This just in.. EA plans to fail even harder with Brick and Mortar

Posted by SharkMan (685 posts) -
#1 Posted by SharkMan (685 posts) -
#2 Posted by benjaebe (2784 posts) -

Yeah, because opening a handful of retail outlets will really sink EA.

#3 Posted by Subjugation (4741 posts) -

I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?

#4 Posted by benjaebe (2784 posts) -

@weeman105 said:

I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?

They're experimenting with whether or not retail stores like this where they can directly reach the consumer will be a benefit or not. I mean, if you could cut out that cost and have it be successful wouldn't you? I really don't see how they're taking an isolationist stance - you can still buy EA games EVERYWHERE from various online and digital retailers. I don't really get what's with the hyperbole as of late.

#5 Posted by Hailinel (25205 posts) -

@weeman105 said:

I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?

By selling directly, they can keep 100% of the profits. How this offsets the cost of operating an online retail portal and brick-and-mortar stores, I have no idea.

#6 Posted by RE_Player1 (7526 posts) -
EA has some great games but this is either showing over confidence in their brands or doubt within the company needing to get 100% of the profit.
#7 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -
@RE_Player92 said:
EA has some great games but this is either showing over confidence in their brands or doubt within the company needing to get 100% of the profit.
its doubt.
#8 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

This doesn't seem like a very good idea for a business. Judging by the picture, I can't imagine somebody wanting to buy sports equipment and sports video games in one purchase. Hell, the Lego Rock Band/Old Navy bundle confused the shit out of me.

#9 Edited by SpartyOn (500 posts) -

well it's EA sports specifically. As a fan of games, sports, and sport games, I know the level to which i follow the industry leaves me in the minority. I'm sure they're going for a store that will attract Joe Maddenfan and the like. I'm sure a playable demo of madden in a store with SPORTS in the name will attract those fans who aren't really in the know.

#10 Posted by Brendan (8155 posts) -

I'm sure a team of people in the company have a very comprehensive plan of how this will bring great benefit to EA, but time will tell I suppose.

#11 Posted by YukoAsho (2129 posts) -

EA might want to take a breath and realize that their name isn't the reason their games are successful.  They're already betting the farm on The Old Republic, making an EA-only store and an EA-only digital service isn't doing them any favors.
 
God, no wonder Activision leapfrogged them as the largest games company.

#12 Posted by Nelander (177 posts) -

This reminds me what an old business professor of mine used to say; "You can cut the middle man, not what the middle man does". many companies fall for the myth that if you cut the middle man they get to keep all the mark up. what they forget is that the middle man does provide value and is more likely to be more efficient at what it does.

#13 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -
@weeman105 said:
I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?
It's all about growth and more specifically control. 
 
Distribution is a problme in the modern games market, what with Gamestop pimping it's 5 dollar discount if you buy a used game instead of a new one and Valve controlling the digital space. 
 
Wer'e going to see more of this kind of thing in the next couple of years.
#14 Posted by YukoAsho (2129 posts) -
@JazGalaxy said:
@weeman105 said:
I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?
It's all about growth and more specifically control.  Distribution is a problme in the modern games market, what with Gamestop pimping it's 5 dollar discount if you buy a used game instead of a new one and Valve controlling the digital space.  Wer'e going to see more of this kind of thing in the next couple of years.
I doubt we're going to see a bunch of other game companies making their own retail chains.  This just has fail on so many levels.  Why would I go here to buy the games when I can go anywhere else (Gamestop, Wal-Mart, Target, etc,) and who the hell wants an EA Sports branded jersey or helmet instead of an actual sports team-branded one?
#15 Posted by bybeach (5000 posts) -

If they bought the storefront slot that has been a cell phone repair and every failing else, between the subway and the hair stylist/barber shop in that tiny strip mall near my house, I might buy at a EA store. The liquer store would sure appreciatte the spill over. Mind you, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this as long as I can still get EA games at Amazon.

#16 Posted by me3639 (1853 posts) -

Bad idea.

#17 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@JazGalaxy said:

@weeman105 said:
I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?
It's all about growth and more specifically control. Distribution is a problme in the modern games market, what with Gamestop pimping it's 5 dollar discount if you buy a used game instead of a new one and Valve controlling the digital space. Wer'e going to see more of this kind of thing in the next couple of years.

No, we're really not. Idiots like you who seem themselves as social commentators will be saying more of this shit in months to come but it's really not true. EA is just experimenting with market awareness, this has nothing whatsoever to do with growth or control.

#18 Posted by Hector (3380 posts) -

Awesome..lol...not really.

#19 Posted by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -

Seems very silly. A store for one division of a publisher? No way.

A store for a first party hardware manufacturer? Why not?

#20 Edited by niamahai (1394 posts) -

if its only sports games, they can achieve [MARKET SYNERGY] with other [MAJOR SPORTING BRAND].

SYYYYNNNERRRRGGGYYYYYYY.

As I type this, a marketing executive just came.

#21 Posted by FateOfNever (1855 posts) -

This seems like maybe not such a great idea.  Maybe I'm wrong though.  I just don't see how they expect to make more money off of the products this way.  They keep 100% of the profit, sure, but then have to turn around and spend x amount of money keeping the operation running, and will that really be less than what kind of cut a third party retailer would get of their products?  This just seems weird to me I guess.  I also can't tell if I would actually want this to succeed or not.  If it succeeds, then do they take it further and try making larger EA only stores and slowly pull goods from third party retailers?  Do they just call it good at what it is and only make more EA Sports stores and nothing else happens?  If it fails though, how much money does this cost EA?  Can EA afford to lose that amount of money, whatever it might be?  I guess they think so.  Anyway, I'll be curious to see how it goes.

#22 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:

@JazGalaxy said:

@weeman105 said:
I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?
It's all about growth and more specifically control. Distribution is a problme in the modern games market, what with Gamestop pimping it's 5 dollar discount if you buy a used game instead of a new one and Valve controlling the digital space. Wer'e going to see more of this kind of thing in the next couple of years.

No, we're really not. Idiots like you who seem themselves as social commentators will be saying more of this shit in months to come but it's really not true. EA is just experimenting with market awareness, this has nothing whatsoever to do with growth or control.

Well it's idiots like you who are idiots. And also mentally deficient and smelly. And your fingernails are dirty. And your penis is small. 
 
EA is pulling it's games off steam and creating it's own digital distribution platform. And you're telling me this has nothing to do with growth and control? 
 
Your penis is small.
#23 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@JazGalaxy said:

@SeriouslyNow said:

@JazGalaxy said:

@weeman105 said:
I don't see any reason for them to do this. What's with the sudden isolationist stance when concerning the selling of their games?
It's all about growth and more specifically control. Distribution is a problme in the modern games market, what with Gamestop pimping it's 5 dollar discount if you buy a used game instead of a new one and Valve controlling the digital space. Wer'e going to see more of this kind of thing in the next couple of years.

No, we're really not. Idiots like you who seem themselves as social commentators will be saying more of this shit in months to come but it's really not true. EA is just experimenting with market awareness, this has nothing whatsoever to do with growth or control.

Well it's idiots like you who are idiots. And also mentally deficient and smelly. And your fingernails are dirty. And your penis is small. EA is pulling it's games off steam and creating it's own digital distribution platform. And you're telling me this has nothing to do with growth and control? Your penis is small.

You can't see me properly because you only see in SD. How is distribution a problem in the games market? It isn't. It never has been a problem. I doubt you could even name a distributor. Stop talking from your anus. EA wants to model itself on the success of VALVe and they wonder if they can do so by using SW:ToR as the central pulling product like VALVe used HL2 wrt Steam. This retail games excercise isn't to do with that process beyond a brand awareness push.

#24 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

distribution is a problem because modern game developers and publishers are still bottlenecked when it comes to getting their games out to the public by storefronts like Wal Mart and Gamestop. The Wal Marts of the world are a problem because they don't want to dedicate precious shelf space to anything that's not meeting their demands and Gamestop is a problem because they're trying to hock their competing product, used games, in place of the publishers product. Add to that fact that the Gamestop model is seeping into other stores like Best Buy. 
 
I remember as a kid when I could walk into a software etc. or babbages and see Kings Quest 1-5 all sitting on a shelf next to one another. The same would go for Zork, Might and Magic, etc. Now if a game isn't a hot seller, it is dumped from store shelves within six months.  
 
IN the next couple of years we are going to see publishers push harder to own or eliminate that bottleneck.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.