GameStop Pulls OnLive Coupons From Deus Ex: Human Revolution

[James Crook]

For the love of copulation people, stop confusing GameStop with Gamespot!

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Lies!

My game wasn't opened at all.

Gamespot repackages games all the time. They have a plastic machine in the back room.

They have fresh bar-coded xbox seals?

No, they don't.

That's because this is for boxed PC copies only.

 

[Tanis]

To add to my original post:

Here's my question:
How the FRELL is my game NEW if it has been opened already?

FREK-THAT-SHART.

Anytime I pre-order a game from GameStop and it's opened I DEMAND a refund or an unopened game.
Frell them, it's my game, I want to open it...how do I know they haven't played it already?

 

[Richardplex]

snip

WHile I do agree that square pulled out a dick move here, in no way did they pull a bigger dickmove than Gamestop. Gamestop could of done something to compensate; maybe a longer warranty, or something of similar value to get people the same or near the same item that they are entitled to get. And better yet, actually tell the customers that there is no Onlive coupon. To use your example, it's like ripping up those purple pants, then packaging them up and returning them, and when the person asked simply saying "sorry, they came like that, trollface".

 

[Dragonclaw]

First off, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a former GameStop store manager. That having been said this is wholly inexcusable. Square has NO responsibility to tell Gamestop that a promotion, no doubt with extensive contracts and fees paid to Square for the advertising, exists between Square and OnLive, and while Gamestop could simply refuse to sell the game, removing the promotion and continuing to sell the game is pretty much the definition of theft. They have taken something of tangible value and sold it it the same price without the customers prior knowledge or consent. I now own a comic book store. If I removed the ads in the comics for online downloads or some of the big name competitors out there from the comics my customers would RIOT. None of the comic book companies inform me of their advertising decisions and there is no reasonable expectation that Square had any duty to inform Gamestop of theirs.

 

[GonzoGamer]

the corporation is noting but a parasite on the industry.

And the consumer.

 

[Hashbrick]

For christ sakes guys it's GAMESTOP not GAMESPOT it's two different companies and industries, way to look like morons as if gamers don't get enough of that flak as it is.

Now to go back on topic... What GAMESTOP did was illegal and damn sure hope this comes down hard with hammer and design a law where GAMESTOP can't open jackshit and can't sell opened "New" games as "New Sealed" games. They always did some unethically practices but this one went way to far. I'm hoping OnLive and SquareEnix jumps in and sues the shit of them as well so we don't only have a civil suit it would also be a corporation suit.

I've only subjected myself to pre-orders from GAMESTOP because of how they open shit they leave on shelves but after this I'll be canceling all my pre-orders and just sticking with Steam and online purchases. I might be the only one but at least they aren't getting my money and with the amount of games I buy within a month it will be a huge chunk lost to them.

Vote with your wallets people!

 

[Frostbite3789]

Yes to all that. They are breaking the law and delivering an incomplete product when people bought it for full price. Yes, you're right.

They could have handled better, of course. But I also understand why they did it. Right idea, GameStop? Maybe. Right execution? Nooooooo.
Again, maybe Square Enix thought that was fine. But the problem was they ASSUMED it was cool. Taking it up to Square Enix could work now, but the fact is that by the time the games are being shipped, developers already have the codes and extra stuff ready to be handed out. Fixing this would have taken longer and they only had maybe a couple of days or weeks before the game was launched.

The way I see it (And I might be wrong), by the time GameStop found out, it was too late. nothing could have been done. They did what an angry kid would have done and that was probably not right. They had every right to be pissed, though. Just imagine someone gives you a gift that you wanted; a pair of pants. But they're purple and really belong to a relative. You might get angry and in a fit, you might rip them apart and throw them away. Then said relative walks in and says "Oh, those were my pants. You're paying for them now". Is your relative right? Yes. are you to blame? Kinda but it's not like you got angry out of the blue.

So the way I see it, it's a weird situation. Both sides are to blame but like I said, I think Square Enix pulled the biggest dick move here.

Did any other retailer take issue with this? Does GameStop refuse to stock games that requires Steamworks or are produced by Valve? No? Then what's the problem?

They make most of their money from their shady used game sales anyways, who cares what's in the new copies?

And it is just like Online pass, an incentive to buy new. Which in turn hurts GameStop's profit margins, what's next? They stop carrying games with Online Pass or Project $10? It's a slippery slope and they're well on their way down it.

 

[Dragonclaw]

Actually, in looking at this email I can't help but wonder what Josh Ivanoff's (since the e-mail is from [email protected] ) position is in the company. This could be a DM sending an email to just his district, in which case I'd say it's a bad move, he should get in hot water, but at least the incident would be isolated....or if he's higher in the company...in which case I could see the company being in a LOT more hot water than if it's a smaller matter.

 

[Beautiful End]

snip

WHile I do agree that square pulled out a dick move here, in no way did they pull a bigger dickmove than Gamestop. Gamestop could of done something to compensate; maybe a longer warranty, or something of similar value to get people the same or near the same item that they are entitled to get. And better yet, actually tell the customers that there is no Onlive coupon. To use your example, it's like ripping up those purple pants, then packaging them up and returning them, and when the person asked simply saying "sorry, they came like that, trollface".

Yeah, I agree with the fact that GameStop could have given something in return. But...I just can't think of anything they could have given to make up for it! Something in0game related would have to come from Square Enix, who already screwed them over by telling them about the coupon days before the game was released. GameStop can't just pull up a code like that, Square Enix is the one responsible for it.
And really, as a Gamestop employee, I can't think of anything else to offer! We got nothing else, no codes, no freebies, no items, etc. It was random and GameStop was unprepared. Yes, bad execution, GameStop. But...what else can they do?

I know that when I see a customer all disappointed about something (like trading in some games and getting 1 dollar for them), I try to give away some leftover freebies, random freebies we have around. It works...but that's just me. And we only have so many freebies. And we got nothing related to the game.
What good would it do to give away a code for Cole's extra weapon in InFamous (We can pull that out because we've already been green-light'd) if they're buying Deus Ex? I don't know, you got a point there but I'm at a loss.

 

[Beautiful End]

Yes to all that. They are breaking the law and delivering an incomplete product when people bought it for full price. Yes, you're right.

They could have handled better, of course. But I also understand why they did it. Right idea, GameStop? Maybe. Right execution? Nooooooo.
Again, maybe Square Enix thought that was fine. But the problem was they ASSUMED it was cool. Taking it up to Square Enix could work now, but the fact is that by the time the games are being shipped, developers already have the codes and extra stuff ready to be handed out. Fixing this would have taken longer and they only had maybe a couple of days or weeks before the game was launched.

The way I see it (And I might be wrong), by the time GameStop found out, it was too late. nothing could have been done. They did what an angry kid would have done and that was probably not right. They had every right to be pissed, though. Just imagine someone gives you a gift that you wanted; a pair of pants. But they're purple and really belong to a relative. You might get angry and in a fit, you might rip them apart and throw them away. Then said relative walks in and says "Oh, those were my pants. You're paying for them now". Is your relative right? Yes. are you to blame? Kinda but it's not like you got angry out of the blue.

So the way I see it, it's a weird situation. Both sides are to blame but like I said, I think Square Enix pulled the biggest dick move here.

Did any other retailer take issue with this? Does GameStop refuse to stock games that requires Steamworks or are produced by Valve? No? Then what's the problem?

They make most of their money from their shady used game sales anyways, who cares what's in the new copies?

And it is just like Online pass, an incentive to buy new. Which in turn hurts GameStop's profit margins, what's next? They stop carrying games with Online Pass or Project $10? It's a slippery slope and they're well on their way down it.

I'm...so not gonna get into the Used Games argument again. Not here, not now. It's pointless at this point.

But I respect your comment either way. Somehow.

 

[Regiment]

How is my game 'new' if it has already been opened?

To add to my original post:

Here's my question:
How the FRELL is my game NEW if it has been opened already?

...

If your game hasn't been played and if all of the paperwork is still present, it's new. Just because it's been opened doesn't make it less so.

On topic: I'm pretty sure that this isn't theft. I'm not saying that it's right, but is this fundamentally different from how some stores offer store-exclusive bonuses? I'm thinking here of stuff like the Best Buy-exclusive stuff for Alpha Protocol (correct me if I'm wrong - I don't have the game) or how every store offered different preorder bonuses for Mortal Kombat 2011.

This is shady, certainly, but I don't think it's illegal. If they were taking the disk or something, that would be different.

 

[conflictofinterests]

I have a question:

If someone bought this game new, received and kept the OnLive code, and returned the game, would they still keep the OnLive game? If so, they would get either a severely discounted or potentially FREE copy of the game.

...


Am I missing something here?

Is that a dumb idea, or am I just seeing things where they aren't?

 

[iniudan]

snip

WHile I do agree that square pulled out a dick move here, in no way did they pull a bigger dickmove than Gamestop. Gamestop could of done something to compensate; maybe a longer warranty, or something of similar value to get people the same or near the same item that they are entitled to get. And better yet, actually tell the customers that there is no Onlive coupon. To use your example, it's like ripping up those purple pants, then packaging them up and returning them, and when the person asked simply saying "sorry, they came like that, trollface".

Yeah, I agree with the fact that GameStop could have given something in return. But...I just can't think of anything they could have given to make up for it! Something in0game related would have to come from Square Enix, who already screwed them over by telling them about the coupon days before the game was released. GameStop can't just pull up a code like that, Square Enix is the one responsible for it.
And really, as a Gamestop employee, I can't think of anything else to offer! We got nothing else, no codes, no freebies, no items, etc. It was random and GameStop was unprepared. Yes, bad execution, GameStop. But...what else can they do?

I know that when I see a customer all disappointed about something (like trading in some games and getting 1 dollar for them), I try to give away some leftover freebies, random freebies we have around. It works...but that's just me. And we only have so many freebies. And we got nothing related to the game.
What good would it do to give away a code for Cole's extra weapon in InFamous (We can pull that out because we've already been green-light'd) if they're buying Deus Ex? I don't know, you got a point there but I'm at a loss.

I don't know a code for an online copy on Impulse would be equivalent I guess.

 

[iniudan]

Damnit double post, sorry, for some reason I did multiple refresh for the previous one and it never appeared before I made a second post. Sorry.

 

[Smooth Operator]

So these guys are effectively stealing from the publishers product... I can't even believe they aren't getting sued to hell and back.

And only moments ago I was saying how this industry has no standards and companies are pulling wild shit on the side...

 

[NotSoNimble]

I called and confirmed it, our Gamestop DID NOT do any such thing for ANY version of the game, nor were they told to.

Good to know we have a good shop near us. It's no secret some shops are dicks, it's sad when ours gets lumped in with them.

 

[Corven]

Strange, my copy still had its onlive coupon in it, maybe my gamestop didn't get the memo...or was too lazy to do it.