Jimquisition: Buyer Beware

[Flatfrog]

I think there's a real trend at the moment towards aggressive, even antagonistic pricing, where shopping is turning into a battle between consumer and seller. I've noticed this trend more and more in supermarkets, where 'deals' have increasingly turned into psychological tricks and the customer has to do enormous amounts of mental arithmetic to ensure they aren't getting a bad deal. But the same attitude of 'caveat emptor' seems to be applied here as well - no one seems willing to hold the chains to account and introduce some basic controls.

You would have thought this is exactly the kind of thing modern-day politicians would want to regulate, because essentially it's a barrier to a properly regulated free market, since customers aren't making fully informed buying decisions.

 

[Darth_Payn]

Wait, wait, WAIT!
People are still buying Aliens: Colonial Marines?!

Also, Jim, I thought one of your earlier videos told us to "vote with our wallets" to show the shitty-behaving publishers what we want.

 

[maximara]

...sorry, did I miss why the Record Breakers theme was being used?

Well, it sure as shit ain't the Record Breakers theme, for one.

...isn't it? I see people saying its Grange Hill but I remember that music being completely different.

Depends when you were a kid, it's the 90's Grange Hill theme specifically.

The question is, beyond physically damaged or otherwise defective games, how does regulation relate to other issues in games, such as glitches or bugs? That would be very difficult to define and regulate legally, most companies would just try to work around that with a EULA. But there probably should be some legal limit to how much they can wash their hands of liability for buggy software. But I don't think too many legislatures have much interest in regulating software in that way (unless it comes to censorship of content, of course!)

I think the worst offender is the little nugget in the EULA that states, should the software damage any information or hardware on the machine, the publisher will not be liable for such damage. Now I understand such disclaimers with overclocking machines... but when simply installing software requires that level of protection on the corporate end, you know something, somewhere is seriously wrong with that. Hell I once had to completely replace my RAM because Fallout 3 fried it... even with the expectations of bugs in a Bethesda title, that's a little extreme. But again this also leads into with PC Gaming the minimum spec debacle where apparently the game running at 5fps on all the lowest settings is acceptable. In general the industry truly is lazy in terms of quality assurance, I mean even CDP Red have to release 2 versions of their games to quash the bugs.

The thing to remember about EULAs is they may have parts that are unenforceable due to being considered contracts of adhesion, unconscionable, and/or unacceptable pursuant to the U.C.C. see Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology and Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software Ltd for examples. Also in the US some states have laws on the books that might limit what kind of liability an EULA can protect the company against. It is a very grey area that sadly will only be decided by more court cases.

 

[Blade_125]

Is this really anymore prevalent today than it was in the past?

I've skimmed through most of the posts, but it seems like people missed the biggest point:
In the past you almost always needed a publisher to release a game. This publisher acted as quality control to some degree and with the industry crash it was no longer profitable (or even possible, after console manufacturers banned publishers if they abused their trust) to release broken games.

Now we have self-publishing and small publishers who release whatever they can to make a quick buck, as Steam (just like the Xbox Indie Arcade) doesn't care what is sold through their market. Is it worse than before? Maybe not, but that was the infancy of the video games market. We don't need to revert to those times, especially not now that everyone and their dog can create a game that barely works and release it online for minimal (or no) investment. It gets even worse when Early Access is flooded with broken "games" who get away with it because "they might be good eventually", making the average consumer expect games to be like that.

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. You are not fooled and I applaud you. Should you stop being a smart shopper because others are not? Or should the government step in and forbid gaming companies from making shitty games (although as a caveat I will say false advertising should be punished with severe fines, I'm looking at your Colonial Marines)?

I'm really saying that we are not going to change the game companies until they feel a change in their profit, and there will not be a change in their profit until more consumers are educated.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Buyer Beware

Caveat Emptor is the "get out of an argument free" card for people who want to defend shoddy business practices. It's friggin' bollocks, though.

Watch Video

Nice video (as always)

I disagree with some aspects, agree with others.
I do say on here "vote with your wallet" but I feel the people stung on here should know better. We come to this site to (amongst other things) keep up to date with gaming news. We read the horror stories of shoddy practices. I feel if you are invested in this industry as a serious fan, you have an obligation to let certain publishers see we wont blindly preorder.
Were as Joe public, who casually plays, casually buys, I do have sympathy for.

Either way, 100% agree, it shouldnt be this way.

 

[maximara]

holy balls that opening tune transported me back to my childhood. Thanks Jim.

And it would be nice to live in a world where you can actually trust review sites and not have to rely on Youtubers like totalbiscuit to get a more honest overview of a game.

Assuming said review isn't taken down due to abuse of the DMCA as what happened with his review of Garry's Incident.

Only Totalbiscuit's publishing of this abuse combined with his mammoth popularity got the developer to back down. But what about people who don't have the kind of viewership Totalbiscuit has or feel they can't fight back because they don't understand how the DMCA can (and is) abused?

 

[lostlevel]

Can we start putting in requests for CBBC theme music to be used as intro/outro music?

Because the Roobard & Custard theme would be kind of fitting, I think.

Very much agreed!

 

[Zipa]

holy balls that opening tune transported me back to my childhood. Thanks Jim.

And it would be nice to live in a world where you can actually trust review sites and not have to rely on Youtubers like totalbiscuit to get a more honest overview of a game.

Assuming said review isn't taken down due to abuse of the DMCA as what happened with his review of Garry's Incident.

Only Totalbiscuit's publishing of this abuse combined with his mammoth popularity got the developer to back down. But what about people who don't have the kind of viewership Totalbiscuit has or feel they can't fight back because they don't understand how the DMCA can (and is) abused?

Well it was more likely to of been the weight Maker Studios who own the network he is with, Polaris that got the DMCA flagging sorted out.

Though the shitstorm it caused would of helped I imagine.

 

[Mahoshonen]

Jim, I doubt that most of the people saying that the people should exercise skepticism are trying to absolve companies of the blame. Rather, it's just advice going forward.

Yes, the game market should be one where we can trust game publishers and developers to sell the game they said they were going to make. But that's not the world we exist in, and given the minute influence a single buyer has in the market, the most useful thing they can do is to exercise caution in making buying decisions.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Thank you for once again validating my feelings on this subject.
When it comes to non-essential goods, a buyer who has to beware eventually becomes a buyer who doesn't bother.

 

[softclocks]

He's always been touting "vote with your wallet", now he's turned all of a sudden?

I agree that steam quality control would benefit everyone.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I'm loving the new music! Please tell me that's staying!

Also good video this week Jim!

 

[madstork]

Hmm, this has me wondering how much of Jimquisition's popularity can be attributed solely to Drill Queen.

 

[vgamesx1]

I can definitely sympathize on a few levels with the people who do say things like buyer beware and: If you made an uninformed decision you "deserve" whatever consequences and shit you get for showing such a lack of responsibility with your own resources.

In not just video games but with all things you SHOULD beware, that goes for all commodoties.
Its healthy for a consumer in the long rong to actively seek out information that they can base certain choices on, because companies all over the world will stretch the truth on what their product does or doesnt do and yes while that is utterly disgusting practices that we've somehow just become apathetic towards with a "thats just how it is", its still something i believe can be changed and that you for now still have to adapt somewhat by being a responsible consumer in anything you do.

On the other hand just like this video points out: You shouldnt need to always at all times have to tread through a minefield or dig through a pile of dung just to find a hidden gem or the genuinely trustworthy and good companies and products that are upfront and transparent with their practices and who has the interest of the costumer as their primary priority, providing all the necessary information upfront to the consumer and being honest with their products or services.

Steam is in dire need of quality control and so are a lot of other things, you shouldnt need to become a brittish cynic in order to see that undeniable fact.

On a last note i believe the responsibility falls partially on both parties, not equally though, but enough so that one side definitely can do something about this kind of disgusting lack of quality control going on, every bubble will burst eventually but we can speed that process up severely as consumers, even though we shouldnt need to because this is a problem created by the industry in the first place but being held up by uninformed costumers so the sad truth is: Vote with your wallet.

^ this.. I was thinking the exact same things... sure it would be nice in a perfect world to be able to trust everyone and be happy about giving your money away, however that isn't the case, at least least few times I've checked.. so yeah "buyer beware" should apply to almost everything, because its just being a safe and responsible consumer, as most people don't have a money printer to give them an infinite money supply they should use it wisely... (I only wish..) that said, yes steam should have more quality control and more information on the games' page, heck maybe even reviews/videos of the game right on the sales page, that metacritic score that only half the games have anyway means absolutely nothing.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Buyer Beware

Caveat Emptor is the "get out of an argument free" card for people who want to defend shoddy business practices. It's friggin' bollocks, though.

Watch Video

I agree with everything you say Jim... but there's an element that you're overlooking IMO.

We need a strong gaming MEDIA to highlight the unfair business practices and bring them to light.

Gaming controversy rarely enters the mainstream media as a consumer rights issue. Even when it maybe should.

And the specialist gaming media, although it has its highlights (of which the Jimquisition is one), all too often uses "hype pieces" that come across as being paid for by big gaming companies. When those same companies are also the ones who've been criticised for consumer-unfriendly practices, it's not hard to see that there's a problem there as well.

So yeah... I absolutely agree. Buyers shouldn't HAVE to beware. But the misinformation isn't just coming from the publishers.

Oh... and regarding the "Grange Hill" music... which I recognised immediately by the way... you say it was to make one man laugh. Well, assuming that man is not me, and that man also laughed, you did at least TWICE as well as you intended, 'cause it made me giggle in a way that got me a few strange looks!

EDIT: in case it's not clear above, I meant that the Jimquisition is a highlight. Not that it contributes to the culture of "hype"!

 

[Barciad]

Grange Hill?! That takes me back.

Why not the original theme? You know, the classic one from the '80's.

 

[endtherapture]

P;ease always have Grange Hill as the theme tune.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Trust is a two-way street. And trust can only be maintained through vigilance.
If that requires the average consumer to stop being a naive, impulsive little sheep, then so be it.

You can try to demand better quality from producers. You can ask producers to stop with these bait-n-switch scams, less-for-more gambits, freemium honeypot schemes, and all that jazz. But until the average consumer acts on that and stops trusting those companies with their money, nothing will improve because those companies have no evident reason to believe you.

They think you, me, hell everyone with complaints are either bluffing or are some insignificant "vocal minority".
And they probably won't until (if) the bubble bursts.

 

[Mosesj]

Wait, Jim, didn't you mock Mass Effect fans when they expected what they were promised back with Mass Effect 3?

That doesn't sound like something a consumer advocate should do.

He showed in later episodes that he changed his mind about the whole thing.

probably got a lot more information on the subject

 

[Oskuro]

Oooh, what was that vehicular combat game the video showed? It looked intriguing to me ..

Search Youtube for "Jim Sterling" and let your jaw drop in amazement at the bounty of sweet sweet Sterling there is to peruse.


Or search for "Hard Truck Apocalypse" if listening to Jim's voice proves too taxing.