Interesting discussion with an EB clerk today...

STATIC3D

STATIC3D

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
I was in EB today and talked to clerk there, a cool guy that's a long time gamer also. We were discussing how people buying games that don't know anything about them. I'd read an article a while back that said something like 65% of game sales are made by people that walk in, see some pretty screenshots on a box and purchase the game (without knowing anything else about it).

We were discussing how gaming now is much different than say in the Atari 2600 days. Most gamers back then were kids, didn't have the kind of disposable income as the older gamers now, and, didn't have the same amount of choice in games (i.e. library sizes, different consoles, etc.) as now either. Because of this, most of us gamers back-in-the-day had all played the same types of games (Pac-Man, Asteroids, etc.). We all had that kind of shared gaming experience where you could talk about a particular game and most of the other people knew what you were talking about.

Anywho, we also talked about how so many people now will go out and purchase a game they know so little about, sometimes, just to be "in" on it. For example, many people that stood in line (or rushed out) and purchased Halo 2 had never played Halo 1. They purchased the game because it was "HALO 2" and was supposed to be good because Halo 1 was good even thou they had not played it. Perhaps they sorta want that shared gaming experience (that was more easily found during earlier days of gaming).

The clerk said that a lot of people do still just come in and buy games because they are new without any real knowledge of them one way or the other. He told me how he is still amazed how many people will come in, buy a game only to return within a day or two to trade it in. He said many times it's not because they are finished with it, but, that they will even say things like "Well, I'm not into shooters, but I thought Gears of War was different."

As expensive of a hobby as gaming (at least on the retail market) can be, you would think people would be a bit more informed. Then again, that would require effort on their part...lol.
 
[quote name='STATIC3D']Then again, that would require effort on their part...lol.[/QUOTE]

and your point is? Do you put effort into everything you do...lol

People don't have to be informed. People should be able to buy what they want, when they want. It shouldn't require two days of research. Yes we live in an age of information. Not everyone can access it. whether you want to admit it or not, everything we buy (exception of food) is because the box is pretty.

The back of the game gives you some more information. Some people want the new and best, even if they don't really like it. but the biggest thing I think your forgetting is that not everyone can afford the internet and magazines.

or should I say, not everyone has the time, and money to be informed about every purchase.

Your bitching to a store clerk about how people spend there money. I think that you might need something to do with your free time...lol
 
Reading that does make a lot of sense. I guess us "core" gamers take pride in knowing that we can make informed decisions about games and the "right purchase". But you do have to look at it on the opposite end of the spectrum. We take pride in gaming but to other people, games are the same as movies and food, or any other indulgence.

Look at it this way. I don't read up on articles or watch Ebert and Roeper to decide if I want to see a certain movie in the theater. All it usually takes is a 20 second commercial or a friend to tell me about it for 10 seconds, and I can make a decision on the spot.

I live in NYC where there are literally 100 restaurants every block. All it takes is a 20 second look at the menu to decide whether or not I want to eat there.

When it comes to games, I'm not so quick to pull the trigger. As gamers we take pride, but maybe to the mainstream audience, games to them is what movies and restaurants are to me? Granted it is a bit more expensive, but you get the point.
 
[quote name='CitizenB']Not everyone can afford the internet and magazines.[/quote]But they can drop $60 on an impulse buy?
 
[quote name='daroga']But they can drop $60 on an impulse buy?[/quote]
No kidding. I'll try a new burger at BK "because it looks good" or rent a movie that "seems interesting," but if I'm dropping 50-60 dollars on something I had better know what I'm getting into.
 
CitizenB,

It doesn't take THAT much effort to learn at least a little something more about a game than looking at screenshots on the back of the box. Magazines/Internet is often freely available in many bookstores and/or libraries. At the very least, someone can ask people about the game beforehand. Then again, like daroga said, it still seems pretty "interesting" that a person who can't afford a magazine/interenet would be basically blowing $50-$60 on a videogame. :}

If people are going to bring a game back the next day after purchasing it, they could have saved themselves the money, and, the extra effort of having to go back to the store if they had spent a little effort in the first place. If this was a just a whim $5 purchase that didn't work out good, woopie. But, they could have rented the game for less than the loss of value between their original $50-$60 purchase and the trade-in value. P.T. Barnum was right, a fool and his money are soon parted.

Also, I wasn't "bitching" to the store clerk. HE was the one that said to me that he finds it interesting/strange how many people bring a game back to the store after just purchasing it a day or two before to trade it in because they it wasn't what their type of game, even when they were not into that type of gameplay in the first place. We are both fellow gamers that were discussing the way people make gaming purchases.


Kendro,

I see that side of the spectrum. It's just sort of a shame that someone will go out and purchase a new game (@ $50-$60) only to turn around and bring it back in a day or two. As I mentioned above, the amount of frustration on the customer's part that leads to the extra effort of going back to the store and trade the game in (at a loss in value) seems like less effort than doing at least something to find out more about the game than what some marketing dept has printed on the box. Then again, I guess some people don't mind hitting their head on the same brick wall over and over...lol.

Your movie example is close, but you would have to say that you had decided to see the movie simply by looking at the poster, not having seen a commercial for it, to be the same type of thing as buying a game based upon what's on the box. By seeing a commercial, you have accessed some of the actual content of the film and been able to see more of what the actual experience of seeing the full film may be like (or not in the case of a film that has a good commercial but sucks). For a person to make the same type of choice for a game purchase, they would have to have played a demo of the game to get a taste of the actual interactive gameplay to help them make the purchase decision.

But, I agree many people are willing to make uninformed purchases. While that does stimulate the gaming industry by putting more money in, it can also lead to some negative sides. Since publishers can continue to make money on film/TV/etc. tie-in games that suck, they continue to make them. Some publishers bank on the release of sequals to (once) popular titles on little more than name alone (sometimes even on a "yearly" basis). Nothing wrong with good sequals to good games, just sometimes it's interesting to see what some publishers are willing to put out there at times. :}


Qslugs,

The clerk I was talking to was NOT referring to kids. With the average age of gamers in the 30's now (33 if I remember the last study released), it's actually less likely it would be kids spending mom and dad's money. Then again, I wonder how many of them still possbily live with their mom and dad...lol.
 
[quote name='CitizenB']whether you want to admit it or not, everything we buy (exception of food) is because the box is pretty. [/QUOTE]

What the hell are you talking about, who's "we"? I can't remember the last thing I bought because the box was pretty. I guess your not informed about anything you buy.
 
I would assume the reason most people shop at EB/GS is because the employees are informed, and can help them make better buying decisions. There are lots of things keeping people from buying crappy games these days: online reviews, print reviews, sites like CAG, employees, etc.

It's almost worse for the uninitiated to buy bad games. If something I buy stinks, I'll just curse it out, trade it in, and get something else. In their case, it may sour them on our hobby as a whole, and we need to keep building up our numbers.

Regarding Halo 2 in the OP, it's nice to see a (good) sequel surpass the sales of its predecessor -- even if it was partly hype-based. Think about it: If the only people who bought a sequel were those who played the first game, the potential audience would be severely limited and shrink each time. But at the same time, I wholeheartedly believe there are too damn many sequels out there.
 
eh, people are just dumb, and the majority of people don't form their own opinions about most things. Just look at how popular MTV/Flava of Love/etc is, and how much people like the horrible music on the radio.
 
[quote name='PenguinMaster']I guess your not informed about anything you buy.[/QUOTE]

Yes you've figured me out by one statement I've made on the internets. I went to go buy a pair of socks and bought a car instead. Damn me for not being informed. You don't know me, if I'm buying anything thats not food I research my purchase.
Games (what rating did it get, will it drop in price soon)
Electronics (what are the highest quality) etc.

Its also a proven fact that people responded to different colors, patterns etc. So like I said even on a subconscious level.

If your sent to the store to buy a can of chicken broth lets say. Your going to buy one that has an appealing label to you.

*example*
Let say can one is 89. cents it has yellow, pink, black polka dots, and has nothing on the label except for "JOHNS BROTH" you more the likely not going to buy it.

2nd can is .99 cents
It has a picture of a warm bowl of broth, steaming hot. With a spoon coming out of the bowl and some crackers around it. in the background is a picture of a cottage home, and rolling grassy hills. Your going to buy that one. Within a split second you decide. Just like everything in life. You subconsciously make decisions you're never aware of.
Are you going to run home and google "JOHNS BROTH." to make a informed purchase.
To find out the quality, manufacture, call someone to see if they've tried it,

No your not the packaging is going to sell you on which one. Your going to buy the one with a label that is more appealing to you. Again on the subconscious level, The cottage reminds you of comfort, home, being secure. The steam from that bowl shows you that it hot and comforting that the bowl of warm soup will nourish you.
When companies do ads, and labels a lot more psychology goes into it then you think.

The only thing that would turn you off from the can with the cottage is if it was $9.99 a can. Or you retard uncle rapped you in a cottage when you were a young boy. Then that cottage symbolizes, anger, hate, dread.

I hope you understand what I'm saying now.


[quote name='STATIC3D']CitizenB,

It doesn't take THAT much effort to learn at least a little something more about a game than looking at screenshots on the back of the box. Magazines/Internet is often freely available in many bookstores and/or libraries. At the very least, someone can ask people about the game beforehand. Then again, like daroga said, it still seems pretty "interesting" that a person who can't afford a magazine/interenet would be basically blowing $50-$60 on a videogame. :}

If people are going to bring a game back the next day after purchasing it, they could have saved themselves the money, and, the extra effort of having to go back to the store if they had spent a little effort in the first place. If this was a just a whim $5 purchase that didn't work out good, woopie. But, they could have rented the game for less than the loss of value between their original $50-$60 purchase and the trade-in value. P.T. Barnum was right, a fool and his money are soon parted.[/QUOTE]

I get what your saying, but its easier to plop down money on something then to make a informed decision. Most of mainstream America are cattle, they will follow more then lead. The people that are leaders are the ones that run this country. It goes back to what I was saying some people want the newest greatest thing. Also it comes down to the fact that most people don't want to put up any effort, time, or money in make a informed purchase.

[quote name='jer7583']eh, people are just dumb, and the majority of people don't form their own opinions about most things. Just look at how popular MTV/Flava of Love/etc is, and how much people like the horrible music on the radio.[/QUOTE]

This is exactly what I mean when I say people are cattle.
 
I gotta agree with CitizenB.

Im that way with wine. My wife and I enjoy a nice bottle of wine every now and then, but when I go to buy one, I always buy one with a cool label on the bottle. Since I cant taste it ahead of time, Im shopping for wine strictly on the appeal of the bottle/label. LOTS of people do this.
 
ViolentLee,

Good point on the Halo 2. There's nothing wrong with a series/sequal growing. However, I often see it as a bit of "me too-ism" instead of a reflection of the actual quality of the gameplay. For example, say a certain movie did good and was well reviewed. How many people would likely rush out to see the sequal as soon as it came out but would never see the first film? More than likely, even if they did rush out to see the second film when it hit theaters, the majority of them would have checked out the first one beforehand.

Not seeing the original first, would be like watching the 2nd Matrix film without having seen the first. Sure, you may enjoy the 2nd film, but there are going to be certain things that are missing (whether you realize them or not) from the original's content. You can sometimes end up feeling either left out (not understanding references to the original) or possibly never even realize you are missing something (events that are built upon the first even if they don't reference them or an "inside" joke).

I just see it as a bit "silly" when someone rushes out to purchase a sequal to a popular title (just because it's popular) when they haven't even played (or at least checked out) the original. A person could rent or purchase a copy of the original game (which would be cheaper than the new sequal, since it's the "old" version now). :}


CitizenB,

I guess "easier" depends on your definition. Is it easier for someone to spend a few minutes looking up some information on a $50-$60 purchase, or, is it easier for them to simply plop down some cash, take a game they know nothing about home, get frustrated by not liking it, go back to the store, trade it in and then have to find another uninformed purchase (which could lead to the same cycle starting all over again)? The way I see it, it's easier (and cheaper) to spend a little time up front to find out something about a product as opposed to having to spend it on the back end (which also includes the frustration). Then again, I'm just silly like that...lol.

I agree about people being cattle, or at least sheep, when it comes to purchases. They want to walk in, plunk down some cash and get instant results. Yet, I'm still (well, suprised isn't the right word) amused (in a, "isn't that stupid" sort of way), by how many people seem to have little problem banging their head against that same old wall (making uninformed purchases, getting frustrated, yet, doing it all over again the next time and not having learned at least a little something from it the first time around). :}
 
GREAT posts Static3D! In regards to sequels, the one thing that's different with games is that so many game sequels either are basically self contained, or in some cases really have nothing to do with the earlier games (quite common in RPGs for example). With the Final Fantasy series, I'd actually recommend people start with the newer games (9 and 10 especially), and then branch out if they enjoyed those.

Just yesterday I saw some woman calling looking at a bunch of crap games, buying them for a nephew or something like that. This time of year hurts my head, what with people just randomly buying games for kids. It blows my mind that they don't think to check reviews at least before buying something-it's like they think "JOHNNY LIKES VIDEO GAMES, THIS IS A VIDEO GAME, SO JOHNNY WILL LIKE IT" which is just bizarre.

(The other thing that drives me nuts about this time of year of course is just that so many games are released now. So many great games get buried-the DS alone must have 90 thousand RPS in the space of two months, with virtually nothing earlier in the years.
 
[quote name='Puppy']Just yesterday I saw some woman calling looking at a bunch of crap games, buying them for a nephew or something like that. This time of year hurts my head, what with people just randomly buying games for kids. It blows my mind that they don't think to check reviews at least before buying something-it's like they think "JOHNNY LIKES VIDEO GAMES, THIS IS A VIDEO GAME, SO JOHNNY WILL LIKE IT" which is just bizarre.[/QUOTE]
In a way, I feel bad when kids get the shaft. I'm sure kid-geared games are better than they used to be. I remember being a kid and getting kind of crappy games; I was probably more tolerant of them than I am now, just because I didn't have a lot of games and my expectations were lower. However, kids also usually have a shorter attention span.

Also, for kids games, it's tough to really rely on the reviews of some guy who owns 500 other games and just played Call of Duty 3 beforehand. I've reviewed my share of kids games, and I had to put myself in a different frame of mind. With games like Ice Age 2 and Curious George, I ended up kind of enjoying them.
 
[quote name='Puppy']It blows my mind that they don't think to check reviews at least before buying something-it's like they think "JOHNNY LIKES VIDEO GAMES, THIS IS A VIDEO GAME, SO JOHNNY WILL LIKE IT" which is just bizarre.[/QUOTE]

SO true. In fact, the article I remember reading a while back mentioned people like aunts, uncles and grandparents buying games for kids yet knowing nothing about what the kid likes of whether the game was good or not...lol.

As you mentioned so many games being out is one of the things that makes it hard for some games to get noticed, and, for gamers to have those similar shared experiences having played the same games sometimes.

Along that same lines, the EB clerk and I were discussing how it can be harder for some games to make an impact. For example, Halo was a good game, but it was THE FPS on XBOX because it had little/no competition. Now, look at how many FPS games are on XBOX. DooM was considered THE FPS back in the day on PC. Yet, DooM 3 did not make the same kind of splash due in part to the great number of FPS games out, as well as the fact that DooM 3 had old school style gameplay which had been surpassed by other FPS games. I mean, why play hallway after hallway when you can play a mixture of environments (close quarters and open spaces) like Far Cry for example?

With any gametype/genre, etc., it's usually the first, or one of the first that gets the "innovative" title. After that, it becomes harder for other games, or sequals, to live up to the impact the earlier game had. Sorta like after the first time you've seen bullet time, it's just not as impressive later on. This is one area where sequals have a hard time. If they are not innovative enough, people claim it's just more of the same. If it's too innovative, then people say it's too different and doesn't have the same flavor/feel as the original. Good ole Catch-22 for the developers/publishers.

Then again, EA can release Madden year after year with little changed (i.e. could have been an update instead of a whole new $50 purchase), and people will STILL rush out to buy the next one...lol.


ViolentLee,
Actually, some kids games are not any better than they used to be. You are 100% correct about most kid game reviews (reviewers). Some kid games LOOK like kids games (cute/etc.), but, the gameplay is something that most kids, in the age group of the game's subject material, have a hard time playing. Instead of having fun, they get frustrated. I say this from experience as we have picked up a few games for our boys at times that were even hard for my wife and I to play...lol.
 
[quote name='CitizenB']
If your sent to the store to buy a can of chicken broth lets say. Your going to buy one that has an appealing label to you.

*example*
Let say can one is 89. cents it has yellow, pink, black polka dots, and has nothing on the label except for "JOHNS BROTH" you more the likely not going to buy it.

2nd can is .99 cents
It has a picture of a warm bowl of broth, steaming hot. With a spoon coming out of the bowl and some crackers around it. in the background is a picture of a cottage home, and rolling grassy hills. Your going to buy that one. Within a split second you decide. Just like everything in life. You subconsciously make decisions you're never aware of.
Are you going to run home and google "JOHNS BROTH." to make a informed purchase.
To find out the quality, manufacture, call someone to see if they've tried it,
[/QUOTE]

So first you say that everything we buy except food is based on pretty packaging, then you make an example using food. You never should have made such a blanket statement saying "everything" is based on pretty packaging. Also I'd try John's Broth, it's cheaper and there isn't a damn thing that says it will be worse. If they are the same price, I'd probably look at the ingredients and nutrition facts, always an informed purchase.
 
[quote name='ViolentLee']In a way, I feel bad when kids get the shaft. I'm sure kid-geared games are better than they used to be. I remember being a kid and getting kind of crappy games; I was probably more tolerant of them than I am now, just because I didn't have a lot of games and my expectations were lower. However, kids also usually have a shorter attention span. [/QUOTE]

Have you played any of the old Disney games on SNES & Genesis. They made a lot of excellent games (Aladdin, Lion King, World of Illusion, Mickey Mania, etc.). Disney games are the epitome of kids games and they used to be a lot better (I still play the old ones today). Plus Sonic and Mario were always designed for kids and those have gone downhill too.
 
[quote name='PenguinMaster']So first you say that everything we buy except food is based on pretty packaging, then you make an example using food. You never should have made such a blanket statement saying "everything" is based on pretty packaging. Also I'd try John's Broth, it's cheaper and there isn't a damn thing that says it will be worse. If they are the same price, I'd probably look at the ingredients and nutrition facts, always an informed purchase.[/QUOTE]

This thread has been dead for 3 days, let it die. You didn't have to rebuttal 3 days later, it doesn't make your e-penis bigger.
And yes I contradict myself we all do it.
 
[quote name='CitizenB']This thread has been dead for 3 days, let it die. You didn't have to rebuttal 3 days later, it doesn't make your e-penis bigger.
And yes I contradict myself we all do it.[/QUOTE]

The last post before mine was a day and half earlier, not 3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top