deejrandom: You call it an unnecessary middle man, but there is always a middle man...even during the original purchase of the game.
pkt-zer0: And indeed, I'd be in favour of removing them from the equation as well, as much as possible. (See Greg Costikyan's rants on the death of the gaming industry) Still, 30% or whatever it is the devs get from retail sales are more than the 0% from second-hand sales.
Anyhow, I still don't see how the existence of Gamestop and its ilk is beneficial, overall. The only argument for them seemed to be giving an alternative to people with less money - that's what piracy is for. Basically, if you don't intend to give the developers any money for their trouble, why the heck would you just throw your cash out the window? Save up instead so you can buy a game later on.
i think the existence of game stop and the like are just a part of being in a commercial society with a free market. I already know that the devs got the money from the game I purchase, used or not. Being on a budget, why should I pay 60 to 70 bucks for a new 360 game when I can use that same 60 bucks and buy 3 older games for a lot less money?
This is the reality of it: The game companies need to realize this and rework their strategy accordingly. GOG.com is a great idea. I also like the idea of DLC and games on the xbox arcade/PSN/steam etc. These are reworked gaming strategies and they are all doing very well.
As for equating buying a used game with piracy? That is very unfair. You wouldn't say "well you might as well pirate a movie instead of buying a used copy of it because you are poor."
I think it boils down to this: I don't agree with you on this subject, I don't look at buying a used game as something less moral just because the game company that made it isn't getting my money.
The Companies need to step up, stop belly aching, and change with the times.