The practice of opening new games, taking out the disc, putting it back again, and selling it as new is by now verging on tradition. Consumers were appropriately outraged at first, but then just kind of rolled with it, which is probably the way this is going to turn out as well. And by this, we mean GameStop opening up all their brand spankin’ new copies of Deus Ex: HR and removing the code offering a free OnLive download of the game the developers had included.
Consumer Reactions and Industry Practices
When this practice first came to light, consumers were understandably upset. The idea of purchasing a “new” game that had already been opened and tampered with felt like a breach of trust. However, over time, many gamers have become somewhat desensitized to this practice. It has become an almost accepted part of the retail gaming experience, much to the chagrin of purists who believe that a new game should be untouched and pristine.
The situation with Deus Ex: Human Revolution (HR) and GameStop is a prime example of this ongoing issue. GameStop decided to open all new copies of the game to remove the code for a free OnLive download that the developers had included. This move was particularly controversial because it seemed to prioritize GameStop’s business interests over the consumer’s experience and the developer’s intentions.
GameStop’s Response and Industry Implications
And if you thought the revelation, coming from a leaked GameStop memo, would send the company’s PR team scrambling for their stock apologetic letter templates, you were wrong. “Regarding the Deus Ex: Human Revolution OnLive Codes: We don’t make a habit of promoting competitive services without a formal partnership. Square Enix packed the competitor’s coupon with our DXHR product without our prior knowledge and we did pull these coupons. While the new products may be opened, we fully guarantee the condition of the discs to be new,” read a GameStop statement.
This response highlights a significant issue within the gaming retail industry: the conflict between retailers and digital distribution platforms. GameStop’s decision to remove the OnLive codes was driven by a desire to avoid promoting a competing service. OnLive, a cloud gaming service, represented a direct threat to GameStop’s traditional retail model. By removing the codes, GameStop aimed to protect its business interests, even if it meant compromising the consumer’s purchase experience.
The broader implications of this practice are worth considering. As digital distribution becomes more prevalent, traditional retailers like GameStop are increasingly finding themselves at odds with the evolving landscape of the gaming industry. This tension can lead to practices that may not always align with consumer expectations or developer intentions.
For example, imagine purchasing a new car only to find that the dealership had removed a complimentary service package included by the manufacturer because it competed with the dealership’s own services. This would likely cause significant consumer backlash. Yet, in the gaming industry, such practices have become almost normalized.
The practice of opening new games and removing certain contents before selling them as new is a contentious issue that reflects broader tensions within the gaming industry. While consumers have become somewhat accustomed to this practice, it continues to raise questions about transparency, trust, and the evolving dynamics between physical and digital game distribution. As the industry continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how retailers, developers, and consumers navigate these challenges.
Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals
Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
