Deathfish15 said:
squid5580 said:
Deathfish15 said:
squid5580 said:
It wasn't unforseen. That is why they put in the *. Shouldn't the lawsuit be directed at EA though? It wasn't GS who packaged it. The end result would be the same sure but he might have a chance at some free swag. If EA wasn't bitter about him buying used.
It is stupidity like this that gives "gamers" a bad name.
No, it's not EA. Actually, it's Gamestop's responsibility for whatever they resell. If you buy a whole PC at a Pawn Shop and it's missing the HDD, do you blame HP for it or do you blame the reseller who sold you the used product? You blame the Pawn Shop (well, blame yourself for buying a used PC and not turning it on at the store 1st to see if it works). But, you see the point, right?
Gamestop has done this before. If a game is missing it's manual, they still charge the full price and don't cut it in the slightest for missing parts of the game's product. Missing it's case? Well, they'll give less money back to the person selling the used game to them, but they'll still charge it the full used game price that's equal to all their other used game prices. They scam as much as possible to get the most money out of their customers, and they even lie to them at the POS (point of sale).
I originally bought a subscription to Game Informer because the sales associate at Gamestop swore up and down that I'd get 10% off all my purchases there; boy was I fooled, as it was only 10% off of USED game purchases only, no new games, consoles, accessories, or anything else. And of course, because it was a magazine subscription, it was none refundable. So, I was stuck with a (luckily 6 months instead of 12) magazine coming every month without any useful bonus to me.
So it is GS's fault you bought a game missing it's case or manual? It is a risk you take when you buy used. Now I don't know about the GS's in your area but at mine I can look at the disc, look at the case, open the manual all before buying. If I choose not to do this and then get it home to find the manual is MIA well I can't fault them can I? Since I didn't do my job as a consumer and make sure I am informed before the transaction takes place.
Oh crud I forgot this is 2010. It is everyone elses fault because no one was there to hold my hand. I can't be held accountable for my own business transactions. Even if I was the one who initiated it in the first place.
So, what you're saying is that we, as customers, must check and doublecheck our items because you seem to give the impression that companies are out to scam and screw us? And, you then go on (as interpreted by your statements) to say that it's foolish to just try to trust a company and that if we do put our faith and trust in a company and they screw us, it's technically our own fault and not theirs?
HECK NO! That's a giant load of bull. There are companies that I DO trust and that I DO put my faith in without trying to put on the idea that they're trying to scam me. Ya, it's 2010, and apparently every business is out to screw the little guy, the customer, because one customer doesn't matter when there's millions more. Well, that needs to change, and quickly.
So what you are saying is if I were to go to a grocery store and buy (imaginary product) Bacon Chips (I know, weird imaginary product, but stay with me), get home, see that they are not made of Bacon, go back to the store, and get told they can't take it back because it's open, I should sue, even though on the back of the bag, it clearly states "Not Made With Real Bacon"? Is the grocery store "Deceptive" because they sold it to me? I don't think so. It is my job as a consumer to know what I am paying for. Just because I don't read the whole package, just what's on the front, doesn't mean the store is responsible. If he had read the package and payed attention to the asterisk, he would have known the DLC wasn't included. Caveat Emptor.
EDIT:
Furthermore, whenever buying a used product of any kind, you should always check the item out to make sure it is in good condition. You wouldn't buy a used car without looking under the hood, taking it for a test drive, or at least having a knowledgeable friend check it out. You wouldn't buy a board game from a yard sale without checking to make sure all the pieces are there. Buying used means someone else had it before you, and that someone else may not have taken care of it the same way you would. I don't think nearly as many people would be siding with this guy if he had bought it at, say, a no-name pawn shop or flea market. The fact that it is a big name company like GameStop is influencing a lot of peoples perceptions in this case.
And for everyone saying "$55 for a used game? Robbery.", that argument is not relevant to the case. Supply and demand. The company sells the product for what they can get for it. If no one is willing to pay that much for a used copy, it sits on the shelf till they mark it down. Likewise, if they offer you $5 to buy your game used, you can always say "No thank you" and try selling it elsewhere. If no one is willing to take what they offer, eventually they will start to offer more, or go out of business. No one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to buy/sell. That is just the "free market" way of doing business.
As for the Gamestop=Piracy argument, just no. Property laws in the United States allow me do pretty much anything with property I own. Resell it, give it away, burn it, make a million copies of it (for my own personal use only), etc. That's like saying buying a used car is the same as stealing one. Yes, the manufacturer makes no money off the used sale, but they've already been paid for the work they put into that particular product. What I do with it after I buy it is my own business. Pirating/Stealing is illegal, because in the eyes of the law, it deprives the manufacturer of income in one way shape or form. I'm not going to debate the intricacies of piracy laws with you, but there is a difference.
And finally, no, I don't think GameStop is perfect. I have plenty of problems with them, just most are from an employee's perspective and less on their business model. What they do business wise is pure capitalism, but they really have some bad policies on the employment side.
/wallo'text
