GameStop Refuses to Sell Console Bundles That Include Digital Copies of Games

Going all digital means lots and lots of jobs are going away and being replaced by computers. Just another nail in the coffin for the lower and middle class while the people at the top who own the servers get to then decide what they want to do with all of your shit. The amount of people that need to manage servers is massively massively less than what it takes to sell physical.

Cost efficiency for CEOs of corporations looking to impress shareholders and negligible convenience are not more important than those people behind the counters who work retail or the familys they're feeding.

@bradbrains said:

Well, it is not very bright to wish for extinction of physical media because of various factors that make digital media worse in many aspects. Ideal situation would be that both continue exist.

A desperate move from a company that will quickly find itself left behind if it can't come up to speed with a digital future. The option to buy physical discs is great, but such a draconian move to try to keep their used games business alive is telling.

DARGH I still need to play Saints Row 2... I have it!

your not wrong for liking physical as its personal preference but a lot of the complaints about the all digital future are exaggerated imo. it hasnt hurt pc gaming. also I also like the idea of not having clutter or worrying about a broken disc.

Madden / NHL.

The people I bump into at gamestop and walmart looking for the mainest mainstream games don't even really understand why Canadian games sell at $70 yet, they just think it's the stores being greedy. Not all gamers are techies, not all techies are gamers.

Some don't want to set up their consoles online or have a credit card for the store. For them, some buy points cards, some don't.

@plasticpals: reading comprehension is not your forte, isn't?

This, coming to fruition.

@plasticpals@wraithtek@austin_walker

The uncanny success of the GameStop business model over the years has always fascinated me given the perceived split among the community of gamers who seem to either loathe what GameStop represents and those who support GameStop because they feel they are getting value in trading games or simply owning a physical copy, and perhaps a third faction that shares both sentiments at the same time in a more self-defeating way.

Either way, Austin's article sheds light on something I find far more disturbing that's more between the lines of the subject at hand. That is the sheer power and control GameStop as a distributor has over the industry-at-large.

They "worked with Sony, Microsoft, and EA" to bend to their own demands. Sony, Microsoft, and EA are not small companies, they are juggernauts in the industry who are creating the product in the first place, yet GameStop (who is providing the shelf for it to sit on around the corner from everyone's house in North America) is effectively telling them how to conduct their own business - and reaping a huge share of the profits on the back end and on the back end of that back end and then on the back end of that as well. It's enough to make you wonder how many release dates for games the big GS has mandated over the years when digital distribution wasn't even an option for publishers - or how many creative decisions that affect the development of those games trickle down from that kind of veto power at the distributor level (not to mention content ratings).

Consider this: do you think Apple gives a flying fuck what Best Buy thinks of their release dates or potential bundle opportunities? Of course not, because Apple has more weight to throw around in terms of proprietary retail distribution power and consequently have more control of their own creative vision and product cycles and BestBuy and third party retailers compete on Apple's terms as a result to keep the market competitive for consumers. Would you want GameStop telling you what kind of bundle or what release date works best for them for the next Apple product you want to buy?

That's not to say that Sony, Microsoft or EA always have our best interests in mind as consumers either, but at least they would still have an open and free market to contend with to determine value and restrictions (just look at the Xbox One launch and reversal if you don't believe me).

If giving up physical copies of games is the price to pay for eliminating the kind of control GameStop exerts over the content and distribution of video games as an entire industry than I'm all for it. I would rather wait 24 hours to download a game than have GameStop determine when and how it should be released. I would rather pay an extra $50/month for Internet access to download games digitally than having GameStop influencing potential content in a game I want to play. If buying digital means no more used games but more of the revenue generated from game sales as a whole finds it's way back to the companies who are creating the content in the first place than I am all for it.

It's time to move on from physical copies and trade-ins for content that is inherently digital to begin with. There are games available at all price levels that cater to all consumers. Maybe the price of admission for AAA games with $100 Million budgets should be $60 for everyone and not arbitrarily discounted the day after it is released because someone removed the shrink wrap on the case and inserted the disc in a tray once, or decided to lend it to a friend for free - because that is the cost of the product (regardless of the license debate). Just as free to play models represent the value consumers are willing to ascribe to those games before they move on to something else. To me there is absolutely nothing anti-consumer about this because the medium of our time has evolved, for better or worse, whether it is more convenient for the majority or not, it is simply a result of the age we live in today rather than a discussion based on the way it used to be done for the past three decades.

Like most things though,I guess there's no easy or definitive answer to the debate - just strong opinions;)

@cornbredx: It surprises me how Gamestop is still a thing...

@kosayn: $80 now :(

@ei8htbit: I don't doubt that Gamestop has a certain amount of influence on console manufacturers and game publishers. The source of this article being one example. But they're hardly a monopoly, especially when you're looking at buying new games, new consoles. My nearest Gamestop and Best Buy are right across the parking lot from each other. See also Walmart, Target, Amazon, Newegg. If someone wants a console bundle with a digital game, and Gamestop doesn't sell any, the customer probably has other options available.

I don't doubt that discussion and negotiation between publishers and retailers affects how games are sold (exclusive preorder bonuses being the most transparent example). And I'm sure Gamestop has some leverage over the console manufacturers and game publishers. But I doubt Gamestop is dictating to publishers that they need to release a game on X date or suffer the (retail) consequences.

Downloading Forza 6 would take me days to complete, and during that time, my internet would be 100% occupied by that download. I could get it faster from Amazon, even without Prime's two-day shipping, but yes, that still requires a disc. If I get that game (no bundle), it's probably going to be from Best Buy (GCU discount). But if Gamestop had an Xbox One bundle with the game on disc? I might just do that. If they're the only one offering, I have no qualms about buying it from them.

If you're ready for the all-digital future, Sony and Microsoft are ready for you. For everyone else, we still need the option to buy games on disc.

Not sure why this is even an issue. When you buy digital you CAN NEVER get money back by selling that game. I just bought and played Last of Us Remastered for $45 and then resold for $22. I'm not certain where the hate is here. Profit? Umm profit is how businesses work and it not like they are lying about what their profit is.

Please let physical retailers die. It's bad for consumers and developers. A digital copy can remain in stores forever and the money is always going to the publisher. It's because of physical sales that we have all these pre-order exclusives and cut up games. Publishers trying to get their money back on used games.

@ei8htbit: Leaving these large companies unchecked would just lead to even worse business practices. This is why a digital copy of a 2 year old game on PSN is still fully priced. Physical stores are very much a necessary evil to keep the system in balance. I shudder to think what publishers and main console manufacturers would do if there simply wasn't an alternative in getting their product. Looking at Apple as an example, whose products never diminish in value and prices are set to whatever ludicrous heights they want, no that is not where I want gaming to go. Factor in the fact that digital prices are inflated in Europe, where the same game costs up to 30% more simply because you're buying it directly from the manufacturer and you have a wonderful glimpse of this free market you're advocating.

To me this is a very transparent move by Gamestop to perpetuate their exploitative trade-in practices. They key phrase is Austin's write-up is "buying it back from them for a pittance" which is scandalous. What's worse is that is the consumer who keeps doing this.

If digital prices were in line with retail I would be all digital by now. But they're not, they charge MSRP to keep retail happy. I really wanted to get MGSV digitally but it was £20 more expensive to do so, which is ridiculous. It's about time the manufacturers stopped bending over for retail.

@authenticm: Agreed! I don't mind downloading indies & games with gold games, but I much prefer having the disc.

Thank you. As much all these game sites, they are very much in their 'digital only future' bubble without talking about the downsides nor about the fact that the big majority of console gamers prefer discs.

I like discs, I have good reasons for liking discs and I can't help but feel more than a little shunned by articles like this.

I know you're making a joke but you know their recently released 'used' games are practically always in mint condition yeah?

I worked there for seven damn years.

Trust me.

I know.

Their trade values are so random and piss poor that it's not worth trading anything in anyway. The website is awful for looking up inventory, and I really dont like going in just to hear the site was wrong. Also, if they ever published what you actually got for games, maybe i'd consider it instead of taking something in, finding that the value is terrible and wasting my time.

I used to like going there - I liked talking to the staff about games, sometimes they gave me some free promo material like posters or whatever. Now, i'm not saying that I deserve that stuff, but it was a nice touch (and I had a feeling they wouldve just trashed it otherwise) But later they replaced the manager with an experienced retail person who has no understanding of games or the people who buy them.

When the store became about getting customers in an out as fast as possible, like some kind of automated payment system - why should I go there over Amazon? The face to face contact with customers is the last advantage brick and mortar has over online, and they are squandering it. Why would I give them $5 up front when amazon wants nothing until release, if i'm going to get the same mindless automated service.

What a silly move. I'm not a huge fan of buying digital (I only buy what I know I'm never going to want to resell) but what Gamestop is doing is hurting no-one but the consumer. Sure, EA and a few others might play ball and substitute a physically copy for a digital one. But what about Nintendo? They sure as hell won't, and with all the "collectors" edition consoles they put out that come with a digital game is Gamestop just not going to carry that?

How does this hurt the consumer at all? In any way? From what I understand it's not like they're refusing bundles. They're doing nothing but replacing a game code for normal bundles with actual discs. Nothing is different about this except that one retailer now has a different option for people. Many people that are complaining here admit that they don't even use Gamestop. Why does this effect you? Can't you buy bundles in the billion other retail stores (Best Buy, Fye, Walmart, Meijer, Target, Toys R Us, Kohls, Sears, etc) or a hundred other places online that have digital codes?

Most of this thread (including the text of the article) is just people thumbing their nose at a place they don't even shop at.

If you prefer your digital future and pray to the digital overlords and need witnessing for the coming days of this all digital utopian fantasy than you already know you have plenty of other options.

Sorry, the 12 year old in me made me do it.

And I approve.

@humanity

I'd hardly consider eliminating GameStop or physical media for games leaving these large companies "unchecked". If anything, I would argue they are a contributing factor that drives prices higher.

Regarding Apple, it's a perfect example of the free market in action. On the surface their prices relative to competitors are consistently and substantially higher - but why do you think people are buying that product and willing to pay more for it as a result? In theory they are offering a better experience that people simply want more and perceive has better value given the price than that of the competition (in your view the prices are "ludicrous" but that's your opinion and value is entirely relative - you get to vote with your wallet, in Apple's case millions of people apparently vote in their favour). The important thing here is that the competition is forced to create better quality products and compete on price and offer that combined value to retain market share. For example, the Samsung Galaxy series, and arguably the entire Android platform as it exists today would never have come to be were it not for Apple entering the mobile market the way they did.

BUT to bring it back to Gaming, look at the Ouya; It was a super cheap alternative to buying into either Steam via PC or consoles while offering the ease of console gaming yet it failed horribly because they didn't prove it had enough value - even despite it's low price - and the market decided it was a piece of crap and essentially abandoned it given the multitude of other options being provided by all those other large companies delivering a better experience. The point is that price alone does not determine value. It's the very definition of competition that creates more options and more relative value for consumers.

If physical copies were abolished and Sony and Microsoft arbitrarily raised the price of their games to $100 tomorrow you can guarantee SOME people would still buy their products because it is still worth it to them, but arguably not enough of the market would buy it (or be able to afford it for that matter) that would make it remotely profitable enough for either company to support the life cycle of their systems. THAT is the check and balance. And I don't think an additional middleman in the system with their own additional profit considerations benefits consumers at all, if anything it actually drives prices higher because more margins are involved.

The assumption that a digital game that costs the same as a physical disc copy is costing the consumer 30% more simply because there is apparently 30% of the cost of physical games going towards manufacturing, packaging, materials, and distribution is somewhat misleading. In fact it's an example of exactly why third party distributors like GameStop do not benefit consumers for digital mediums and certainly do not "check" the market to the degree some may think. You have to consider that retailers like GameStop are likely just as responsible for that kind of "inflated" digital pricing model. Just think about that scenario. Stop and think about it logically: Forza Ultra EX 8 releases in GameStop for $60 and you get an extra pencil case with a logo on it if you preorder - or you can buy the exact same game for your system on that exact same launch day digitally for 30% less at $42 (a ~$20 difference that is likely a best case scenario profit for anyone who would trade a game anyway). You don't think that GameStop and every retail outlet would lose their shit or threaten never to sell consoles if publishers marked down digital copy games by 30% compared to the retail boxed copy they are forced to sell that much higher in their stores? It would literally kill their business model to have the exact same product on the market at launch offered ubiquitously for 30% less than the product stuck on their shelves. GameStop is not there to check these larger companies, they are there to get their own cut of the pie even if it's at the consumer's expense elsewhere.

If a 2 year old game is not selling, lowering the price is the easiest way to stimulate sales. Physical or Digital. Period. Of course there is more urgency to get physical discs off shelves as GameStop demonstrates when they generously knock off 5 whole dollars or whatever, but any company who wants to make money isn't going to let a digital game collect dust if they think lowering the price will boost sales revenue for them. If a 2-year old game stays on the digital store for the same price it was at launch it is likely still selling because it has retained that perceived value. If it is not selling at all, why would companies refuse to lower the price to stimulate sales?

I just don't buy the kind of fear-mongering that goes along with this debate. At the end of the day the consumer always gets to make the final decision and there has never been a time where we have more choice. If the game I want costs more than I'm willing to pay for it than I don't buy it. If enough people refuse to buy digital and the profit margin remains greater for companies in physical disc sales than that will stay the way it is until that changes. And the morally self-righteous pirates of the world will always find their own way around the system to their own ends. The common thread in all of those scenarios is that we, the consumers, are the checks and balances - definitely not the GameStops of the world.

@ei8htbit: There is a lot of assumption going on here, and I honestly don't follow the markets that close to argue one side or the other without simply speculating. What I defer to with certainty is the consumer experience. In the case of Apple products, nothing about their business model is friendly or beneficial to me as a consumer. Their products are kept on a short leash and almost never fall in value. I am either forced to pay their premium prices, or go to shadier third party retailers - this is taking under account my neck of the woods of course, geographically this situation may be a lot different. Whether their particular business model stimulated competitors to create competing products I can't say, although it seems more a case of natural competition in that particular market rather than inspiration gleamed from Apple's pricing model.

I never mentioned anything about costs of manufacturing or packaging that even out pricing between the digital and physical SKUs. I was referring to the same games being a lot more expensive on PSN when bought digitally. As in a physical copy costing £40 while the exact same game on PSN is priced at £54 which is quite a difference. Obviously it would be a little crazy if digital games were significantly cheaper at launch but what I'm talking about is at least equal pricing. Unless you are living in the US there is absolutely no incentive to buying anything digitally, as you pay more, have to put up with slow PSN speeds and ultimately are beholden to Sony whenever you want to redeem that game in the future. There should be some incentive, but currently there really isn't, and this doesn't even cover the entire debate about internet speeds and data caps and how we're just not there yet.

Voting with your wallet is a myth that rarely works. On the rare, rare occasion that it gains traction we see changes, and only when the stakes are high enough for a company to actually care. This is happening with the XB1 as that is a huge investment for Microsoft and they need to remain competitive. These changes are also due to a change of management that is more in touch with it's consumer base, so I wouldn't say these changes are all due to consumers - but this is getting into me speculating rather than being able to cite any concrete sale figures. This all leads me to the discussion of prices that don't degrade over time on the digital console market. Why would a company keep the same price if something isn't selling? Well thats a good question, because it is happening as we speak. I can only imagine it is because unlike physical copies it's not costing them nearly as much to keep those games "on the shelves" and as such who cares - the people that really want it will buy them at the higher price point. They don't need to lower the price because they don't need to move digital inventory. This is even more bewildering considering that Steam has shown us just how beneficial sales are to business, with many people purchasing games they have no intention of playing anytime soon simply because it's a good deal.

I don't think it's fear mongering that is going on when the conversation does arise, but a real concern for choice. If the choice is to buy something at a bad deal or not buy it at all, that is not a realistic choice at all. I would really like to think that people are the checks and balances but if the rise of lackluster DLC, pre-order bonuses and free to play game aspect creeping into AAA releases is any indication then I shudder to think who's calling the shots. Certainly the general consensus is that all those things are universally regarded by consumers as "bad" for games, and yet they continue to sell because as you said if they didn't we wouldn't see things like the Deux Ex "augment your pre-order" campaign. If anything I fail to understand the complete disdain people have for GameStop in general. Their trade-in prices are obviously bad, but there are those who don't care and are willing to trade-in a stacks of old titles just to get a discount on a new game. This in turn is beneficial for people that want to play Enslaved all of a sudden but aren't willing to pay $50 for a really old game when they can easily pick up a used copy at GameStop for under $10. It's just another option that empowers the consumer rather than forcing them down the bottleneck of a binary choice dictated solely by a static price point.

I don't get the comments that say "this is a bad idea" and then end with "I never shop at gamestop". If you don't shop there, why do you care?

Yes. A store that makes it's money from selling physical copies should support digital copies that can be bought elsewhere. That'll definitely keep them afloat.

I used to shop at Gamespot. A lot of my import Sega Saturn games came from Gamespot. So for that reason, I will be grateful for what they were. I say were, because times are changing. We live in a digital world now and everything is being done that way. You even have fast food and grocery delivers online now. Gamespot, like a lot of movie rental franchises are getting left behind. And a lot of people perfer to by their games online now, not just because of the convince of downloading, but also the prevention of getting harassed in store to buy or sign up for something, which personality became very annoying for me.

They already sell digital copies on an online store, they should do more of that and phase out or reinvent their stores. They are guaranteed to sink if they don't. Sales of physical consoles and merchandise that's not the games themselves is the only thing they can do in the long run.

Like how strong a position do they think they're in? Who would even buy a console in a gamestop? There's walmart, target, best buy, costco and every other store that gets more traffic than a gamestop. Most of all there is amazon and every digital retailer, all of whom get more traffic than gamestop can even dream about.

And now they don't even offer bundles a customer might want? What? They need every sale they can get. Because EVERYTHING gamestop sells can be bought elsewhere, more conveniently and at a better price. If people pay for a digital copy of a game it needs to be at Gamestop. not anywhere else. They don't think selling stuff is important i guess.

Wendy's invented the drive thru window for fast food. Should McDonalds have taken a stand and remained a walk-in, walk out place? Should they have refused to add salads to their menu because they were "A burgers and fries place"? Maybe they thought the health food craze was just a trend and that it would go away, but they ended up adapting and changing their business model to accommodate what consumers wanted. You don't live longer from sticking to your guns, you just ensure your death, The idea that they shouldn't sell something in their market "that can be bought elsewhere" is antithetical to running a business.

@noah_n_bridger: I assume it's because of backlash like this from retailers. "Digital only? We won't carry your stuff."

It's a smart move. GameStop is essentially saying "We would rather purchase BOTH the hardware and software from the publisher in order to create a return scenario for the customer." And it works. I know as I have personally witnessed years of system bundles go out the door and people come back with the game. Just walk into any GameStop right now and ask them how many used copies of Destiny on PS4 are in the backroom. Or The Last of Us. Or Batman Arkham Knight. And that's fine. If the publisher doesn't want to bundle the title in the box, no problem, then Gamestop corporate generates a coupon code to make the software free. Technically, the profit GameStop makes off a new console sale is around $25, and even then, that's twice the margin for new software. So the line of logic then follows that GS wants you to flip that physical copy ASAP towards an item in the inventory with a higher margin such as preowned games or even PRPs and GPGs (which are 100% profit). And a return incentive creates more opportunities for publishers to make more money off that customer instead of just hoping they go home and enter their credit card information and make all subsequent purchases from their couch. GameStop will turn to selling codes inside of boxes if they have to (oh, wait. They already have)

Now as for the publishers standing up to GS, that's a pretty far-fetched idea if you look at the market share Gamestop holds. in 2014, GS held 28% of the hardware, but 46% of the new games and even 42% of digital content. And Market Share in case you were unaware, is the percentage of ALL copies that are sold compared to ALL OTHER retailers. That's a pretty strong position actually.

It's fine to not like a lot of GS practices, but man, you gotta understand how the beast moves.Don't underestimate retail just because you personally have empowered yourself to shop online exclusively.

I hate gamestop as much as everybody but digital sucks. At least if I''m not sure about a game i can return a used game if i don't like it i can return it within seven days if i love it I can also return it and buy a new copy

to support developers. I don't rent much but digital will destroy that business also. Digital only benefits the

publishers they rely or over-hyping and advertising to get people to impulse buy even if the game is garbage.

Ubisoft anyone? There is no way to return a bad game and demos are getting less and less. How about people that like to collect games or the strange people that like special edition junk ? Gone. The writings on the wall already so my small rant is way to late. People if you know you like the game buy on Amazon they ship amazingly fast . If your not sure use a rent or buy a used copy to try before you buy. Some games are worth $100 some worth 2 cents. Don't get stuck losing $60 on junk it happens way to often and when they go completely digital it's all over no recourse no returns your stuck. At least on pc there's plenty of discounts.

Why no discount on consoles digital over disks it's way cheaper for the publishers no manufacturing no shipping cost no over printing . At least movies give u a deep discount for digital that's why blu ray is dead.

At least give us a discount and or a short return period, but it will never happen so enjoy your disks while u can. When they're gone so am I.

@noah_n_bridger: Microsoft tried to steer things towards all digital with XBOX One and people lost their crap... the number of people that are ready to go all digital are such a small amount of the market that we're not even in the ballpark yet. Maybe once high speed internet becomes more prevalent.

It's never going to be "all digital". Think back about any point in history and think about how that has literally never happened. People still buy vinyl...people use cassettes. I have DVD's and blu rays and vhs' and I stream Netflix. I have an iPod and I also buy CD's. When a new format comes along it has never been the case that the old one is phased out completely. People lose there minds about these weird us vs them battles. You're blinding yourself from history if you believe that things are going to go all digital. No matter how much people want it to be real the physical vs digital battle will always be fabricated. It's a fake event. You're buying into an illusion.

This whole argument is basically about personality types.

**** Gamestop, and **** digital. I want physical copies. That way I can claim 100% ownership.

I've never understood how a retailer such as GameStop can open a copy of a game, separate the disc from the case and then charge you full price for the game.

You can defend that the game is "new" all you want, and that they use the box for display, but all of that is BS.

Once the seal is broken it's considered "used" by any other sense, in fact, buy a game there that IS sealed, and right in front of the employee, open the game, then tell them you want a full refund. Bet it wont happen.

And as for display, they can get dummy boxes.

I have a GameStop membership that I paid $15 for when I bought my PS3 (and it instantly saved me $25). I buy enough games each year to earn points to get my membership renewed for free. I played Witcher 3 for weeks and traded it in for $25 in credit at Gamestop, similar to what I get when I trade in most reasonably new titles. Go ahead and call that "a pittance" but I will keep paying just over half price for new games until they nail the doors shut at Gamestop.

This is Blockbuster all over again. They need to pivot. Now. HARD. They should Netflixify to survive and I don't think they have it in them.

Or don't. Frankly I don't give a fuck. I made the decision at launch to go 100% digital on my consoles this gen and haven't looked back (or had to get off my couch nearly as much). Game Sharing on the Xbone has cut my costs in half there as I now split purchases with a close friend. That is the most undervalued feature this generation on any console.

Its a good move for people that cant download massive digital copies with ease, but did you think of that?

yes.

it said that digital is becoming more and more the norm not that physical games were bad.

lot of people taking this personal.