to comment. Who gives a damn about how Gamestop changes the way they display games?
Used games are the major part of Eb/Gamestop's profit. But if this turns out true, this means that the online pass idea is doing what it was meant to do, eliminate the used game market. But at the same time, if Gamestop really IS taking their used games and mixing them in with the new ones in an attempt to sell them I'd question the legality of that. That's basically deceiving your customer on the dirtiest level.
First off, why don't you people READ before commenting. The article talks about removing the DISTINCTION between new and used. The yellow stickers versus white stickers. Not removing used games. At 1000% markup, they will never get rid of used games. That's how the Owner pays for his BMW and ugly-ass trophy wife. I don't know about Canada but here in Colorado I was at a Lamestop this weekend and noticed they all had the same looking white stickers. Might have been hard to tell the difference between used and new except for all the missing covers and crappy conditions of the used ones. No wonder Consumer Reports named Lamestop (and Verizon who SUCK) as one of the worst companies this year. For employees and customers.
Yeah, here in Maryland, the only difference between new and used is the word printed on the sticker. Luckily, this will be GameStop's saving grace as to why this is 'okay'.
The yellow versus white stickers have been gone for a year here. And the new games aren't even on the same wall as the used, in the case of PS3 and 360. That said, the new sections for ALL systems has been made as small as possible, while the used sections stretch across as much wall as possible. It's a tactic I don't approve of, but there's also next to nothing I can do about it. What this most likely means- to someone with insider knowledge, anyway- is that this has to do with the display sections or something else. I sincerely hope GameStop isn't stupid enough to try such a tactic.
Rumor: McDonalds is getting rid of their world famous Big Mac. Why would they get rid of the thing that makes them the most money?
With online passes becoming more prevalent, this is surely going to lead to some really pissed off people when they get home and find out that the game they think they bought new now requires an extra $10 to play online. This choice will not only affect GameStop, but the people who provide their games as one of the first parties blamed for any issues with games are the people who made the game.
Simple solutions: Don't buy at Gamestop/EB. Don't buy anything that isn't factory sealed. Ask counter guy for the new copy if that's what you want, bring it back for a refund if it isn't. At some point people have to stop being stupid. No one forces you to buy at Gamestop anymore than they force you to eat at McDonalds. Many Bestbuys deal in used games now. Amazon does. Blockbuster does. Lotsa mom 'n' pop shops do like PnP. Anyone set to blame first parties for the used game they accidentally bought at Gamestop are just as stupid as the people that blame McDonalds for making them fat. They can join the crowd that buy their 8 year olds M rated games like GTA and add to the problem.
This can't be real; as others have said, there is a BIG distinction between used and new games in regards to online access, included dlc, etc. By mixed them together, they would be misrepresenting a product.
I think Gamestops justification is used book stores, of whom a lot of them will mixed used and new books together, and only distinguish by genre.
Of course, their true intentions are to send a shot back at the publishers after all thay have bee doing to tear down used sales.
Unfortunately, this can no way end well for the gamers. Totally agree with you, by the way, it is a misrepresentating to the consumer.
I agree. I don't think that what they what they are allegedly attempting to do I wrong prima facie(edit: in te non legal sense of prima facie) but if many people are misled, and it can THEN befound that there is a case, there may be a class action. They may use the used book excuse, but we all know that it is more evident before purchase that a book has been used than software. Also, the consequences are also more severe.
This can't be true because it's illegal but if it were, thanks god for online passes - it just feels wrong typing that but such are the times.
Why is it illegal? Used book stores do this all the time.
Is it moral? That's a different question...
It can be considered misleading the consumer. They are going to have to make sure each customer knows at the time of purchase they will not be getting a new game with full features(assuming it has online pass/new purchase DLC.)
I agree Silent Bob, but the sticker on the front will still say Used Game. Not saying that I condone this behavior, or that I even shop there (I don't), but if the consumer buys an item that has a tag that says used all over it, I have to put the onus of responsibility on the consumer.
Really? It is wrong for typing that. Online passes are another bane to the hobby of gaming, it's like requiring a $10 key to open a model train kit you just bought from the hobby store. Gamers who are continually willing to sell themselves out for whiney publishers like Greedivision and EA-we-rape-your-wallet-while-y ou-sleep are almost worse for the industry than scumbags like GameStop and the publishers they're fighting with. It also boggles my mind why you people would continually support publishers who give you less each year for more money.
Does anyone read the articles or at least the description anymore?
Apparently not. Look at all the comments from people who have nooooo idea what the article is even saying. It's amazing.