Why do stores stock bad games?

[captaincold]

I've never understood this.
I've noticed this ALOT during these CC,BB,TRU sales.
It just seems like they're always fully stocked with bad games but alot of the best games on the system are nowhere to be found.

Besides the high prices for new games i think this is the 2nd biggest problem.

[6669]

cuz people buy all the good games, and leave all the crappy games

[biggestinuyashafan]

cuz people buy all the good games, and leave all the crappy games

exactly. but i think he is trying to say that they should stock more of the new ones and toss some of the crappy ones in the back or something.

[captaincold]

cuz people buy all the good games, and leave all the crappy games

Ya i understand that but my point is why do they even choose to stock bad games over good games that they don't even stock?

Just went to CC yesterday & there was no Phantom Brave,Kingdom Under Fire,Puyo Puyo Fever,Super Mario Advance 1-3,etc..
Yet they had tons of copies of Showdown Legends of Wrestling for the Ps2+Xbox,which i played & it sucks bad.

[bignick]

I think they think that we think we want the games. They think they will sell them all.

[Kaijufan]

I would bet that a lot of the time people who buy games for stores have no idea if a game is good or bad and buy it based on the title, box art, and what ever info they get about the game.

[dcfox]

I think defender answered a question like this a while ago. From what I can remember of his answer, I guess retailers and publishers are in sort of deal where they would have to stock/sell so many copies of the crappy game in order to get copies of the better games. And also I think by having these hard to sell titles in a more prominent display they have a greater chance of moving them rather than keeping them in the back.

[epobirs]

Stores do not consciously stock bad games, nor do they knowingly stock good games. What they stock are those games the corporate buyer believes is going to sell. That is the sole definition of a good game fromt he store's perspective. The buyers instincts are often correct even when the product is something none of us would touch with a ten foot pole or a nine foot Hungarian.

This is one of the reasons there will always be crappy games tied into popular kid's TV shows. The store buyer knows the typical grandparents and other gift buying adults are only vaguely aware of the kid's gaming tastes but are much more likely to know what TV shows rulle the kid's world. Brand recognition really pays off at that moment.

[pimpinc333]

Gamestop and EB will try to sell those peices of crap to stupid ppl who dont know anything about games......they will hype it up just for someone to buy like well every game ever made lol

[EggViper]

I would bet that a lot of the time people who buy games for stores have no idea if a game is good or bad and buy it based on the title, box art, and what ever info they get about the game.

probally that or they have to order X amount of games from the publishers inorder to get a good deal.

[eldad9]

It's so much more coplicated than you think. For example, some bad games sell a lot (wanna bet the mary-kate and ashley titles sold well? the shrek games?) and some good games never sell that much. Then there are contracts with publishers. And if people try to find a bad game and can't find it in your store, they'll go to another store, and maybe try it first next time, because yours sucks. Then add the fact that reviews aren't available until around the time the games ship, and how good or bad games are is subjective... would you suggest that a store only carry good music? The list goes on and on and on.

[captaincold]

This is one of the reasons there will always be crappy games tied into popular kid's TV shows. The store buyer knows the typical grandparents and other gift buying adults are only vaguely aware of the kid's gaming tastes but are much more likely to know what TV shows rulle the kid's world. Brand recognition really pays off at that moment.


That's a great example & another reason why i think so many companies + stores are going out of buisness.
My niece got a GBA-sp for her birthday & got some bad games(licensed garbage) from my brother. Of course she doesn't even play it anymore therefore my brother said he's not getting her anymore games for it.

I think there should be a higher royalty rate for games that get low ratings & lower royalty rates for higher rated games from the actual quality control testers at Nintendo,Sony & Microsoft.

It doesn't make sense for a publisher to pay the same rate for a bad game & a great game.

[Sporadic]

Why do stores stock bad games?

The same reason why people buy them.....they don't know any better.

[Scrubking]

This is so stupid. How the hell is the store gonna know if the game sucks or not?

Apart from the fact that it's completely subjective whether a games "sucks" or not - stores don't go around play testing the games before they come out to decide if they want to sell it.

Common sense people!

[Alpha2]

Stores dont know how bad a game is untill they check their stock and notice what hasnt sold. They dont go around reading reviews unless maybe it's a small mom and pop store. And you cant say a licensed game based on a movie or tv show automatically sucks because lots of people loved Chronicles of Ridick.

Afterwards they know they dont need another thousand copies of barbie's adventure game since they still have a shelf stakced high with them fromthe first order and dont bother doing it again, atleast untill they can sell out the first order.

[DigitalSpace]

This is so stupid. How the hell is the store gonna know if the game sucks or not?

Apart from the fact that it's completely subjective whether a games "sucks" or not - stores don't go around play testing the games before they come out to decide if they want to sell it.

Common sense people!

Couldn't put it any better. :)

[elprincipe]

This is so stupid. How the hell is the store gonna know if the game sucks or not?

Apart from the fact that it's completely subjective whether a games "sucks" or not - stores don't go around play testing the games before they come out to decide if they want to sell it.

Common sense people!

Exactly. Not to mention that plenty of games that are terrible sell really well, meaning they're good for the store even though they suck.

[captaincold]

This is so stupid. How the hell is the store gonna know if the game sucks or not?

Apart from the fact that it's completely subjective whether a games "sucks" or not - stores don't go around play testing the games before they come out to decide if they want to sell it.

Common sense people!

How is this stupid? Retailers spend 100's of millions on videogames,why not have a special division that test the games b4 they come out? They have the power to do that since they are the one's that drive the industry.

When 3 of the 5 biggest videogame retailers in the usa are blowing games out at $5 - $10 a piece i think there's a serious problem that needs to be fixed and thats blantantly obvious.

[sblymnlcrymnl]

Unfortunately many bad games outsell the good ones.

[camoor]

Y'all see how many copies of "Enter The Matrix" moved?

THATS why store stock bad games.

[punqsux]

Y'all see how many copies of "Enter The Matrix" moved?

THATS why store stock bad games.

bad example. etm was a hype machines. people didnt buy the game as much as they bought the hype of the game.

i think a good example of stores stocking bad games is pryzm or most 3do/acclaim games

[Ledhed]

When 3 of the 5 biggest videogame retailers in the usa are blowing games out at $5 - $10 a piece i think there's a serious problem that needs to be fixed and thats blantantly obvious.

What 'serious problem' are you seeing? They are simply trying to move stale product. The only thing TRU knows about REZ is that it's been sitting on their shelf for over a year, and it needs to move. Quick.

So they have a big sale, and hope that people buy, or at least see the other stuff in the store. I fail to see the negative.

As far as stocking bad games: Like someone else said, price and recognition move product. Grandparents don't know how cool Disgaea is, they only know it's $50. Meanwhile, their grandkids would simply love that $20 Scooby Doo game. Videogames are a business, no matter what way you cut it. It's about making money, not always about making an outstanding game. The shitty publishers know this and exploit it. That's all there is to it.

[camoor]

Y'all see how many copies of "Enter The Matrix" moved?

THATS why store stock bad games.

bad example. etm was a hype machines. people didnt buy the game as much as they bought the hype of the game.

i think a good example of stores stocking bad games is pryzm or most 3do/acclaim games

I must respectfully disagree with your dismissal of my post.

My point is that game stores stock up on plenty of hyped-up bad games.

Your point is that they stock up on... Pryzm? Acclaim games? I can't tell you how many Pryzm games are in my local Gamestop but when "Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness" came out they were stocked to the gills!

Stores are there to make money, period. They stock up on the hyped-up/good games because they have a reasonable expectation that these games will sell well. Sometimes that doesn't pan out, but there are always enough idiots willing to shell out cash for the next Army Men game because the game had ads in the latest Maxim (AKA the hype machine).

[camoor]

When 3 of the 5 biggest videogame retailers in the usa are blowing games out at $5 - $10 a piece i think there's a serious problem that needs to be fixed and thats blantantly obvious.

What 'serious problem' are you seeing? They are simply trying to move stale product. The only thing TRU knows about REZ is that it's been sitting on their shelf for over a year, and it needs to move. Quick.

So they have a big sale, and hope that people buy, or at least see the other stuff in the store. I fail to see the negative.

As far as stocking bad games: Like someone else said, price and recognition move product. Grandparents don't know how cool Disgaea is, they only know it's $50. Meanwhile, their grandkids would simply love that $20 Scooby Doo game. Videogames are a business, no matter what way you cut it. It's about making money, not always about making an outstanding game. The shitty publishers know this and exploit it. That's all there is to it.

Agreed. At least videogame companies are giving us the consumer what we want.

You want to see an industry with serious problems, look at the music biz. 18 clams for the latest Ashlee Simpson CD? I'll just buy Viewtiful Joe for 2 bucks more and take the free tshirt, thanks.

[Alpha2]

Stores are not exempt from beleiving in hype.

If the hype machine works and they have a million copies of a crap game all that matters to them is that the crap game that they were told would sell a million copies will blow off the shelf.

ETM is a game based on a super popular hot movie franchaise, millions of dollars were spent to add movie fottage that isnt on any DVD or in the theatrical film. it even features actual voices by the actors. technically theres no reason why it shouldnt sell a million copies and thats what the stores know and thats all any store has to place their bets on, this is the method they've used for years.

[tubtub]

I'm always amazed by what crap people will buy at TRU. Some of the games are just unbelievably bad and TRU can charge full price and they'll still sell some(parents don't know what games are good). Another reason stores stock so many of the crappy games is that they might get a deal if they order x copies of the game and they figure they will be able to sell it. I know those GBA Intec Accessory Kits TRU sells for $40 are only being sold because they got such a good deal on them. The only bad thing is that they might have sold a bunch, but most stores are now stuck with tons of them and they aren't selling. At least they are part of the green tag sale, but still they aren't moving that well.

The same thing with the TRU Black GBA system. TRU had over 20,000 in the warehouses a little over a month ago. When they did the free game deal they emptied the warehouses, but now the stores are stuck with tons of the old black gbas. Now that the SP is $80 TRU still sells the old GBA for $70, while most places clearanced the old ones out for $50 or less.

[neocisco]

There are all kinds of incentive deals that are made between publishers and retailers that the general public isn't privy to. As I'm sure you all know publishers crank out the garbage then cut a deal so that stuff can be sold at a very high profit margin since it's obvious there's no money put into game development. Plus, corporate buyers are often clueless, especially where videogames are concerned. Go to CC and take a close look at some of the game price tags. They have I-Ninja and Jet Li: Rise to Honor classified as sports titles. Does that sound like someone who has even held a PS2 controller? A large portion of the blame falls on their shoulders as far as I'm concerned.

[sying]

Someone voice in the planning department said "If you stock it, they will come"

[msdmoney]

Stores base how good a game is on how well is sells. If you don't want stores to stock bad games you are essentially telling them don't stock games that don't sell. That would end up (and many stores are moving toward this already) with only a few big/licensed titles available in stores. I for one would like stores to stock everything that way I can make my own decision, rather than having the three new movie licensed games to choose from. If stores stop stocking "bad" games we will see less BG&E, Rez, etc but plenty of Enter the Matrix and plenty of the latest version of Madden.

[Rig]

Stores stock bad games not only because they don't know any better, but also because someone will buy them. I'm sure many of you, including myself, picked up some lousy games at some point (CC sale?) becasue of price alone. When the stores see the game isn't selling, they clearance it, and ultimately, get rid of it.

[rebenns]

Stores don't know the difference between a good game and a bad one. This could work to our advantage, sometimes. For instance, do you think TRU would be selling REZ for $12.50 if it knew what it was worth online? That said, it seems stupid for publishers to make bad games. I can understand games being rushed out the door if the license is time - sensitive, but even then, if the game is good enough, it will sell to not only fans of the license, but other players as well. For instance, Goldeneye was released two years after the film, and was still the best selling game of the year, and one of the biggest sellers for the n64 ever! Chronicles of Riddick sold well, despite the film flopping, because of it's game play. Sure, a good game may cost a bit more to develop, but we're usually only talking a few million, and the extra sales and increased reputation of the license and developer will more than make up for it. When you consider that the distribution, advertising, and all other expenses are the same for good and bad games, and development expenses are only a small fraction of the total cost of bringing a game to retail, it doesn't make sense to make a crappy one. But what really doesn't make sense is sequels to crappy games that often don't sell well in the first place. For instance, are there really people out there anxiously awaiting for the next Army Men release?

[Indiana]

I think the people who run the stores have no understanding of good versus bad games. They purchase xxx amount at xx price and have to sell that many. The problem is they order some amount that is waaaay to high for a real shitty game and it never sells. The good games fly off the shelf so fast that they end up running out of stock and probably never order another shipment.

[Trakan]

They still get $ from stupid people who buy shitty games.

[epobirs]

A few things to consider.

Large businesses can easily absorb the losses on turkey games that get blown out for pocket change thanks to their tax situation. Once you achieve a certaqin scale, so long as you maintain sufficent cash flow, you can pass a lot of garbage through your stores with little longterm repercussions.

How are you defining a bad game. Is it one that offends your particular tastes or one that fails to do good business. Some of the games with the highest resale value are titles that utterly failed in the market while many others that go for a pittance on eBay did great business in their time at retail.

Don't presume your tastes should dictate the market. I guarantee that every one of us views a particular genre as worthless that is the favorite of others here. If the market was defined by my tastes 90% of sports titles wouldn't exist, nor would wrestling games.

If I was running a software company, though, my taste wouldn't matter at all if I had good developers who like the genre and the charts showed the potential for this to be a big seller.

[wubb]

I'm always amazed by what crap people will buy at TRU. Some of the games are just unbelievably bad and TRU can charge full price and they'll still sell some(parents don't know what games are good).

On the same token I think a lot of kids get faced with a situation where Dad offers to buy a game for them and they have to just pick one out to get right there on the spot. It's pretty much impossible to tell what game is good and what is bad from just looking at the box art and if there isn't anything there the kid knows and wants it's a crapshoot.

[Mishimaryu]

yea well there are some crappy 4.99 games left at CC I saw Evil Dead still in stock at mine...

[GuilewasNK]

Stores do not consciously stock bad games, nor do they knowingly stock good games. What they stock are those games the corporate buyer believes is going to sell. That is the sole definition of a good game fromt he store's perspective. The buyers instincts are often correct even when the product is something none of us would touch with a ten foot pole or a nine foot Hungarian.




I would agree with that. At the bookstore I work at we have limited input on the reference books we get. Our buyer selects what they think will sell. Sometimes it sells, sometimes it doesn't.