Slashdot Mirror
Wal-Mart Enters the Used Game Fray
eldavojohn writes "It's a simple model — you buy used games for a third of the price of a new one from patrons. Then you turn around and sell the game for two-thirds the normal price to other patrons that have not yet enjoyed the title. Such has been the model for stores like GameStop. The great part about that business is a recession can sometimes help their market, as gamers look to save a few bucks any way possible. Well, today Wal-Mart launched kiosks in 77 of its stores that vend used video games. Looking like a RedBox DVD kiosk, these automated machines are full of bugs, but spell trouble for businesses like GameStop. This should also pique the interest of used-game opponents and provide a bigger target for them to go after if they get the politicians on their side."
This should also pique the interest of used-game opponents and provide a bigger target for them to go after if they get the politicians on their side."
I have the feeling that even the likes of Blizzard or Electronic Arts would think twice about giving Wal-Mart a hard time.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Excellent. With Walmart now financially committed to reducing the amount of DRM that would interfere in resale, the amount of anti-DRM political lobbying money should increase dramatically.
If you agree that GameStop is bad for gaming, then this isn't really worse. I don't think Wal-Mart doing it is going to increase the overall trade in used games. If you don't agree that GameStop is bad for gaming, then you don't care about this move anyway.
As such, I'm actually quite happy to hear the news simply because I hope they kick GameStop's ass. I don't buy games from them, but I've read enough of the Penny Arcade to completely loathe them .
Moderators: Before moderating a comment Insightful/Informative, check to see if a child post has already refuted it.
Your logic is like a half-baked cake. I suppose printing your own copies of books from the library is ok too, cause you aren't paying anything to look at the book anyways right?
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
I don't buy used games on principle. (Wait... so I'm paying someone for a game and simultaneously not giving the content creators any money? Why not just pirate it and spend more money on new games if I'm not going to pay the creators?)
But even if I wasn't against the concept of used games I still don't see the financial incentive. Gamestop will pay me less than the parking fee to go in and sell them a game. If I were to drive to a free-parking gamestop it would cost more in gas than they would give me. The used prices of new games tend to be almost the same as new. ~$45-50 for new releases and games on steam tend to be priced as low or lower for older games.
If you aren't going to buy it new you might as well just pirate it and save the money going to Wal-Mart.
By giving money to someone who purchases new games, you are providing them with more resources to purchase more new games, and support new content creators. Or to put it another way, would you buy a car that you knew would have no value on the used car market? Auto companies like good resale value, so that one guy will buy a new car every year.
Also, if you save up a few games, it might just cover your parking. And give you cash for a new game. (Which is the point)
Well, in this case you might as well send the $45 to The Pirate Bay, rather than Walmart, as the publisher and game developers won't see a cent of it anyway.
- These characters were randomly selected.
New used games suck they are used and not much of a savings in dollars. The only good thing about this is if WalMart sells lots of horrible games that suck so much you can't give them away. At least you have a way of disposing of them and recouping a few pennies.
Having a place to buy older games like PS1 or SuperNES games is valuable to the gaming community. Places that sell games you can't buy anymore! Our local video store sells these games for $2-$5. Sometimes they are scratched but you don't feel ripped off. And it gives you an opportunity to play these awesome games you forgot even existed. Except the older games are incredibly easy and you end up feeling stupid for taking two weeks to wrap it the first time.
Wait... so I'm paying someone for a game and simultaneously not giving the content creators any money?
If they make games that are good enough that people don't want to sell them back, this wouldn't be happening to them.
That logic is whacky. So does that mean that you won't buy a house or a car second-hand (or sell your own after you have bought it) because this would mean that neither GM or the Architect got paid again? If so, I assume that you want to make sales of used cars illegal, and require that people raze their houses sell when they move so that architects and construction firms get paid again by the new person who buys the land? If not, please explain why you think that the first sale doctrine apply to everyone except game makers?
IMHO game publishers are coming at this from the wrong angle - they should be looking at the second hand market as an opportunity rather than a threat. Over the last year or two there has been a growing trend for games to have paid-for DLC (see Guitar Hero/Rock Band as prime examples). Since this content doesn't get resold when the game does the new owner may well then re-buy the DLC.
So although yes they might miss out on the profit from the original game sale (assuming that the person who bought it second hand would otherwise have bought a new copy) they ARE still making money.
Also don't forget trade ins - many console owners I know (myself included) will trade old games for money off new ones, often allowing us to buy more NEW games then we would have done otherwise. Why not embrace this? Publishers could offer incentives if people trade in one their older games for a sequel, or a direct competitor to their game - say trading in Guitar Hero for Rock Band etc.
When the music market changed under them (i.e. the internet) the industry tried to fight the change rather than embracing it as a new opportunity, that didn't work out too well did it?
I'm just saying I would rather as a book publisher have you save your limited resources to spend on one of my books instead of going to a used book store and spending money there.
75% of the used game price disappears into Gamestop. As far as the game ecosystem is concerned that money is gone. Your customers are expending their limited teen dollars on a product that in no way what so ever brings a profit.
If instead of buying and reselling 2 games these teens pirated those 2 games and simply purchased a third new the publisher would make more money than if they threw their money into the big bonfire that is the used game market.
And I would love everyone of you to send me all your money without anything whatsoever in return.
Used games are part of the game ecosystem. The limited teen dollars might not be spent on a 60$ new game without the option to get some of that money back to begin wtih. So you'd end up with 3 pirated games and no sale at all. Sounds much better to me. At least publishers still would have something to bitch about. Oh and it's not their fault ... ever.
I don't buy used games on principle. (Wait... so I'm paying someone for a game and simultaneously not giving the content creators any money? Why not just pirate it and spend more money on new games if I'm not going to pay the creators?)
Except that when you buy used your money IS going to the creator (or at least his publisher). It goes to the publisher by proxy of the original purchaser who may not have considered the original selling price to be reasonable without the ability to resell it and recoup some of that cost. Similarly for all additional sales on down the line until the game eventually ends up in somebody's trash can.
But even if I wasn't against the concept of used games I still don't see the financial incentive. Gamestop will pay me less than the parking fee to go in and sell them a game.
Even if your characterization of Gamestop's pricing is accurate, they are by no means the only way to buy and sell used games (or used books, or used CDs, etc).
If you aren't going to buy it new you might as well just pirate it and save the money going to Wal-Mart.
Wal-mart provides a service - they get paid for that service, just as a book publisher provides a service to an author. You don't think that YOU personally are responsible for the money that goes to the authors that you publish do you? That would be the height of hubris - you provide them distribution and revenue handling in exchange for a fee. Kind of like the way Wal-mart, et al, provide buyers the service of distributing used copies.
Either you buy into the artificial scarcity of copyright or you don't, but don't think you can justly have the best of both the copyright-scarcity model and the non-scarce freedom of speech model without the downsides of either.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Pending legislation change, that is... don't assume anything that's legal today will remain so, especially when copyright is somehow involved.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I don't really agree with this point. It makes sense for multiplayer games, but a lot of single-player games (like films and TV shows) are very enjoyable to play once, but become less enjoyable when you play them again. Given the choice between playing them twice, or playing them once and then playing another similar-quality game once, the second is more fun. Think of them like books and DVDs; lots of people buy these and sell them second-hand because they never watch a film or read a book twice.
Even a great single-player game like Monkey Island or Grim Fandango is only really fun to replay after a few years, and it makes more financial sense to sell the game after you played it the first time then buy a second-hand copy a few years later when it costs a fraction of the price; you pocket the difference in the price and don't have to store it for the intervening time.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Two thirds of the price? In what gamestop? If you're lucky, you'll get a whole $10 off of the game is still retailing at release price.
Otherwise, you're getting $5 off retail until the game is so old its out of print and everyone who wants it has it so they're overloaded, when you can get it for $2.99... Yay Jak and Daxter!