GameStop Nailed With Class Action Over Deceptive Used Sales

[mjc0961]

Is that GameStop's fault? It's probably more neglect than intentional deception.

Probably both. I wouldn't put it past certain employees to lie and say "Yep the code is in there and it works!" I wouldn't put it past some some people to be honest if asked, either. And of course, there are customers who would just assume it was in there, not ask, and be disappointed when they get home.

 

[Ariyura]

I would rather them get sued for their practice of selling opened (and played by the employees) games as new. No they're not new, they are used and should be marked that way.

I don't know about suing but I can heartily agree with you here.

 

[Tom Goldman]

Is that GameStop's fault? It's probably more neglect than intentional deception.

Probably both. I wouldn't put it past certain employees to lie and say "Yep the code is in there and it works!" I wouldn't put it past some some people to be honest if asked, either. And of course, there are customers who would just assume it was in there, not ask, and be disappointed when they get home.

I've got to be honest, I doubt any employee that knows the code isn't in there is saying it is. If an employee is ignorant, that's another issue... which is why GameStop needs to make sure its employees are educated about DLC.

 

[Dragonborne88]

Don't get me wrong, I dislike GameStop quite plenty and have vowed to never buy from them again (am doing a damn fine job keeping up with that too), but people seem waaaaaay to sue happy in this day and age. I mean, really? That is one thing that should never have come into existence. Even the most well intentioned stuff gets corrupted when the average person gets a hold of it.

 

[Clockwork Scarecrow.]

Good Idea OP. People should be more aware of the consequences of buying a game used.

Exactly!

Also I don't see where you people get all these horror stories. My local Gamestop, is reliable, they never try to push warranties on me, they're friendly, and always remind me to check the specifications on the back of pc games. Seeing as how they're the only shop specifically tailored for games in a 15 mile radius you'd think they wouldn't have to bother, but they do.

 

[L8NEYET]

Being a former manager for Gamestop, I can tell you that not every Gamestop is evil. It all depends on the manager and how well he trains his/ her staff. If a used game says that it has a bonus code for DLC, than it should probably be replaced with a generic cover art to not confuse the masses, however most people, no matter where they come from are lazy and that is where the problem really comes into play.

As far as selling used games to Gamestop and them ripping you off, you can always sell your game to a friend or another chain, again, do not complain when it is the simple matter of being convenient. You have the right not to sell!

And something that would make everyone's life a lot easier would be, RTFM!!!

 

[JeanLuc761]

[
I'm not against used sales per se.

You might have ignored that part, but I referred specifically to the business strategy that is encouraging your customers to trade their purchases back in as quickly as possible. No book store is ever going to encourage me to trade in the books I purchased last week so that I can get the new release at a reduced price, and the same goes for stores specializing in movies or music.

How does Gamestop encourage people to immediately trade in their games? I've NEVER heard that.

Sure, games are worth more in store credit if you trade them in immediately, but that's because the game was just released! That's very simple economics, and certainly not a malicious business strategy on Gamestop's part.

 

[rynocerator]

I just thought about something. Gamestop accepts returns for ANY reason (including it didn't have a* working DLC code) within 7 days of the purchase date on ALL USED MERCHANDISE in the ENTIRE STORE. Even systems. Maybe these people should just return it, get their money back, and buy it new or go somewhere else. I truly believe that our society needs to stop placing all the responsibility on the distributor/provider and place more on the consumer. Just like parenting.

 

[NLS]

Don't blame Gamestop, blame the customers that can't read, and the game companies making the DLC.

 

[The Last Nomad]

The times I've bought used games in gamestop that once had special once only downloads included, the guy at the desk clearly told me that it might not still be included.
So I think it may be an over-reaction.

 

[Ice Car]

Dumbasses don't have the common sense to realize that DLC Codes are probably ALREADY USED. People are such dumbasses they need retailers to tell them everything, or they sue them for quick cash. It's retarded.

 

[Rayne870]

I spend way too much time in that store to know that there are way too many idiots that come into there. Expecting launch dlc or dlc included in a new copy of the game in a used copy is just plain ignorant.

 

[MaG iiC 3E]

How exactly can they check on these codes without actually using them? They can't, they just have to ask the seller and hope for the best.

In reality, it's showing that the $10 plan is working perfectly for keeping new game sales up. Gamestop really needs to cut the shit with pretending that this isn't their fault. The only plausible course of action is to start selling used games for less to keep sales up, otherwise people are just going to buy new games and they'll lose one of the key points of their business.

Actually, games that have EA's "Project Ten Dollar" are usually about $15 cheaper when used, and (at least in the store I work at) we always offer the $10 downloadable code for those people who want to enjoy the bonuses. If they don't, they saved $15. If they do, they either buy the game new or spend the $10 for the code.

Then the only real recourse is to stop trying to be so greedy.

Do they even differentiate? If so, why? why not assume the code is dead and go from there?

As far as I can tell, that's what they ACTUALLY do. But if I'm wrong, the "how was I to know?" Defense is pretty weak here.

Plus, they guarantee other content. You know, like if your XBox is console banned you can trade it in. IF, and I specify IF they're actually playing this card, they should have no problem giving you a new code.

But only IF, because I seriously doubt they are.

That's what I just said.

 

[Something Amyss]

Actually, most do. Usually on the back. Depends though.

Oh, and you undercut yourself in ONE SENTENCE! That has to be some kind of a record.

Since you were talking about things like EVEN BIGGER LETTERING!!@!!!! Most, in fact, do not.

Sorry.

Putting it on the back is also not "further down the box," it's "on the back." I can also tell you how to get to Sesame Street.

Why? Because you don't think most people don't know that codes are one use only? Or you believe that gamestop should have to replace those codes for all their used games. In the end if you're unsatisfied with a used game from Gamestop just return it within the seven days and get your money back.

Why would you even ask if the latter was the reason I said that? It's completely irrelevant here.

It's lazy to assume "everybody knows." It's lazy logic of convenience. It's not even so much I "don't think" people are aware, as it's just poor reasoning to assume that they have to be, and therefore are suing because...Because...Well, that's part of why the logic is lazy. It then attributes the behaviour to an unreasonable concept when a more reasonable one exists. Again, not saying it can't be true, just that it's lazy to assert as true.

As for "w3ell you can just return it!" Also lazy. That in no way immunises you from false advertising or deceptive practices, which is what this is about.

I haven't seen Gamestop claiming this.

I have. but let's follow your logic here. I haven't seen France. Seems to me people who claim they've been are probably just full of it.

No i won't kill anyone but why did you take it that literally instead of realizing it was "Hey a lot of law suits lately why can;t they slow down a bit".

Why would you take my response literally when it was a response in kind to your own?

The idea being "I haz lawsuit...GUESS UR GUN KIL SUM1 NAO LOL."

I guess I should have posted it that way, I just figured people would take it in context.

Point remaining, it's silly to whine about the number of times you see lawsuits. Especially if you don't hold the belief that frequency of lawsuits=validity.

But if i am correct and these are all just idiots that read the box, saw it was used, thought they got the game and the item cheap they are idiots, gamestop is not at fault, and they are wasting the time of the courts.

Yes. IF you're right, then they are wasting the time of the courts IN THIS CASE.

But even if nto taken literally, your post still expresses annoyance or dissatisfaction with the number of lawsuits. Why would you be annoyed if you weren't casting dispersions on lawsuits due to frequency?

 

[loremazd]

I think it should be mandatory for everyone to work in retail for a year. I think everyone would be nicer to each other.

 

[Ariyura]

Why would you even ask if the latter was the reason I said that? It's completely irrelevant here.

It's lazy to assume "everybody knows." It's lazy logic of convenience. It's not even so much I "don't think" people are aware, as it's just poor reasoning to assume that they have to be, and therefore are suing because...Because...Well, that's part of why the logic is lazy. It then attributes the behaviour to an unreasonable concept when a more reasonable one exists. Again, not saying it can't be true, just that it's lazy to assert as true.

As for "w3ell you can just return it!" Also lazy. That in no way immunises you from false advertising or deceptive practices, which is what this is about.

False advertising, well lets see. Gamestop, other than a few unknowledgeable employees does not go out of its way to say We sell used games with DLC, no they sell used games. And in fact you can return it if you're not satisfied with your purchase. It's not lazy. It offers a consumer a way to get their money back if they do not like the quality of the object they've received.

Consumers should be aware of whom they are giving their money to and the product that they are receiving, but yet in turn you exemplify a consumer of all responsibility here, when they should be just as responsible.

 

[Leg End]

Actually, most do. Usually on the back. Depends though.

Oh, and you undercut yourself in ONE SENTENCE! That has to be some kind of a record.

Since you were talking about things like EVEN BIGGER LETTERING!!@!!!! Most, in fact, do not.

Sorry.

Putting it on the back is also not "further down the box," it's "on the back." I can also tell you how to get to Sesame Street.

Whoah, no need to be hostile mon, seet bock and drink sum leemonaade.


Also, Imma just leave this here...

Spoiler: Bro Company 2 Box Art. Backside style.

 

[standokan]

I´m rooting for gamestop, I always root for the underdog.