84 réponses à ce sujet

[SOLID_EVEREST]

I bought my game used on Amazon for like 25 bucks, and it came with the codes unused. I see a lot of you guys are friends of the corporations, but there are laws against misleading customers.

[Haexpane]

This is an odd one, Gamestop didnt create the cover art for DAO so it's not their advertising. EA does not want any games sold as used to begin with.



Really the lawsuit should be between EA and GS

[Fate Elixir]

To sue you must have a certain set of criteria, including but not limited to, Negligence, damage incurred from that negligence, and proof that the negligence was willful. Whoever is suing should get nowhere being as a company can sell a product for whatever they want. The customer as one pointed out above is not being obligated to buy at gunpoint. The only way this suit could be legitimate is if Gamestop was advertising the DLC as being included with the used games, and then selling games without them. Even then this would have to be done on a large scale, with refunds not being issued. I would be interested in seeing the source information that this allegation stems from to confirm its validity. Sounds frivolous to me.

[Crazy_Cat_Lady]

Fate Elixir wrote...

To sue you must have a certain set of criteria, including but not limited to, Negligence, damage incurred from that negligence, and proof that the negligence was willful. Whoever is suing should get nowhere being as a company can sell a product for whatever they want. The customer as one pointed out above is not being obligated to buy at gunpoint. The only way this suit could be legitimate is if Gamestop was advertising the DLC as being included with the used games, and then selling games without them. Even then this would have to be done on a large scale, with refunds not being issued. I would be interested in seeing the source information that this allegation stems from to confirm its validity. Sounds frivolous to me.

The link in the original post has more info, including the lawsuit filed itself in pdf form at the bottom.

[RetryAgain]

Drake Sigar wrote...

Shhh, do you hear that? It's the sound of EA laughing maniacally. They do despise used game sellers.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........ My stomach.....EA:"Hey, Boss. I have a idea to stick it to people who try to get our product at a lower price." Legally no one is at fault here.  Ethically...EA decided to prank people and make a profit faster at the same time. Even if they are evil, you gotta admit it was smart.

I think it should be possible to renew the code if it is returned. I mean erase the DLC from the guy who returned it so the guy who got it used could then use the code. That sounds fair to me....but that's an idealistic world.

[Nukenin]

If this goes anywhere, I can see it leading to brick & mortar game retailers being reluctant to carry titles that advertise on the box "first purchase" content tied to single-use activation codes printed on a card or some such inside the box.

What EA should have done is put any mention of the bonus content on a sticker placed on the outside of EA's own shrinkwrap.  This would prevent casual return situations leading to unintentional deceit on part of a used game reseller.  Not that EA or any other publisher wants to go out of their way to facilitate the used game market… 

Or EA should have put to hard box copy the warning (in BIG letters) that if you are buying the box without some fancified EA-hologram-infused shrinkwrap or whatnot, then you are buying a previously-owned or otherwise used game, and extra content will not be available without additional payment.  Of course, big scary warnings anger and confuse people, and the brick & mortar used game resellers wouldn't be partial to it either.

GameStop should have been proactive though, and prepared a sticker to slap on used DA:O and similar games warning that the bonus content doesn't apply to a used copy, and further adjusted the price to still incentivize potential used game purchases.

Disclaimer: I may be insane. 

[Reaverwind]

SOLID_EVEREST wrote...

I bought my game used on Amazon for like 25 bucks, and it came with the codes unused. I see a lot of you guys are friends of the corporations, but there are laws against misleading customers.

QFT.

[Fate Elixir]

After reviewing the link originally posted (thanks Crazy Cat Lady), I think this is even more frivolous than before. Since when did it become the retailers fault when people don't ask questions before buying a product?



According to the link it says "on the cover" (which could mean the back cover as well) that the game comes with codes. I don't see anything wrong with this because it does new. It is the buyer's responsibility to question whether a used game still has those codes. For instance, if I buy a game off ebay and the seller didn't advertise codes being included, how can I get upset with the seller for my own laziness in not paying attention to the listing and asking questions?!



Furthermore, the person tried to return the copy of the game more than 7 days out. If this is store policy than maybe the person filing should have asked about there return policy before purchasing. This angers me because Gamestop is a great company and I'm sure they are struggling to survive through this economy. If they go under because of a frivolous law suit the consumer by in large misses out.



Here is a crazy way out there notion, ask questions and read descriptions of products before purchasing them!

[Malanek]

Fate Elixir wrote...
This angers me because Gamestop is a great company and I'm sure they are struggling to survive through this economy. If they go under because of a frivolous law suit the consumer by in large misses out.

How am I missing out if gamestop goes under? The consumer is by and large missing out because of used game sales, which contribute nothing (other than pushing the original sell price up) to the people who made the game.
In some ways I do agree with other bits of your opinion about frivilous law suits though. This seems like a fairly minor issue.

[TheMadCat]

SOLID_EVEREST wrote...

I bought my game used on Amazon for like 25 bucks, and it came with the codes unused. I see a lot of you guys are friends of the corporations, but there are laws against misleading customers.

Just as there are regulations preventing consumers from filing frivolous lawsuits against corporations, which is exactly what this person is doing. You see, ignorance is not a legal excuse. It is not the responsibility of the seller to educate the consumer, that is the consumers job. Unless Gamestop was actively and aggressively advertising and promoting false information, which they did not according to the article, then there is no case. This is some people looking for a quick cash in using BS excuses, that's it.

[BanksHector]

Fate Elixir wrote...

After reviewing the link originally posted (thanks Crazy Cat Lady), I think this is even more frivolous than before. Since when did it become the retailers fault when people don't ask questions before buying a product?

According to the link it says "on the cover" (which could mean the back cover as well) that the game comes with codes. I don't see anything wrong with this because it does new. It is the buyer's responsibility to question whether a used game still has those codes. For instance, if I buy a game off ebay and the seller didn't advertise codes being included, how can I get upset with the seller for my own laziness in not paying attention to the listing and asking questions?!

Furthermore, the person tried to return the copy of the game more than 7 days out. If this is store policy than maybe the person filing should have asked about there return policy before purchasing. This angers me because Gamestop is a great company and I'm sure they are struggling to survive through this economy. If they go under because of a frivolous law suit the consumer by in large misses out.

Here is a crazy way out there notion, ask questions and read descriptions of products before purchasing them!

I agree with everything you said other then GameStop being a great company.

[Blessed Silence]

Wow, the GameStop where I live refuses to take any game where you have to enter a key to download or register it.

[Red Frostraven]

I remember a label from an american vending machine:

"Tilting this machine may cause serious injury or death"...
Seriously.

What about cars?
Can't tilting a car cause serious injury or death?
Can't serious injury lead to or be death?

...
Bah.
Have GameStop put gray paper bags over the covers.
Bioware aren't promising anything to second hand buyers.

Besides...
The machine is obviously tilted, and has fallen.
Why would people complain about not suffering serious injury or death when they're trying to tilt the already fallen vending machine?
It's obvious that it has already been used.

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 26 mars 2010 - 12:48 .

[lisakover]

My local GAME and Game Station both have dozens of second hand MMO games for £10+, now that is something to sue over.

[Drake Sigar]

My local gamestores also refuse to take games which require online activations tied to e-mails or accounts. And I'd like to add that every time I want to buy a game, they usually tell me if there's something important about the product, like "it's an expansion pack, do you have the original game?"



Hardcore gamers might find that offensive, but I appreciate the concern.

[Mad Method]

TheMadCat wrote...

SOLID_EVEREST wrote...

I bought my game used on Amazon for like 25 bucks, and it came with the codes unused. I see a lot of you guys are friends of the corporations, but there are laws against misleading customers.

Just as there are regulations preventing consumers from filing frivolous lawsuits against corporations, which is exactly what this person is doing. You see, ignorance is not a legal excuse. It is not the responsibility of the seller to educate the consumer, that is the consumers job. Unless Gamestop was actively and aggressively advertising and promoting false information, which they did not according to the article, then there is no case. This is some people looking for a quick cash in using BS excuses, that's it.

This is not ignorance. When you buy a used copy, it is common sense that unless specified otherwise you are getting the exact same product as a new copy. The failure to specify otherwise makes it GameStop's fault for being deceptive. This, in turn, could possibly be traced back as Bioware's fault in failing to properly inform retailers that the DLC only applies to new copies, which GameStop may well assert to deflect blame.

BanksHector wrote...

Why would you pay that much for a used game when the new game is only a few dollars more?

If the used copy is a few dollars less than a new copy and comes with the exact same content, why would you buy a new copy? What are you paying for? Shiny plastic wrapping you will immediately throw away? A pristine box?

Modifié par Mad Method, 26 mars 2010 - 01:21 .

[DragonShepard138]

I hate Gamestop too bad there wasn't a dependable game store to go to. In my area that and Walmart is all i have and Walmart hardly has any selection.

[London_Liche]

Malanek999 wrote...

The consumer is by and large missing out because of used game sales, which contribute nothing (other than pushing the original sell price up) to the people who made the game.
In some ways.

Actually, you are incorrect here.  Many people would not pay full price for games if they could not sell them back and recoup some of their expenses.  So, if games could not be resold, game prices would have to rise in order to maintain profit margins, as less copies would be sold.  Assume for a moment that prices didn't rise and less people began to purchase games.  That would inevitiably mean that less money could be spent on game development, and therefore, the quality of the games coming out would inevitiably suffer.  Thus, the gamer suffers in the end.  Mark my words, if there comes a time when games cannot be resold, we'll see a serious ression in the gaming industry.  Games won't get better, they'll get worse because less people will buy them and less money will be spent making them.

I'm a bottom feeder, myself.  I like to purchase games for $15 USD or less.  I made an exception for DA:O.  But if I couldn't get games for those prices, I would have spend nothing on games this year.  After all, I would have never purchased my PS3 in the first place if I knew I would be paying full price for every title I purchase.  And the same thing would happen with a lot of other people, too.  Thus, that much less money ends up getting pumped into the gaming industry.  You see, used games are vital to the industry whether the industry likes it or not.

[hoysexyjew]

walmart should be sued for selling used condoms with their fries

[TheMadCat]

This is not ignorance. When you buy a used copy, it is common sense that unless specified otherwise
you are getting the exact same product as a new copy. The failure to
specify otherwise makes it GameStop's fault for being deceptive. This,
in turn, could possibly be traced back as Bioware's fault in failing to
properly inform retailers that the DLC only applies to new copies,
which GameStop may well assert to deflect blame.

When there are outside sources readily available for a consumer to educate themselves then it is indeed ignorance and this is indeed posted throughout the internet on Bioware and EA sites. Again, unless it can be proven that Gamestop was actively misleading the customer through aggressive and misleading advertising then there is no case. Gamestop is not required by any means to inform you that this and that won't work if you buy it used. Is it a dick move, absolutely. But they are not liable of anything other than being a dick and that alone is not enough to warrant reparations.

[Sarkus]

GameStop had over $9 billion in sales last year - I don't think they are in any kind of trouble. :-)



As for this lawsuit, this is clearly and issue between the buyer and GameStop and I don't see where it's EA or Bioware's responsibility to change what they are doing just to make things easier for GameStop. If you are going to sell used goods, you are responsible if you mislead the buyer. If you are the buyer of used goods, you have a responsibility to know what you are buying. Besides, its not as if Dragon Age without Shale is broken. And Mass Effect 2 isn't broken without it's free if new content.

[ObserverStatus]

*facepalm*

[Zenon]

Well, I generally don't buy 2nd hand games, but I still feel Gamestop charges too high prices. As for DLC it's my opinion, that since this is a fairly new concept the vendor should inform their customers about it, especially if there are features with an extra price tag for 2nd use.

At the same time the vendor can't know, if a DLC code was already used by the first buyer. Common sense tells me, that the risk is so high, that it can be safely assumed in most cases these codes shipped with the original game were already used.

[Zenon]

About blaming EA and Bioware: I think they made it transparent, that one-time codes for extra content is included in the box. Even if the customer should have read this carefully, the price for a used game should be much cheaper than 5 bucks less.

Digital distribution and DLC is most likely the future of selling digital goods. Of course this causes conflicts with the stationary retailers, who don't get a share out of this. As long as there are enough people like me, who generally prefer to have a DVD rather than just a file on the HDD, there will be DVDs sold through retailers. But most likely the portion of digital distribution is going to increase. In fact this could lead to lower prices for games, since the packaging, shipping and retailer margin are not included in the price. Besides I found RtO was worth it.

Modifié par Zenon, 26 mars 2010 - 09:59 .

[Weiser_Cain]

Getting ripped off makes you smarter and you'll stop going to gamestop