GameStop Says Publishers Beginning to Accept Used Game Market

GameStop Says Publishers Beginning to Accept Used Game Market

image

GameStop executive Mike Mauler says the success of "Project Ten Dollar" style programs are helping publishers see the pre-owned videogame market as a way to "fuel the sale of new games."

Pre-owned game sales has long been a bone of contention between game publishers, who see no income from the used game market, and retailers, who see painfully thin margins on new game sales. Some publishers, like EA and Ubisoft, have had varying degrees of success monetizing the market by charging pre-owned buyers for content that's included with new copies of games but Mauler, the the executive vice-president of GameStop International, says the more important outcome of those efforts is that publishers are finally starting to see used games as a way to drive new sales.

"There has been a shift in the way publishers see used. More and more they see it as a way to fuel the sale of new games. It's a way for that person to trade in a couple of used games for a new FIFA or Call of Duty," he told MCV. "If you think about some of the sequels - who needs seven years of a franchise on your shelf? But if you can trade them in, or trade in hardware for a new console when it comes out, it's a win for everyone."

Mauler said the trend toward charging pre-owned buyers extra for bonus DLC or online play hasn't had any negative impact on GameStop's sales, making it an ideal target for future digital sales. "DLC is the big opportunity for used product - so if someone buys a used FIFA game they want the DLC with it," he said. "That's an opportunity to sell more digital content."

Permalink

About time they grew to accept (THEIR) second-hand market. The conflict between them & second hand market was inevitable, I guess. It happened with movies, books among other industries.

Which CEO was it who compared used game sales to piracy, again? Someone please remind me.

I always buy new but I still don't like the idea of project 10 dollar mostly because I dislike the idea of day one DLC. If the content is ready when the game ships then it should be on the disk. I don't like DLC in general. I rarely ever buy it (Blazblue characters. That's about it). I wish gamestop would just give developers a cut of the used game sales, even if it's significantly less than what they get for new games.

I win for everyone? HA. It's not a win at all for the consumer, considering most times they amount of money you get for trading in a game is laughable, and then you go on to sell the used game for like 3 dollars below the cost of buying a brand new copy. Also I know plenty of gamers who LOVE having more than 7 years of a franchise on their shelves, granted the games that they collect aren't essentially the same game every friggin year, which Gamestop is essentially implying is true of the series they used as examples.

This side of the argument is so riddled with holes, I can barely even call it an argument. What does it matter if there's more opportunity to sell digital content, when if they had bought it new, they would probably have bought the DLC AND given the company who made the game money with the purchase of the game itself. That's obviously better for the company, but Gamestop is trying to imply that it's just as good somehow if they only make money from the DLC.

Seriously Gamestop, either give me a good deal or give me a new copy, don't take 5 bucks off of the original price for a disc that's probably scratched to hell.

If you think about some of the sequels - who needs seven years of a franchise on your shelf?

Ha, I'm glad he slipped that in there; if publishers weren't so fond of making cookie-cutter sequels on an assembly line, maybe people wouldn't be so eager to get rid of them.

I find it doubtful that something which is costing the industry untold millions of dollars will be accepted. Also, thank you for that specific picture in the article. It reminded me that I still need to complete Warden's Keep.

Good for everyone except the customer.

Surely project 10 dollar is a sign that they're not growing to accept it, since it's entire purpose is to have customers avoid the second-hand market?

Bakuryukun:
I win for everyone? HA. It's not a win at all for the consumer, considering most times they amount of money you get for trading in a game is laughable, and then you go on to sell the used game for like 3 dollars below the cost of buying a brand new copy.

Nobody's forcing you to trade in your games. For some people, it's a worthwhile incentive, for others, not so much. But I think we can agree that if it really wasn't "a win for the consumer," the program wouldn't go anywhere. The fact that it's such an integral part of GameStop's business strongly suggests otherwise.

Even before EB stopped taking PC games on trade (no GameStop within reasonable range), I never traded in my titles. Well, I did once a few years back when I acquired a very generous fellow's game collection and found myself saddled with a few doubles, but for all intents and purposes I'm one of those people who likes seven years of a franchise on my shelf. But I still see pre-owned as a very important part of the market that's valuable to retailers and consumers alike.

Chibz:
About time they grew to accept (THEIR) second-hand market. The conflict between them & second hand market was inevitable, I guess. It happened with movies, books among other industries.

Which CEO was it who compared used game sales to piracy, again? Someone please remind me.

when did it happen with movies?
i must of missed that one.

you have a point with books though.

Wait, this is Gamestop saying that things are getting better? Why are they the ones talking? This is like Lex Luthor saying that he and Superman are best buds because they managed to settle their differences off-screen. Has no one asked how Superman feels about Lex now?

GameStop? No.

And just so I'm clear:

NO.

I read the whole thing, and all what I could interpret from it was this:

image

Seriously, all what they're doing is just trolling. It's because of GameStop's used game system that there exists shit like Project Ten Dollar. I think publishers would be more than willing to accept a used game market that benefits the publishers and developers as opposed to the used game sales going only to the retailer. I know GameStop is a business, but there's a difference between a business and a bunch of crooks.

"If you think about some of the sequels - who needs seven years of a franchise on your shelf? But if you can trade them in, or trade in hardware for a new console when it comes out, it's a win for everyone."
Halo's been going 10 years right?
Im gettin ce for christmas and I have the rest, therefor you are wrong!

I have nothing against used games especially seeing as they where the only way to really get xbox games before I hasd a 360.

Bakuryukun:
I win for everyone? HA. It's not a win at all for the consumer, considering most times they amount of money you get for trading in a game is laughable, and then you go on to sell the used game for like 3 dollars below the cost of buying a brand new copy. Also I know plenty of gamers who LOVE having more than 7 years of a franchise on their shelves, granted the games that they collect aren't essentially the same game every friggin year, which Gamestop is essentially implying is true of the series they used as examples.

This side of the argument is so riddled with holes, I can barely even call it an argument. What does it matter if there's more opportunity to sell digital content, when if they had bought it new, they would probably have bought the DLC AND given the company who made the game money with the purchase of the game itself. That's obviously better for the company, but Gamestop is trying to imply that it's just as good somehow if they only make money from the DLC.

Seriously Gamestop, either give me a good deal or give me a new copy, don't take 5 bucks off of the original price for a disc that's probably scratched to hell.

When I was a kid I used to trade in old games to get new games, then a couple years ago I saw my friend had a beautiful collection of classics in a disc binder, and I'd realized I had made a huge mistake.

Now I save my games and the collection is building.

If I was Gamestop I would be more worried about a store coming along that offers reasonable prices for both used games and trade ins, I don't know why it hasn't happened yet.

danpascooch:
When I was a kid I used to trade in old games to get new games, then a couple years ago I saw my friend had a beautiful collection of classics in a disc binder, and I'd realized I had made a huge mistake.

Now I save my games and the collection is building.

If I was Gamestop I would be more worried about a store coming along that offers reasonable prices for both used games and trade ins, I don't know why it hasn't happened yet.

To make one thing abundantly clear: Not all used game stores are as bad as gamestop for this! Many of them do a standard 50-100 deal, where both the seller & the store itself make money. IE: They buy it for $10 (CASH, NOT STORE CREDIT) and sell it for $20. Hell, almost nobody here sells to gamestop. They rip you off.

The next gen of consoles almost certainly be digital distribution only, so retail is crew in the medium turn. Yeah I know all the I like physical media shtick, but having no physical media has really harmed the success of the iApps store and made steam a bit part player in the pc market.

As long as they understand when and where to enforce DLC to work around pre-used sales, they can do whatever they want. But if they start ripping off honest people, then screw em.

benbenthegamerman:
I find it doubtful that something which is costing the industry untold millions of dollars will be accepted. Also, thank you for that specific picture in the article. It reminded me that I still need to complete Warden's Keep.

Not really worth it unless you happen to have a Blood Mage in your group. WK isn't anywhere near as interesting as the rest of Dragon Age's DLC, and it feels tedious.

Am I the only one confused? Nothing has changed, the fact that publishers are pushing project 10 dollar is clear evidence that the Used Game Market and Publisher's aren't getting along and not proof that they are getting along...
Sure trading in a few games to cut the cost of a new game means that is is technically a sale of a new game for a publisher. But it also means that while Gamestop takes a tiny hit in the pocketbook for the new sale, it gains back much more selling the used games. Also not every trade in money is going to be used for a new game, people can just trade in for another used game.

People are still hating on Project Ten Dollar, but I fail to understand why. It's not cutting anything out of your game experience, especially when you buy new and get bonus content for free.

If it was TRULY bad for the consumers, the plans would have failed. The fact that it hasn't leads me to believe that most of the bitching I hear about the program is from a small, but very vocal minority.

FloodOne:
People are still hating on Project Ten Dollar, but I fail to understand why. It's not cutting anything out of your game experience, especially when you buy new and get bonus content for free.

If it was TRULY bad for the consumers, the plans would have failed. The fact that it hasn't leads me to believe that most of the bitching I hear about the program is from a small, but very vocal minority.

I agree fully, I got nothing against project ten doller and have seen the joy of it. It rewards you for buying new and thats all. If you buy used its never content that is absolutly needed to enjoy the game, its just fun extra stuff to make it a little sweeter.

JediMB:
GameStop? No.

And just so I'm clear:

NO.

...Elaborate please.

I'm curious as to what you mean.

(Actually curious here)

Oh! And Merry Christmas!

5

Bakuryukun:
I win for everyone? HA. It's not a win at all for the consumer, considering most times they amount of money you get for trading in a game is laughable, and then you go on to sell the used game for like 3 dollars below the cost of buying a brand new copy. Also I know plenty of gamers who LOVE having more than 7 years of a franchise on their shelves, granted the games that they collect aren't essentially the same game every friggin year, which Gamestop is essentially implying is true of the series they used as examples.

This side of the argument is so riddled with holes, I can barely even call it an argument. What does it matter if there's more opportunity to sell digital content, when if they had bought it new, they would probably have bought the DLC AND given the company who made the game money with the purchase of the game itself. That's obviously better for the company, but Gamestop is trying to imply that it's just as good somehow if they only make money from the DLC.

Seriously Gamestop, either give me a good deal or give me a new copy, don't take 5 bucks off of the original price for a disc that's probably scratched to hell.

That is what I "love" so much about these used game sales discussions. It's always about what benefits either the publisher or the retailer; never what benefits the consumer. As a result, it is precisely the consumers that end up being the most screwed by decisions from either side.

If only people would get past this hatred for selling used games.... sigh.

Let me explain a bit for those who don't know.

I bought a new game for full price $60. Then 2 weeks later I trade it into Gamestop. They give me $30 store credit which I use for some other game. Then they sell my trade in game for $54.

OMG HOW COULD THEY?!?!?!

They are going to get a profit of $24 when they sell it. They also get a guy (me) to buy another game since I have store credit.

If that used game I traded to them doesn't sell in a few months, it's price goes down, and they will get even less for it.

People want games, but don't want to pay full price for them. I am one of the lucky few that has a competent Gamestop near me that employees gaming nerds, doesn't 'gut' new games like the haters like to tell you they do. And oh yeah, they care about customers.

Tinley Park, it's a town just outside of Chicago, for those who care.

The fact that companies are charging for DLC is something they should have been doing sooner. Paying $10 for multiplayer if you buy used is fucking brilliant. Free DLC for new games is awesome too. Since it isn't mandatory for the game, why not charge more?

The bottom line is, if you can't afford a new game, wait till you can. The fact that companies will reward you if you buy from them, instead of buying used, is a great thing. It's also great that Gamestop and others, will sell you used games at a discount.

People love to bitch and complain, cause they can. That doesn't make them worth squat tho.

Chibz:

danpascooch:
When I was a kid I used to trade in old games to get new games, then a couple years ago I saw my friend had a beautiful collection of classics in a disc binder, and I'd realized I had made a huge mistake.

Now I save my games and the collection is building.

If I was Gamestop I would be more worried about a store coming along that offers reasonable prices for both used games and trade ins, I don't know why it hasn't happened yet.

To make one thing abundantly clear: Not all used game stores are as bad as gamestop for this! Many of them do a standard 50-100 deal, where both the seller & the store itself make money. IE: They buy it for $10 (CASH, NOT STORE CREDIT) and sell it for $20. Hell, almost nobody here sells to gamestop. They rip you off.

I don't usually comment, but just so you know, Gamestop has updated their system to allow cash trade-ins, making your parenthetical shout unnecessary.

Andy Chalk:

Bakuryukun:
I win for everyone? HA. It's not a win at all for the consumer, considering most times they amount of money you get for trading in a game is laughable, and then you go on to sell the used game for like 3 dollars below the cost of buying a brand new copy.

Nobody's forcing you to trade in your games. For some people, it's a worthwhile incentive, for others, not so much. But I think we can agree that if it really wasn't "a win for the consumer," the program wouldn't go anywhere. The fact that it's such an integral part of GameStop's business strongly suggests otherwise.

Even before EB stopped taking PC games on trade (no GameStop within reasonable range), I never traded in my titles. Well, I did once a few years back when I acquired a very generous fellow's game collection and found myself saddled with a few doubles, but for all intents and purposes I'm one of those people who likes seven years of a franchise on my shelf. But I still see pre-owned as a very important part of the market that's valuable to retailers and consumers alike.

I would disagree, just because a lot of people use the program doesn't make it anymore of a good investment, we are talking money here, not personal opinion. All it suggests to me is that a lot of people are suckered in with the promise of slightly cheaper games without doing the math to find out if it's worth it. I'm TERRIBLE at math but I suffer through it so as to not be ripped off. It is simply NOT a good investment to sell or even trade to Gamestop.

no really?
everyone else has already figured this out lol

get with the game!

Except that this only works for games that are part of a long-running franchise with constant new releases. Which is the worst way to go about making games.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here