"80% of games are crap", says online retailer

[wraggster]

via CVG (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=156584)

Online retailer DVD Empire has quit selling games, blaming selfish publishers, slim margins, slow distribution and the fact that "80% of games are crap" as reasons for its decision.

"The video game industry only cares about mass merchandisers like Toys-R-Us, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, etc. They completely ignore the needs and wants of the medium to small game retailers," the company says on its website. "You may not care whether or not we make money, but we cannot continue to pay to sell video games."

"We all know how fast games devalue in prices; this is due to the fact that 80% of the games created are crap. So take the fact that we only make $5, now if the price of a game drops $20, we are now losing $15 every sale," the statement continues.

"The game industry releases many bad games, and word of mouth spreads fast to the consumer. All of those bunk games sit on our shelves. If we do end up selling them, we lose more money."

DVD Empire then lists several conveniently-numbered reasons why it has decided to stop selling games, including the "video game industry does not care", "we do not receive price protection", "we are not big enough to return products", "distribution is dumb", "games are better suited for brick and mortar retailers".

And the only positive? Apparently 20% of games are indeed, fun - though there's some questionable inclusions on DVD Empire's 'quality game' listings.

Do you agree or disagree with the article above. ?

[Poem58]

I don't know about the financial aspect...but given everyones differing tastes...it really not hard at all to believe that only 20% sell well. Especially these days when reviews are easy to find. back in the mid 90's and before you'd have to get a magazine awhile after a game was out to know if it was any good...now it's within a few day of release.
Remember Atari's ET? supposedly the worst game in history (I had and played it and didn't think so) but it sold tons due to lack of rating knowledge in today's market it would have bombed almost instantly.

[Zion]

I agree, 80% are crap

[atani]

I would even venture to guess the 80% number is a bit too low really. I think more like 90% of all games out are crap, doesnt matter if it is PC, console or handheld!

Almost all games are just crap sequels or just rips of another game out there. Anything original doesn't sell very well. Granted there are a few exceptions to this rule, but most times the games that are good are gone from the shelves when you go looking for them and there is no ETA for replacement stock.

Mike

[Boardman2411]

id actually say that more than 80% of games are crap, but its mostly down to personal opinion

[muffinman]

80% seems a fair figure of crap games however id say there were a higher percentage of crap games

[Aryn]

I would have to agree that most games are crap, but I believe that the amount of crap out there, while still excessive, is significantly lower than 80%. Anyway, I find myself usually being disappointed by games that received good reviews whereas if I wait 2 months used copies of the games become available and I can hear more honest opinions from friends and retailers.

[GazeboflossUK]

Most games are absolute rubbish. I'd say around 85% of games aren't worth buying.

[Shrygue]

In my opinion, some 91% of games aren't good at all.

[dthpsc]

I'm gonna have to agree, and I think it's a fair decision for them to stop selling games if they're losing money. With the ease of creating games these days, there's a whole lotta shit coming out (just like movies and music).

[Hungry Horace]

probably more than 80%.

best to play Retro as well.... you'll get a lot more hours worth of entertainment.

[iniquitous_beast]

I assume that this business has some control over its inventory. For a small store, the best strategy would be to follow previews and release dates, then to just buy only the games that either look good or already have a huge following.

True, 80+% of games are crap, but about 30% of the crap can be weeded out just by reading the game's title. Even more can be weeded out by staying on top of previews and reviews.

[SSaxdude]

I think most (75%) of games offer some entertainment, but may be only entertaining for a short amount of time. I'd say that 20% of games are good enough to finish the game.

[VFerg]

Yea 80% is crap. But that does not bother me at all since if there was a larger percentage of games that were good I think I would find myself playing games way to much and I already play a lot as it is. There are almost always 5 games on my list that I want to play but probably will never get around to it and lets not even talk about finishing them. Boy how I wish I could go back to the simple life of being young.

[cloud_952]

I think that's really childish and pathetic for a shop to do. They should've just phased out games. I would definitely stop shopping there, even if I only used them for DVDs. They clearly lack any element of maturity.

[devmas]

Well, I agree with them in a way.

Reading that they make only like, $5 off each game, and that the companies would not buy back the games that don't sell, and combine that with the whole 20% of games worth getting anyway, the video game buisiness does not sound like a very profitable one. I hope to not see more companies follow in their footsteps, and quit selling games.

I wonder if it is possible to hoose which games you sell... then, in that case, small companies can only sell games that will actually sell.

[Atari]

I think the number is higher, especially these days. I also think that the majority (not all, so don't get mad) of casual gamers are at fault for this. Gaming has become another symbol of status; a race to see who can get the latest console and the newest piece of shit with great graphics but garbage gameplay. Most games are mere sequels with window-dressing, or clones of best-sellers, while original ideas get tossed to the wayside or don't do well at all in the mainstream.

I'm thankful that we have homebrew, although I'd really like to see far less clones, REMAKES (jesus, how many goddamn remakes of Asteroids do we need?!?!?!) and more complete, thought-out games in homebrew. It'd be nice if garage game designers worked on their games to the point of perfection, rather than worry about getting something out and making a name for themselves. The latter is NOT important in any way...

[Amethyst]

I agree with Cloud. The shop should of done research on the products they are purchasing if they felt a profit wasn't being made. What games are being most anticipated? Which are receiving the better press? Which kind games have a reputation of sucking eggs overall?

If you're selling something you make sure to do your research.

[VampDude]

I would actually say that 98% of games were crap, there is a lack of originality in todays gaming industry. They constantly try and feed us sequels, I don't actually go for sequels (except FinalFantasy ResidentEvil and Zelda) as I find most sequels boring and somewhat unoriginal from the prequel (i.e: NeedForSpeed TigerWoods FIFA - strangely all EA games), the most original thing I can say I actually like is the Wii for being original - but sadly third party publishers will start trying to push their crap onto the Wii and the originality of the Wii won't last as publishers such as EA only release sequels upon sequels "which in most cases it's a once you've played one you've played them all", and that is NO fun whatsoever. Publishers need to start releasing games of more originality, whether it be for Nintendo Microsoft or SONY. Publishers need to take a long good look at Nintendo then take a good look at themselves, Nintendo wins hands down for originality every time they release a game cause they don't push sequels upon sequels of the same game year after year such as EA who each year around September since 1992/93 have released a FIFA NFL and NHL game then since 1995/96 NBA and 1998 Tiger Woods - it's NO wonder why games these days are complete and utter crap...

...Back in the early/mid 90's when it was just SEGA and Nintendo before SONY, the games were decent and original plus 99% of the gaming market was good and NOT crap like it is today!

[hp1]

89.345% of statictsics are fabricated.......

[gdf]

maybe not 80%. 30% are ok, 50% are bad, 15 % are good, 5% are incredible and classic.

[Emulation_Chief]

Hello:

This happens on each console generation. An yes, TOO MANY games are crap... and I said about 90%.

Can we recall the times of the Famicom/NES? The real hitters at that time - and even now - were Mario. DK, Megaman/Rockman, Metal Gear, The Ninja Turtles, Zelda and Final Fantasy. The rest... well... Who actually Play the Silver Surfer or the Uncanny X-Men and like it?

Sega Knew this all along since the Master System and deliver many excellent playable experiences comparing to its competitors. Still, they also have many crappy games in its collection.

What about the PSone? Thousands of games and practically almost every title sucked. Only the Square games -with the eception of PS2's The Bouncer - were some of the best games that console offered. Following Konami's Metal Gear and DDR games and Capcom's Resident Evil series.

The common denominator? High tech machine with hi-tec graphics and hi-tec audio. It seems that the more powerful the machine is the worst the titles are out.

Here, Sega do the things right with the Dreamcast and Nintendo with the Wii. Both are machines that excels each other in many innovations. Specially in the games sector, the reason WE are video gamers. Sega comes up with a lot of good games to play, with new ways to experience what an ultimate game console is. Nintendo is taking a new direction with the motion-sensing controllers and their delivering the games to enhance the fun of that.