theblackman357

@3dpenguin:

"You go into GameStop and try buying a new game that has been out for a week or two, they will likely have a used copy in because a percentage of people will buy a game and not like it, so they sell it to them on the cheap. GameStop employees are strongly recommended to sell the used copy before the new. Why? Because they are only making a few bucks on the new copy while making more than what they paid for the new copy on the used one, even a new game with $20-$30 in store credit buy back price, and that is high,"

Yes, because the retailer's objective is to PLEASE THE CUSTOMER AND MAKE A PROFIT, NOT PLEASE THE GAME INDUSTRY. The used market existed well before this generation of gaming, and nobody was crying about it then. So why all of a sudden is it a problem now? Now that the economy is hitting rough waters, economic reality is catching up with a lot of these game developers. Game developers put themselves into this mess by backing the HD consoles that are literally a money pit. Nintendo isn't crying about used games sales, and has even said that attacking used games is pointless because used games are not the problem but simply the symptom of declining interest in games.

Reggie recently said in an interview that the game industry has a very bad problem with ignoring their customers and not trying to look at things from the customer's viewpoint. The game industry is not exempt from the laws of economics. The market ultimately decides with its money. If the customer isn't satsified with their product, they sell it off and take their business elsewhere. If a customer keeps having to resell their games because they are terrible, they exist gaming altogether. Gaming is in the entertainment business. Entertainment is a VERY hard business to be in because there must be an unwavering and intimate respect for the audience (or customer). Most game developers these days do not have this attitude. And they are going out of business for it, as they rightfully should.

Instead of whining, or attacking their customers, the game industry should be trying to better understand their customers and show respect for their imaginations and tastes, and bend over backwards for them. But they aren't interested in the customer experience, so their games continue to bomb, and they remain ignorant of where the blame truly lies: Themselves. And they're gonna continue to whine themselves right out of business, and it will be well-deserved as it is in any other industry that actively attacks its customers *coughRIAAcough*.

Pretty much what GenKhan2 said. More often than not people trade their games in towards a new game. But they wouldn't trade their games in if those games could hold their value over time. But a lot of games these days don't. People that bought a game new for 60 dollars aren't satisfied with it, so they trade it in towards a new game that might. That used game gets marked down over time to a price that someone else might find more acceptable. The person might buy God of War for 30 dollars and be content with their purchase to the point that they won't trade it in.

But more often than not, we're seeing games so bad at holding their initial retail value they get resold many times. Eventually these games drop to more than 50% (or even greater) of their retail value in months and sometimes weeks. The only conclusion is that a lot of games that come out are overvalued at their initial price. Their price quickly plummets towards what the MARKET truly values these games at.

And guess whose fault that is? The developers and publishers, that's who. Instead of realizing that their games being resold is a sign of their game being a poor product, they instead blame everyone but themselves. Because they do this, they never seek to improve themselves and their products so they can hold their market value over a greater period of time. To put it succinctly, Gamestop would not exist if there was not a demand for videogames at a lower price, or to put it in terms of the customer, a price that they find at a more appropriate market value.

These developers whining and crying over second-hand sales of their products are no different from the auto-industry asking the government for a bailout. The market has spoken. Games these days suck. They can't hold their value. And that's entirely on the developers and publishers. Part of it is that HD game development is a money pit. And the other part is that, just as Nintendo stated at the beginning of this generation, graphics alone are not going to continue to spur the growth of new gamers, or even hold the interest of existing gamers.

Now, let's look at what Reggie Fils Aime said the other day. He basically said that games selling millions in the first month, and then nothing at all afterwards is the wrong way to make and sell a game. They should sell a healthy, consistent amount months and even years after they have released. Mario Kart Wii came out around the same time as GTA4. GTA4 now sells for about 20 dollars brand new, give or take, depending on where you go. Mario Kart Wii is still selling brand new for 50 dollars. And if it's sold used, it's usually not for much less. It's the same with NSMB DS, and you'll be hard pressed to find as many copies of NSMB Wii used as you will GTA4 used.

NSMB and Mario Kart have all sold a healthy, strong amount over a long period of time and its current market value has stayed consistent with its initial retail value, that is to say, its price hasn't gone down at all. THAT is the sign of a good game. The reality is that a lot of game developers these days can't make games that last. Every game developer that makes a game should strive to make a game that is a classic, that sells for years after it is made, and is continued to be played long after the platform it released for is now defunct.

Games used to do this, but game developers these days show no respect for gamers and giving them what they want, and addressing complaints. Instead of realizing that used games are a sign of gamers losing interest in their games because they are not good enough, they are crying a river because otherwise they'd be force to get their heads out of their own asses and focus on pleasing the customer. But nobody can admit fault with themselves, so they blame everyone else, and demand, like a spoiled brat, that they are entitled to second-hand sales even when that indicates that their product was never good enough to remain in ownership. People get tired of this, and it drives gamers away, to other platforms, or out of gaming entirely.

Nintendo saw this coming, and that's what they have been fighting against. Disinterest in gaming. Other game developers need to realize this, or they will eventually go under, along with the existing game industry.

Nintendo's business strategy right now is to make new customers. Part of their strategy is to lower the barrier of entry for new gamers. The DSi XL is removing barriers that might otherwise prevent people from getting the hardware. What barriers is it removing?

The XL is extra-large because some people might have a hard time handling the normal DS/DSi due to how small it is. Another thing is with the bigger stylus, which makes handling it easier. Finally, the much-larger screens make it much easier to see what's happening, especially for people who might have trouble with their sight. And this paid off big in Japan where the DSi XL has sold pretty well, so it's obviously doing its job of lowering the barriers of entry for potential gamers.

Another comment that is completely foolish is that if Iwata doesn't say anything, then whatever someone from Nintendo of America says doesn't matter. That is nonsense. You do not keep a major branch of your company in the dark about any new hardware that is coming down the pipeline.

What we can take away from Dunaway's presentation is that Nintendo is still persuing their current business strategy very aggressively, especially with the DS. If they are saying that they can sell more DS hardware in the US, then that's their intention. Nintendo will only release new hardware until the market demands that hardware. Right now, there is no demand for a new Nintendo handheld. They'll continue to push for maximum market penetration before they try to take their new audience upstream with new portable hardware.

As for Apple's iPad and iPhone and app gaming...I think the Wii and DS demonstrates that people do not want a media hub or portable computer that just happens to allow you to play videogames (and either not very good games, or games that don't control very well). They would much rather have the dedicated gaming platform that they know will do the task at hand as well as possible.

The DSi XL probably looks bizarre to people that are not familar with Nintendo's business strategy as of late, but here is the situation in a nutshell:

Nintendo's business strategy is to expand gaming; to make new gamers. So, their efforts and the DS reflect this by trying different contexts of playing games. Also bear in mind that in Japan, the console market is stagnant while the portable market is thriving.

So, the first DS was proof of concept. The DS Lite was a refinement of that. And now we must ask ourselves what niche the DS XL fills in? If we view it through the prism of Nintendo's business strategy, then it becomes much easier to understand.

There are people that might have a hard time holding the small DS Lite, or handling the smaller stylus. Most certainly there are people that have less than ideal eyesight and have trouble seeing stuff on the small screens of the DS. All these things are barriers to people that have interest in the DS but might turn them off to it.

So naturally, the DSi XL tries to eliminate these barriers, and as such, the DS becomes much more attractive and accessible to people that might not have been able to get use out of it. I have a hard time handling the normal DS Lite due to its size, so it and the larger screens are definitely attractive to me, and it's definitely attractive to a lot of people in Japan otherwise it wouldn't have sold.

Remember, Nintendo is trying to sell to people that normally don't play games, or quit gaming because they lost interest in it. The fact that this thing is selling should be a no-brainer to anybody that has seriously analyzed Nintendo's business strategy in the last five years.

Simply put, this is gonna explode in EA's face. Sean Malstrom recently wrote a post stating that the game industry would soon begin attacking its customers to look out for its own bottom line, and that's exactly what is happening here. Here is the ugly truth that EA and many other game companies must face:

Your games suck. There is a used game market because there is a demand for used games. Simple as can be stated. Why are there used games? Because people think that your games are not worth their initial retail value. Or because people become dissatisified with your games and trade them in towards a new game that may satisfy them. Games nowadays are mostly crap. That's why they get traded in. They sell based off of hype but never deliver on that hype.

Core gaming is already eroding, but all this will do for EA is drive away what little Core gamers they have left to milk. They have tried and mostly failed to tap into the Expanded Market (the Wii and DS audience of gamers), and so now they aim to try and get every ounce of revenue they can out of Core gamers. But Core gamers are already at their breaking point with this kind of use and abuse. They are realizing that gaming is not about the gamer, but about the industry. The industry does not care about gaming or the gamers. They only care about their profits and bottom line. They don't care about what the gamers want. Only what they want. They have their heads up their asses and they can't be bothered to listen to what their customers want.

Music went towards digital distribution because that's what the customers wanted. There was a benefit to the customer. Digital distribution as EA and the rest of the game industry would have it is not beneficial to the customer. That's why gamers will never seriously gravitate towards digital distribution as it is right now, which is just a poorly veiled attempt at taking away a gamer's right to the ownership of their games.

The one console that they really would like to push DD on, the WIi, is incapable of doing so, and Nintendo itself has no intention of taking DD seriously, because they realize that used games are the symptom of the overall poor quality of games these days. And the Expanded Market will never embrace DD because they see it for what it is: Bullshit.

Core gamers are already fed up with this crap. If game companies try to devalue their right to sell their used games (be it at Gamestop, Amazon, eBay, or anywhere else), then they will simply stop buying their games. Right now the industry is making profits but not making new customers with these shady practices. They are driving their shrinking pool of customers away. There will reach a critical mass where there will no longer be enough gamers to prop up the game industry. And then it will crash. And it will be well-deserved.

I do get a laugh about these people playing the violin for EA. Gaming is not about the companies, but the gamers. Go to Gamestop (or any other place or site where there are used games), and see what is still re-selling for a high amount. It will be one of two things: Rare games like Fatal Frame and Shin Megami Tensei, or games like NSMB Wii and NSMB DS which still sell for a lot in trade-in, and still resell for a high amount used. Why is this? Because those games are in high demand and sold out in many places. Around two years after it came out, Mario Kart Wii still sells for 50 dollars. The third party game that came out at the same time, GTA 4, sells for 20 dollars new, and less used. The market is showing how much they really value their games.

I'm not a Malstrom follower, it's just the truth. Remember when Yahtzee reviewed Peggle? Textbook example of disruption and embracing the low-end. World of Warcraft's success is another example of disruption, only in the MMO market, and it explains why all attempts from other MMOs that try to usurp or cash-in on its success fail. It also explains why handhelds are so successful in Japan right now.

The fact is that Sony, Microsoft, and the major third parties that pegged their futures with them overshot the low-end gamers, and Nintendo capitalized on this with the Wii and DS. The third parties saw money rather than customers, which is how they view their audience on the PS3 and 360 and PC, but unfortunately what has been successful for them up until now is now a chain that's drowning them. They can cut the chain and be successful but that means changing how they've been doing things, and they just don't seem capable of doing that.

You can't argue with economics. Gaming is not exempt from the laws of supply and demand.

"The Wii is not a mature console."

Yes, and that's why the 360 and PS3 have completely decimated the Wii this generation, right? You are measuring the Wii by the wrong metric. Nintendo has changed gaming. They have disrupted gaming. They changed the rules, and embraced the "low-end" gamers. The so-called soccer moms are going to be your future core gamers. Console gaming as we know is facing marginalization or completely extinction because of the creative dustruction of gaming from Nintendo and other avenues of low-end gaming (flash games, iphone gaming, handheld gaming is still thriving in Japan while the console market remains stagnant).

The fact of the matter is that the failures of a lot of the major third parties to sell to the Expanded Market shows that they really don't know how to make or sell games at all. The NES created gaming by appealing to everyone. Back then everyone was a "casual" gamer. But then those gamers ultimately went upstream thanks to advancements in gaming.

Do you think this will be any different for Nintendo this time. They made Wii Sports to show people how the new motion controls work, and then they made bridge games for them to move upstream into, like with Mario Kart Wii and NSMB Wii. The third parties don't want to compete as much as they want to "exploit" gamers to make money. That's why they cling so desperately to the 360 and PS3 to fleece revenue from the so-called "hardcore" gamers, who are the easiest to hoodwink with their marketing--marketing that is completely useless against the Expanded Market. That's why their games fail. Expandeds won't buy the hype, but they buy word of mouth. That's why NSMB DS, Mario Kart Wii, Wii Sports Resort, and why NSMB Wii will continue to sell strongly long after they have been released, even with a minimum of hype.

"But it's Nintendo, people always buy Nintendo's games!" Okay, then why didn't Mario Galaxy barely sell anything in Japan, yet NSMB Wii is already well on its way to eclipsing it in a scant few weeks? Why hasn't Zelda been a huge entertainment phenom in Japan since Ocarina of Time? Why did Wii Music flop (and by Nintendo's own admission, the game flopped because it failed to fuel momentum for their hardware)?

There's a disconnect between the game industry and gamers. We see it with blog posts like this where a third party developer demands that the console manufacturer do all the legwork for them, when the first party doesn't even need to really hype or market their games to get them to sell. The third parties are only looking at it in terms of sales and not in terms of pleasing customers, which is where all money comes from in any business. Nintendo pleases its customers, the money rolls in. Nintendo releases games that don't light a fire under its audience (Wii Music and Animal Crossing) and the sales decline.

That's all there is to it, and if the third parties truly competed with Nintendo for customers, or sought to disrupt their games themselves, they'd be doing fantastic on the Wii. But they won't put in the effort, they won't change and adapt to the times, so they'll ultimately be left out in the cold when the game industry as we know sinks into the icy depths in a scant few years from now.

"Unfortunately, Nintendo appears content with its hands-off approach to third-party marketing, offsetting all the blame for the failures of GTA: Chinatown Wars and countless other games at the hands of their respective publishers."

There's nothing unfortunate about this. These developers and publishers couldn't put games that would sell with the Expanded Market, then that's on them. They should either be trying to make games that can disrupt Nintendo's first party titles or try to make games that are sustaining innovations to the likes of Wii Sports or New Super Mario Bros. Wii.

Truly that would mean that these publishers would have to "lower themselves" to making games for everybody, but they won't do that. So they blame Nintendo for their failure because they don't wish to adapt to NIntendo's business strategy. That's just fine, watching these companies eventually fold due to their own willfull igorance and short-sighted business management is gonna be quite gratifying.

You know what? All these games would be something you'd buy your kids for Christmas? Can't exactly gift-wrap a downloadable game, now can ya? Going all digital would destroy Christmas sales, end of story. I think these developers are showing some foresight on their part, and considerably more than Sony has shown this gen. Going all-digital and cutting out physical media would be suicide for the game industry.

The Go is a waste of time and resources on the part of Sony. Sure it might just be an "experiment" but given the current economic climate they don't have the luxury of "experimenting."

It doesn't matter what you think of Reggie, because he is completely right about this. "What's in it for me?" That's absolutely right, nothing. It's just a lame attempt on the part of Sony to cut out the second-hand games market and "lease" games to you. You can't trade them in, and you don't own them. This is all done for Sony's benefit, not the customer's, whether you already own a PSP or not. It's a joke, but not one that customers are laughing at.

Sony needs to stop pissing away what little goodwill they have left and fruitless waste of resources and money, or it's gonna bite them in the ass down the road, and sooner than you might think.