GameStop Nailed With Class Action Over Deceptive Used Sales

[Aetera]

I worked at a GameStop years back, and unless they've changed the policy, all used games can be returned for a full refund within 7 days, for whatever reason. If people bought a used game and weren't satisfied with what came with it, it seems like it'd be easier to just return the thing rather than sue over it. It just seems silly to me.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

No matter what Gamestop does, soccer mom isn't going to understand the details behind DLC.

 

[Plurralbles]

i dont' approve of the understanding tone of teh article.

Gamestop is a creep company.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Is it really that big of a surprise? GameStop makes most of their money off their evil used game practices than anything else. I've already sworn off them for as long as I live anyway so it doesn't affect me much.

Yes, because its always Evil to make money now isnt it? The eveil gaming companies could just let the download codes work more then once, then this wouldnt happen, now would it?

OT: Well... I'm not really surprised. If you get paid on a commission (not saying they do, but if they do) then you pull any trick you can.

Really they're just a business, trying to make money. Cant blame them for what they're doing.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting, is that what we take for granted as common knowledge, is a bewildering wall of jargon to that mom or grandparent who's searching for a game to buy their child.

If they want to sell, it's in the customer's (if not the store's, tho it SHOULD be) best interest to make things very clear.

I'd certainly suggest stickers to cover any mention of DLC would be the best move, and it'd help if EA etc placed the DLC info in the same place on the box each time.

 

[Gralian]

Yes, because arguments by analogy are really effective and hold up well in a court of law. *Facepalm* This isn't even an unequal impact argument. This is just stupid. If we're going to take the 'evil' GameStop down, we might as well take down every video games retailer globally. After all, Gamestation in the UK doesn't give any warning that used games will likely have already redeemed DLC codes. It's rather asinine to think it's the retailer's fault when it's the publisher who plasters over the front cover "DLC included!" when they know it's a one time only thing to entice buyers to pick it up new. Not only can you not expect retailers to mark their products and inform their customers that all used items will likely not include DLC, but there's also no way to determine whether or not the DLC has been used besides punching in the codes themselves. Not only would that take be a waste of time and money, but if the DLC turns out to have not been used then it will get used when they enter the code to check if it has been already. If you go around claiming "all used games won't have DLC", you can just bet people will ask what they will get if they trade in the game with unused DLC codes, then there will be no way to check that, and... oh God, it'll be one royal clusterfuck.

Long story short; i don' see this 'lawsuit' going anywhere fast.

 

[cynicalsaint1]

To all the people saying "It should be obvious that DLC codes will be used" you have to remember that we aren't the general public - we're people who follow the industry close enough to hang around on places like the Escapist and post on their message boards. We're much better educated on how things like DLC codes and the such work.

A parent buying a game for their child, or even a more casual gamer who maybe buys a game or two a year probably isn't going to have the level of knowledge on how things work that we are. So what seems obvious to us may not be to people who don't follow the industry like we do.

Really what it comes down to is how GameStop handles the situation - if they're telling people the DLC is there, or otherwise confusing the issue for people who don't know better then there could be something to this. With the way GameStop tries to push used games I really wouldn't be surprised if some stores or even just some employees are being deceptive with their customers.

I mean think of it this way. Say GameStop is selling a game used for $5 less than it'd be new. Buying the game new unlocks content that you'd have to pay $10 for if you bought it used. GameStop can either push the used version which they will make a vastly greater profit off of, or tell their customers that it will actually be more expensive for them to buy it used to get the same level of content they'd get if they bought it new. What motivation do they have to do that?

Really I'd be more sympathetic towards GameStop if they had more reasonable prices for their used games.

 

[hooksashands]

Pony up the extra $5-10 for a mint copy, problem fucking solved.

 

[harvz]

...the idiocy of people (their parents in this case) and all the variations of 'project $10' combined into one case.

dont get me wrong but i actually side with the companies on this issue, they loose out big time when ebgames/gamestop sell preowned, particularly when they offer things like "beat the game in a week from launch date and get 80% of your money back so we can sell it for 95%"

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

The best is the employees are allowed to take games home, open them, play them, then take them back and re-wrap them and sell them as "new".

Buy your games online or from best buy, gamestop is lame.

 

[BourneGamer]

I never had a problem with this. I bought Bad Company 2 used from GameStop and the cashier said that there was one of those code sheets in there, and that it might or might not have been used. After that he just said to give it a try, if it didn't work I'd have to shell out the $10 for a new one, if it did work "lucky you."

 

[JEBWrench]

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

You know you can't blame consumers who don't read the damn packaging.

I hope this lawsuit goes nowhere. It's not GameStop's fault that their customers are illiterate.

Maybe they should sue the school system?

 

[CapitalC]

Somehow, this doesn't surprise me. Though, people should use some common sense. If the game is used, odds are the code for the downloadable content is not going to be available with it. Clerks shouldn't be pushed to lie about anything though, but most people know that clerks in stores probably aren't the smartest people in the world. Just like the customers. Just saying.

 

[Infinatex]

People are just stupid... If you din't know that you are not gonna get the content then you are in the wrong shop...

Next we will have people complaining that they bought Black Ops and can't play the new maps. Seriously.

 

[Cormyre]

It's just common sense that the DLC (even if say the card is still in the case, but used) will not be with the used title... I mean..

Oh wait that's right... common sense is a misnomer because it's not common at all

Well that and the friggin' parasites that try to find every available reason to sue someone or something so they don't have to do anything.

 

[MinionStarwind]

See this is why gaming was great back before Xbox/Ps3.

Excuse me while I grab my cane.

This wouldn't have flown back then. You try and say "oh the extra stuff comes when you pay more money" when it was advertised like this would've incited riots. RIOTS.

Feh, this is why I get most of my games from Games on Demand, anyway. Most games are worth the 20-30 dollar pricetag, not worth the 60 + "Additional Content (With DLC Purchase)". I'm looking at you, Borderlands.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

"This situation is analogous to selling a used book to customers without telling them that there are chapters missing."

I have to agree all the way up to this statement. This is more like buying a book out of a guy's trunk. And the guy scratches all his bodily sores, you should probably know something is amiss. It's like the guy who sued the clothes iron company for burning himself because he tried ironing the clothes he was wearing. It's stupid and they should have to tell you. It should be rather obvious.

If nothing else they could just have a sign at the cashier desk saying it.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Well, I never buy used games so I don't run into the problem. It is just that I have a must have shiny and new complex.

I've bought a total of 3 things at GameStop, all new. The first was the Orange Box for my 360. Then it was Pokemon Heart Gold, and I picked up my pre-ordered copy of Pokemon White yesterday, oh and also bought a package of styluses and a screen guard, I lost the stylus that came with my DS Lite.

I also have never sold a game, so that doesn't come into the picture as well. People have said that GameStop is pushy, but I have never encounter any problems. I almost forgot to pick up my free Celebi for my Pokemon Heart Gold and the guy that was ringing up my Pokemon White reminded me and put it on my game chip.

 

[Zom-B]

I kind of felt mildly tricked recently. My wife and I went to Gamestop and she decided to buy me a game to play while recuperating. I chose my game, Dead Space 2, and she took it up to the counter while I continued to browse. After a moment she asked me if I wanted a used copy for $15 less and I said sure, i don't care, not even thinking about it. Why make her spend $60+ when she can spend $45 and tax? Wasn't til I got home that I realized that I couldn't access the online stuff without paying another $10 anyway. It's not a big deal, because most likely I never would have utilized it anyway. However, the cashier did NOT mention to my wife that she was purchasing a game with "less product", let's say, when purchasing a used copy.

He should have let her know and then she could have asked me or made an informed position. Instead, I wasn't paying attention and I said do whatever, so of course he sold her the used copy.

He definitely either either wrongly assumed she knew all about what she was buying or he glossed over the facts due to her naivete.