GameStop Sued Over "Deceptive" Used Game Sales

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
The guy an idiot, but at the very least you'd think they'd stick a label on the box saying it doesn't contain the DLC (unless it hasn't been used of course).

SpaceSpork said:
Both parties are idiots. Gamestop is a stupid company. However, the guy is also stupid.

I can't decide!
I'd go with GameStop being more stupid simply because they can afford a whole department of people to stop them being stupid.
 

Cuniculus

New member
May 29, 2009
778
0
0
It has been said a thousand times in this thread. He's an idiot for suing. Plain and simple, because he has no case. GameStop is corrupt, because they buy next to new games for less then a fourth of what they are worth, then sell them at less then 95% of what they would be worth new. Answer? Don't buy used, and definitely DON'T buy from GameStop.

Not to make it too personal but every single one of the used games I bought from them turned out damaged or simply unplayable.
 

superkenalmighty

New member
Mar 14, 2010
10
0
0
psrdirector said:
this is gamestop responsibility. EA isnt selling the game used, they have no control over the pricess, its 100% gamestop to inform people what is and is not in the games.
Exactly right. EA covers their ass from being sued. But gamestop have not made a disclaimer of their own.
 

CheckD3

New member
Dec 9, 2009
1,181
0
0
To think that all this could have been avoided if GS had just taken back the game and let him get a new copy for $5 more, it's a shame, huh

How come it's these people who get all the public press and not the people who help promote the good of gamers and gaming as a culture? Like yahtzee, if anyone promotes good gamer culture and expands the game area as a culture it's him...how come we haven't got to see him on the weekly news for doing something special?

Wait, I'm in America, that's why...sometimes I wish America WASN'T so stupid...
 

Plurralbles

New member
Jan 12, 2010
4,611
0
0
Collins will lose the lawsuit due to that asterisk.

It's fucking that simple. This isn't even news, it's going to get thrown out of court because the company that released DA:O covered THEIR ass and in turn covered for Gamestop. Unless gamestop had a sign that said, "All used games will have their DLC even though it says clearly on the box that it doesn't"
 

Regiment

New member
Nov 9, 2009
610
0
0
Um... to give my standard black-and-white answer, isn't the fine print there specifically so the company can point to it when sued and say "we told you so"?

If the kid's lucky, this'll be thrown out of court with no further action against him.
 

SpaceSpork

New member
May 15, 2009
2,409
0
0
Machines said:
I'd go with GameStop being more stupid simply because they can afford a whole department of people to stop them being stupid.
Yes, but with more people, it's easy for one of them to be stupid, therefore messing up the whole order of things. But with the guy, there's only one person that has to be smart.
 

w1ndscar

New member
Jul 22, 2009
162
0
0
EA sounds like a bunch of bitches with all this ten-dollar project, and all those anti-piracy bs.

EDIT: I just realized, the customer actually would've saved more if he had just bought the game new... by ten dollars.
 

Some_Jackass

New member
Aug 7, 2008
287
0
0
That happened when I got "Ghostbusters" used an the DL code was already used.....I was annoyed, but I didnt get sue happy. Mainly since you dont NEED DLC to enjoy a freakin game.
 

aaronmcc

New member
Oct 18, 2008
629
0
0
if they're only giving you a $5 discount then why the heck would you bother? besides, he can clearly afford the extra $5 if he has the resources to sue gamestop.

there nothing wrong with EA doing project ten dollar. it's their right and i have no problem with it. most games come down in price after about 3months. AC2 is like £25 right now, I bought Bayonetta for £18 and Darksiders for £15. Only 3-4 months after release. A $5 discount is a joke.
 

1trakm1nd

New member
Jun 21, 2008
103
0
0
That guy... he just failed hard.

Didn't they teach you in elementary to "Read all of the instructions first."
 

Jinx_Dragon

New member
Jan 19, 2009
1,274
0
0
Personally:
Why the hell would you not just pay an extra five dollars to get a brand new copy?! The benefits of a new copy outweigh the risk of a pre-used version, even without taking the whole 'DLC' issue raised right here into account.

Manufacturing warranty alone makes it worth while to purchase new.

At this point I would link to the five hour game stop rant someone had done in the style of Yahtzee but those game stop bastards sue whoever hosts the damn thing the moment it comes to their attention. if anyone has a working link, plllleeaaaase?!
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
Why does everyone think he's nuts?

Granted, he shouldn't get any more than specifically what it costs Gamestop to put him back to before he bought the game financially (cost of the game and REASONABLE attorney fees), I think this is a good thing.

Obviously the lawsuit isn't really about the fact that he lost $60, it's about giving the company a slap on the wrist for fraudulent advertising, and frankly, I think that is a good thing, it keeps corporations accountable.

Also, the lawsuit couldn't be directed at EA because when they packaged and sold it, the advertisement on the box WAS true as the factory sold it to the stores as new, the STORES were the ones who resold them without the content card inside.

Perhaps this part of EA's plan, not only does the DLC discourage used sales (which hurts them) but now selling it used becomes QUESTIONABLE OF LEGALITY and it even FURTHER discourages the used sales.

EDIT: Again, there is a wider issue being addressed by this lawsuit besides this simple individual sale, it is important to realize that, and not accuse this kid of simply making a lawsuit for $10
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
Andy Chalk said:
squid5580 said:
It wasn't unforseen. That is why they put in the *.
But I don't think anyone at EA or GameStop expected that GameStop would be sued over what is essentially an EA initiative. An uproar was almost certain, but a lawsuit against retailers? That seems kinda left-fieldish to me.
Well, they can't sue EA, when they sold it to retailers like Gamestop all of the claims on the box were true (because the copies were new), Gamestop were the ones who later sold it in the same box without all the parts, and while EA should probably have foreseen the problem, they don't have any legal liability.