GameStop Not Impacted By Online Pass

J

John_Keck

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
379
Gaming research analyst Michael Pachter says that schemes from EA and THQ to recoup cash from used game buyers are ineffective. This is likely because GameStop says only 25% of used game buyers are interested in multiplayer.

"The company has not seen a negative impact on used software sales from first-use codes or new competitors in the space," Pachter said. "The company estimates that only 25 per cent of used game buyers play online.”
Click to expand...
 
I must be the one person in the world who likes Gamestop. I've never been slighted by them, in the least.

I bought so many more games because of their trade-in system! At least, I did before I moved back to PC. :)

I've traded all my xbox 360 games in during the big bonus when SC2 was released. The only things I have left are my xbox 360, ms wheel and pedals, forza 3, two controllers, and all the arcade games I bought.

If they (publishers) want compete, they need to institute a buy back policy. When I buy a game, that disc is MINE and I can sell it to whomever I like. If you think you can sell me a one time use coupon for $59.99, you are mistaken.

Either give me ownership or charge me Steam's sale prices, otherwise I won't be buying your game. (Or go back to charging $39.99 for games.)
 
While I am a big PC gamer and not a console gamer, I have to agree with ya. The whole point of buying digital is that in exchange for not having to make the box/cd, ship it to you, and you foregoing the privilege of selling/giving it away later, the game should be much, much cheaper.

I am also not surprised at all at the news that used game buyers play off line. All the games I've ever bought used were single player, or multiplayer-offline games. They were also generally older games which online play was either not available, or not needed. If I want to go back and play through Golden Eye or Mario 64, I'd rather do it for nostalgia value with friends than play it super serious as I did way back when, because the technology has changed to allow better multiplayer gameplay. Likewise, if I ever get around to buying a copy of Battlefield 1942 again, I'll probably be more interested in messing around with it than looking for a serious online experience.
 
IRSmurf said:
If they (publishers) want compete, they need to institute a buy back policy. When I buy a game, that disc is MINE and I can sell it to whomever I like. If you think you can sell me a one time use coupon for $59.99, you are mistaken.

Either give me ownership or charge me Steam's sale prices, otherwise I won't be buying your game. (Or go back to charging $39.99 for games.)
Click to expand...

+1, I spend my cash for something I want to OWN IT,my one copy. not a lease, no legal fine print saying that I give up all my rights when I install it. Now I'll follow the rules and have only one copy running and promise not to pirate it, but If I want to sell it that should not cause an issue for me or the person buying it as long as they follow the rules.
 
makes sense...

The serious online players probably bought the game new to get on it right away.

The people buying used probably just shop and pick up something that looks like a fun distraction for a few hours. aka single player.
 
i've always thought that part of a new online game is to get in it when it comes out. that way you get to enjoy some interesting aspects:

- first couple days everyone is a noob:p

- first while people are figuring out what tactics work best, you get to be part of that

- new maps. you see them come to life.

- also when an online game gets old, there isn't near as many people on it. mostly the ones left are the diehards that have put way too much of their life into it and thus will kill you before you know wtf happened. i'd rather have a more balanced play environment.
 
$40 is not that bad for a game but I rather pay $29.99.

No box or CD and still want to charge $60 is ridiculous.
I'll until Steam place it on sale. Games like MW2 still going for $60 in nothing but price gouging.
 
Who's surprised by this?

#1 Most people who own game consoles, hook them in the basement or someplace too far away to get internet access.

#2 Most people don't know how to setup a wireless network, or give a shit enough to do so.

#3 A lot of people (like me) avoid online gaming because of the community it has. You know, assholes and squeakers, oh my.

#4 Most multi-player is like sprinkles to a cup cake. It's nice to have, but it was just thrown on there.

#5 Multi-player is mostly a copy cat of stuff made when Quake was popular. You know, Team Fortress and capture the flag. Adding capture the flag to Hello Kitty isn't what I call fun.

#6 A lot of console owners are getting banned from these online networks, cause they have a hacked console. Cause they think the only reason why people hack their consoles is to cheat in online games, or pirate copies of them. There's a lot better reasons to hack a console besides for playing games.


Multi-player was born on PCs, and best on PCs.
 
#1 Most people who own game consoles, hook them in the basement or someplace too far away to get internet access.
Click to expand...
Every person I know that owns a 360 or ps3 has it hooked up to the internet.

#2 Most people don't know how to setup a wireless network, or give a shit enough to do so.
Click to expand...
How do you know this? So most laptop owners never use wifi? Wow pretty board statement there.

#3 A lot of people (like me) avoid online gaming because of the community it has. You know, assholes and squeakers, oh my.
Click to expand...
cause you can't mute people?
#4 Most multi-player is like sprinkles to a cup cake. It's nice to have, but it was just thrown on there.
Click to expand...
There are a ton of console games that were made for multiplayer and not just thrown in as you say.

#5 Multi-player is mostly a copy cat of stuff made when Quake was popular. You know, Team Fortress and capture the flag. Adding capture the flag to Hello Kitty isn't what I call fun.
Click to expand...
Nobody can copy anybody else or its not fun? There goes pretty much 99% of games.

#6 A lot of console owners are getting banned from these online networks, cause they have a hacked console. Cause they think the only reason why people hack their consoles is to cheat in online games, or pirate copies of them. There's a lot better reasons to hack a console besides for playing games.
Click to expand...
Few get banned, I don't know about the wii but there isn't a hacked 360 console that can play on live with out a ban in 3 hours (playing with the hack on, jtag is easily recognizable on live). And there is no hacked ps3. There are hacked game saves but that is far from a hacked console.

Multi-player was born on PCs, and best on PCs.
Click to expand...
If you like to play by yourself (unless you got a second pc in the same room) with others you don't know over the internet, I personally only play multiplayer with my friends in the same room that's alot more fun than by myself. Pretty ignorant post if you ask me.
 
WorldExclusive said:
$40 is not that bad for a game but I rather pay $29.99.

No box or CD and still want to charge $60 is ridiculous.
I'll until Steam place it on sale. Games like MW2 still going for $60 in nothing but price gouging.
Click to expand...

Got my MW2 on ebay for $30.

It was a US activation code for steam, just like buying it on steam, except for half.
 
Emission said:
Got my MW2 on ebay for $30.

It was a US activation code for steam, just like buying it on steam, except for half.
Click to expand...

That's the only way to get around it. Either buy it on Ebay, Amazon or the forums.

-my first post had awful grammar, wish we could edit- lol
 
I just don't get why we're paying the same price as someone who is going to the store and getting a box with a physical disk, but we don't get that. Steam is weird like that but whatever, I'll stick to ebay.
 
WorldExclusive said:
$40 is not that bad for a game but I rather pay $29.99.

No box or CD and still want to charge $60 is ridiculous.
I'll until Steam place it on sale. Games like MW2 still going for $60 in nothing but price gouging.
Click to expand...

bobbykotickthedevil.jpg


Did I hear someone say "Price Gouging?"


..Sorry I had to, lol. Fuck that guy. There's really no reason for MW2 to still be 60 dollars, honestly.
 
Splinter Cell Conviction is still $60 on Steam also.
I'm for Digital Downloads but if they are going to fix prices and kill second hand resale, we are going to be in an ocean of shit.
Imagine all the popular games costing over $40 no matter when it was released.
There wouldn't be a second hand market to drive prices down.
 
Here's one for fucked up pricing: Star Trek Online. Steam, D2D, store at the game's website STILL charge $49.95/$59.95 for the regular/collectors edition, but you can go into Walmart or Gamestop and pick it up for $19.95/$29.95.
 
I thought it was kind of funny that the worst Tiger Woods version ever produced, 2011, is the first one to have the download activation key.

Shame really. I think TW2011 will change hands. A lot. It's that bad.
 
The better question is, why the hell are the map packs for MW2 still $15 a piece?
 
I keep all my games... no matter for what console, sure it would be nice to get some of the cash back spent on the game, but i'm not going to sell a game I bought for $70, for $5-8 which is all gamestop is gonna offer, then turn around and sell it for 60-65.

I truly wish publishers would take a harder hand against the scum market they exist in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top