My girlfriend's parents have a Wii and a DS. They've been used about twice each. It's had a standard console life cycle, but they've been a HUGE fad.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK Retailer GAME is dead | Brera's Lament
- Thread starter CrunchinJelly
- Start date
- Status
My girlfriend's parents have a Wii and a DS. They've been used about twice each. It's had a standard console life cycle, but they've been a HUGE fad.
JennyTablina
Member
Oh they did fine as gaming systems, the Wii and DS are still pretty popular in the family and kids market (but in the past year sales have really died down). But Nintendo's Wii at least apporached Fad levels in it's early years, just thankfully unlike GAME, Nintendo knew when to get back to the gaming side of things. They rode the casual wave, and stepped back on the push for it when sales slowed. The Wii is enjoying a pretty healthy late year in it's console cycle thanks to Nintendo finally remembering the console can do games too ; P
I suppose if you wanted to be more accurate, it was plastic accessory gaming and motion controls that were the fad, they still can be popular, as Kinect and Move did pretty well when they eventually emerged. Though sales for those seemed to drop off quicker than the Wii's did.
Interesting read I agreed with one of your points and major problems the rest well thats up to interperation of what you believe.
I dont think the bit about upselling is true. I dont think such things ever drove away customers. Gamers were already moving on to cheap online outlets or simply were busy playing CoD over and over rather than buying new games. The other side, the Wii crowd, had moved away to iOS and the like or given up with the fad altogether.
I think it's had an impact. How big of an impact, I don't know. But it's one of the reasons I didn't like shopping in Game or GameStation for a while before they closed. Not the only reason, high prices were the main one, but getting offered loads of extra stuff at the till is offputting. Grainger Games have the right idea, they wait for you to ask them a question or bring whatever products you want to buy, and then they talk to you without trying to sell things to you. If I wanted to buy a strategy guide or a points card, I'd have brought one with me to the till. It's not the staff's fault, it's the management's, but it's a very annoying tactic.
Before GMG bought Gamestation, I enjoyed going in there. The staff were knowledgeable about games, they seemed to actually care about stuff, and the incredible range of retro stuff always brought a smile to my face.
After the buyout, the staff were replaced by people who just didn't want to know or care, and they essentially became GAME stores in all but name.
One of the other main problems is that GMG had 3 separate branches, each with a "perceived focus", but they tried to make 2 of them the same.
GameStation was for the 'hardcore', with a large focus on pre-owned and retro stuff
GAME was the place for new games
Gameplay was the best online retailer for a VERY long time
But what happened? GAME started focusing heavily on preowned, GameStation had a big shift as well, the retro section practically disintegrated, and both stores had their own websites.
I wonder if it would've made a difference if they'd kept each branch's focus separate, and had game.co.uk and gamestation.co.uk redirect to Gameplay... Probably not, but it would've made much more sense (to me, anyway)
After the buyout, the staff were replaced by people who just didn't want to know or care, and they essentially became GAME stores in all but name.
One of the other main problems is that GMG had 3 separate branches, each with a "perceived focus", but they tried to make 2 of them the same.
GameStation was for the 'hardcore', with a large focus on pre-owned and retro stuff
GAME was the place for new games
Gameplay was the best online retailer for a VERY long time
But what happened? GAME started focusing heavily on preowned, GameStation had a big shift as well, the retro section practically disintegrated, and both stores had their own websites.
I wonder if it would've made a difference if they'd kept each branch's focus separate, and had game.co.uk and gamestation.co.uk redirect to Gameplay... Probably not, but it would've made much more sense (to me, anyway)
Cosmonaut X
Member
I think this is a fairer assessment of the Wii situation than in zomg's doc.
I think it would be more accurate to say that GAME utterly misjudged the unusual situation where the Wii was the "in thing" beyond the usual gaming circles. They should have stuck to treating it like any other popular console, instead of building on the hype bubble and being buggered when the console dropped back to more subdued levels and the "in it for a minute" audience moved on.
Preston GAF represent.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
I'm harsh on them because the management at GMG were taking massive pay and dividends. Lisa Morgan, the ex-CEO has made at least £3m from GMG, anyone being paid that much should spot the signs well before a lowly analyst such as myself. The management were completely blindsided by the fall of the Wii and high margin accessories. Nintendo and Activision are just fine, they moved onto the 3DS and COD respectively, GMG had nowhere to go.
Cosmonaut X
Member
I just don't understand why they didn't see that there were going to be issues with the system when it became clear in 2008/2009 that it wasn't going to have the kind of support from third parties to keep it chugging like the PS2 before it. Someone must have realised that the market that was buying the cheap "... Party" games and 5-in-1 plastic accessories couldn't be relied on like the hobbyists and traditional gaming audience, and if the games to interest them weren't coming to the Wii...
There was clearly going to be a decent, sizeable userbase on the system even still, but the passing audience that caused it to explode early on shouldn't have been seen as reliable enough to build on.
So everything in my store is packed up - mint and pre-owned stock (even gift cards and so-on), as well as supplies, paperwork and till systems. Tomorrow they will be all collected by TNT and transported to the GAME in town, our monies in the safe will be collected, and we'll sign-off with our RM and a representative of PWC and hand the keys over.
And that's it.
And that's it.
JennyTablina
Member
Appreciate the complement, though I think there's misjudging and completely missing the woods for the trees, and not realizing till you've sucked the area of any profit.
Anyone who really knew the industry would of noticed the slip of popularity as soon as 2007 - it was clear that unless a popular must-have title for the masses came out - sales surprisingly dropped off, for me that's a clear sign of a unsustainable market. How often can you make Wii Sports and Wii Fit and keep the audience coming back? Eventually the casuals get wise or bored, and move onto whatever the new thing is. Not to mention because of the casual reputation, the Wii sorely lacked major hard-hitting titles outside those Nintendo churned out. So it had a much more fickle customer base as a system. The specialist consumer shunned it for the reasons GAME actually promoted it, a bit of a double edged sword that cut them deep
People wanted the Wii because it was new, exciting and doing things NO OTHER system in the market was really doing at the time. It was the "hey look how cool it is to bowl, and see it happen in game! and how easy it is to play!" aspect of it all. The fact even your granny could play and have a good ol' time without needing to do more than press A and make a natural gesture. The DS had a similar case of disruption to the market, as did the 3DS - but nobody made a major silly focus on the touch screen gimmick or the 3D one. In the case of the DS's Touch Screen, devs learned gradually that shoe horning touchscreen stuff in could be damaging to a title anyway.
When Natal was announced at E3, that was the time GAME should of stepped back from the Wii and casuals. Because then it wasn't unique anymore, the other devs were about to do their versions and because they came second, the public was never going to be wild about it. Even if Kinect was a step up, people were always just going to say "Yawn the Wii did it already, why should I care?" That or even at the disasterous Wii Music presentation and the resulting poor sales, THAT should of been a sign that the gravy train wasn't going to last much longer
Fads exist because someone has a really good, UNIQUE idea and managed to market it for a REALLY good price so it's super affordable thus lots of demand. Gaming history itself shows when you flood the market with also-rans and me-too ideas - it's really damaging for the industry. Someone should of brushed up on their history of the Great Video Game Crash of 1983 at GMG
That still would have meant GMG had 2+ stores in shopping centres across the country. It would have been better to close the reduntant stores when they first bought gamestation, or better yet, not bought Gamestation at all.
Are you seriously calling the Wii a fad? In 2012?
Cosmonaut X
Member
I think there's a good argument to be made for it, actually. That's not to say that the console was like any other one-holiday-season-and-it's-done passing thing - it clearly wasn't, and it does still have an active audience for certain games and genres - but the audience who made it *explode* in the early years were obviously there because of a handful of big games everyone was talking about, and because the system was something really novel.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that owning a Wii was a fad, but the system itself wasn't?
radioheadrule83
Banned
Not only called the Wii a fad but the DS as well... If I cared to address it I'd go look back for some software sales marketshare charts and total revenue generated in software for the past 5 years... but I don't really care. Calling either of them fads, as opposed to... well, insanely popular phenomenons... is wrong. It's probably true to say that publishers and retailers didn't benefit in the usual way, because they exploited them incorrectly - certainly the Wii at any rate.
I had no idea that GAME owned Gameplay! When did they acquire them?
I remember getting their mail order catalogue as a kid and excitedly selecting my potential birthday/christmas list of games.
Sucks that they shut down Gameplay.co.uk and all the stores at the start of March.
Of course all of this is terrible but yea... Memories
I remember getting their mail order catalogue as a kid and excitedly selecting my potential birthday/christmas list of games.
Sucks that they shut down Gameplay.co.uk and all the stores at the start of March.
Of course all of this is terrible but yea... Memories
JennyTablina
Member
But isn't an "insanely popular phenomenon" pretty much the description for a Fad?
Eeeyup
I'm not saying the system themselves are Fads, I clarified that the fashion was the motion gaming, or the simplified form of gaming that was used to show off the Wii was the Fad at hand. It wasn't just the Wii, Guitar Hero and Rock Band did the simplification thing as well, heck even DDR was a very early form of it. Joe Public likes their gaming with as few buttons as possible and addictive as all hell. Thats why they are all about the stupidly simple game apps like Angry Birds. Easy to get to grips, but it's about how well you do that one thing, level after level.
By the time Microsoft and Sony stopped gawping and said "boy we need a piece of that pie" Apple had already stepped in and made gaming even more simple and cheaper for joe casual. So unless they already had a PS3/Xbox - they were never going to buy into Kinect or Move
The DS wasn't so much a fad as a popular choice of system, but for a while there was a conception that the DS was successful because of the touch screen, when really that was just a neat optional control choice (that got overused). It was successful because it was a great system with great games and word spread. The clamshell design makes it a lot more kid-friendly and durable than a PSP or iPod Touch.
s_mirage
Member
2004. They still operated out of their own warehouse for a time but were later integrated into Game's main warehouse, leaving the name only really.
Round the Wii launch, I remember combog from Gameplay helping me source another controller shortly before he got shit canned a couple of weeks later.
Thank you, those words mean a lot. It's not just me though, everybody in my store is putting a huge effort in and doing the same (aside from the manager who's "on holiday" still.) It's all been left up to the assistant manager, so huge props to him. I'm sure the same can be said for LordAlu and every other GAME / GS employee in this thread too. I just hope we get all of the pay we're owed.
I did manage to get myself a Dark Souls poster, though.
WTF are you doing?
Have you seen what they've done to the Eire staff?
Fuck them, go sick and you should have all taken those roll cages straight to your car boots cos those fuckers won't pay you, the tax payer will...in a year!
You are a good guy so good luck. I wouldn't be surprised if your managers been to several job interviews by now
Acidote
Member
Of course they have if they're intelligent.
APZonerunner
Member
Sounds like the remaining stores are saved, and RBS is the saver.
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/game-to-exit-administration-tomorrow-rbs-consortium-wins-race/093563
Wonder what the implications are through this for the running of the business and what happens next. Everything back to normal? Massive reshuffles? More streamlining and closures? Something in between?
Really terrible that RBS rejected OpCapita's job-saving bid and now, after 2000 jobs are lost, have their own bid win.
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/game-to-exit-administration-tomorrow-rbs-consortium-wins-race/093563
Wonder what the implications are through this for the running of the business and what happens next. Everything back to normal? Massive reshuffles? More streamlining and closures? Something in between?
Really terrible that RBS rejected OpCapita's job-saving bid and now, after 2000 jobs are lost, have their own bid win.
Yeah that seems like some dodgy dealing on RBS's part. And isn't RBS owned by the government these days? So does this mean the government now owns its own chain of videogame stores?
Gotta make those videogame tax breaks pay for themselves somehow. I kid, but it is kinda weird.
In effect yes. They will get away with it too given the number of jobs saved.
Smart work on RBS's part. Immoral maybe, but not illegal.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
RBS are going to roll the debt into the new company then try and flog them off for a nominal sum. That's what this is about, ensuring that their debts are secure again. They must have felt there was not much chance of GMG having £175m worth of assets to recoup their loans so now they will gear up the new company with the same £175m and sell them, probably to GameStop or OpCapita.
It would have been more immoral for RBS to buy the group with public money before it went into administration given the utterly fucked state it was in.
CrunchinJelly
formerly cjelly
Resistance100
Member
brain_stew
Member
We don't know the details of opcapita's bid and to just assume they'd have kept every store open is incredibly naive.
APZonerunner
Member
They wouldn't have long-term, but like with Comet they'd have actioned a store closure plan over a lengthy period with proper redundancy payments and proper support for jettisoned staff rather than the harsh axe "close today, tell your team they no longer have jobs" phone call of administration.
To say that wouldn't have been better is crazy. The bid they placed was for the UK operation in its entirety.
IdreamofHIME
Member
RBS are so shady lol.
Huw_Dawson
Member
Accrington Gamestation closed rather than the Game.
FML. Accrington Game is garbage.
If the RBS story is true, it looks like administration was just to get free reign to cancel leases and fire staff with minimal cost. :|
FML. Accrington Game is garbage.
If the RBS story is true, it looks like administration was just to get free reign to cancel leases and fire staff with minimal cost. :|
I don't know enough about the finances of the company and someone with better knowledge than me may have more of an idea, but is there not a possibility that having closed 200 stores they may be able to operate in exactly the same manner they always did? Such a closure may put them in a healthy enough operating position to be able to agree their prior credit terms with suppliers and thus have a "business as usual" mentality. I mean, that's how they're operating at the moment, after all.
The likelihood of a sweeping change in corporate culture happening immediately if the brand and current locations survive is slim to none.
Very true. Ironic given that that is how they were saved themselves!
killer_clank
Member
If they get new credit lines and funding they totally will. No reason not to.
Diablohead
Member
If game wants to survive it needs to change how it does things though I doubt that will happen and owners will live on a deadly line selling new games for £42.99
This has been an insolvent restructuring with an exit into a solvent company. The CEO (and I think the rest of senior management?) has gone so hopefully there will be a sea change in how they operate.
It was really the suppliers that triggered the collapse of this house of cards. As the new company cant go to other suppliers for those particular products, then the power really sits with them going forward.
Whether this in itself is a good or bad thing is another topic but what we can hope to see is the emergence of a genuine specialist bricks and mortar retailer with a good online offering.
edit: Before I forget, given that the next gen is likely to be very anti-used games, the suppliers will have even more control!
CrunchinJelly
formerly cjelly
Hmm, I'm pretty sure most of the management from head office left a few weeks ago (so they got redundancy, of course).
JonathanEx
Member
Only partly reactivated - not on new stock.
- Status