Gamestop is being sued for Deceptive Used Game Sales

I came into this thread expecting someone to have finally attempted to sue gamestop for selling used games as new.

Instead I'm disappointed to find out it's some jackass who can't read the back of a box. His lawsuit won't even make it before a judge. There are dozens of games now that are just like DA:O that include a code in the retail game but may or may not in the used game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This case will be settled out of court. There are tons of cases like these everyday against various retailers and they are almost always settled out of court. The biggest reason for this is because retailers don't want to gamble and take a chance that a precedent will be set forcing them to change practices in ways they don't want to. They would rather settle a case then decide for themselves how best to prevent a similar lawsuit from happening in the future. This kind of thing is very common and is the reason we have warnings like "not to be use as a sled or flotation device" on the bottom of a baby bouncer. People sue over their own stupidity all the time.
 
But I must say that most people will not know/understand/read that they must purchase more add-ons to actually play the game. This kid probably should have known better, but there are many more soccer mom types who will not. I'm sure Gamestop pushed this as "Save $5" when in reality the game is more expensive than new since you are "required" to buy the add-ons to play. You can call the kid a "moron" all you want, but clearly Gamestop shares part of the responsibility here just because we all know their sales pitch.
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']But I must say that most people will not know/understand/read that they must purchase more add-ons to actually play the game. This kid probably should have known better, but there are many more soccer mom types who will not. I'm sure Gamestop pushed this as "Save $5" when in reality the game is more expensive than new since you are "required" to buy the add-ons to play. You can call the kid a "moron" all you want, but clearly Gamestop shares part of the responsibility here just because we all know their sales pitch.[/QUOTE]


Required? You are joking right? The DLC is an optional character and quest that has no bearing on the complete game. The DLC is 1/10000000 of the complete game. Lastly, when you load up the game, EA doesn't force you to buy the DLC before you play the game. How is it required? All DLC for every game has been completely optional and a small fragment of the main game.
 
[quote name='soonersfan60']But I must say that most people will not know/understand/read that they must purchase more add-ons to actually play the game. This kid probably should have known better, but there are many more soccer mom types who will not. I'm sure Gamestop pushed this as "Save $5" when in reality the game is more expensive than new since you are "required" to buy the add-ons to play. You can call the kid a "moron" all you want, but clearly Gamestop shares part of the responsibility here just because we all know their sales pitch.[/QUOTE]

But to what extent should companies be responsible for lack of common sense? I personally feel alot of Gamestop business practices are crappy, but illegal? How many warnings are companies going to have to post on merchandise before everything we buy is just covered in legal text? The store where he bought the game should have just allowed him to pay the difference and swap it for a new one. Really it is the lack of intelligence as well as the lack of good customer service that has brought us to this point. Frivolous lawsuits are not going to help people become decent human beings, all they are going to do is keep people from feeling the need to educate themselves.
 
I would whole heartedly support this lawsuit if the focus was getting Gamestop to label the games. As it's worded though, it's just an obvious frivoulous money grab.

As others have said, it's unfair to expect everyone to be informed about this kind of stuff. Especially since up until recently, purchasing video games was a very simple think. This is a very new practice that many may not be fully aware of. Hell, I can't count the amount of times I've bought a game without reading over the back too. I can easily see many people seeing a commercial, then just picking up the game without paying attention to the fine print on the back.

[quote name='wildcpac']On some games not all. I hate gamestop just as much as anybody but they are in business to make money. A majority of those games that they "buy back" sit on the shelf. Inventory sitting on the shelf cost money. It requires lights, employees, rent for the building, etc etc etc. The longer it sits, the more money the company loses. Go into a gamestop and you will sometimes see 2 dozen plus for any used game. Double that if it is used sports game.[/QUOTE]

That's what most people don't think about. You forgot the taxes they have to pay on unsold inventory. They also have to take into account all the discounts and deals that people use when they buy/trade. That cuts into the profit of individual games as well.
 
this is a dumbass trying to get cash from a retail giant on a technical loophole based on his own stupidity. if he was this mad about it, he should have taken it back within a week, went above the manager, or tried not being an idiot. stupid lawsuits like this are part of the growing expense pool that RAISES prices on games for the rest of us that pay this guys lawsuits on the back end of our next purchase
 
You have to be kidding me with this frivolous mitigation. If he was dumb enough to buy a used copy for 54.99 and isn't aware the codes may or may not work (which there is no way of knowing if the previous owner redeemed the code) I don't see how its actively deceptive. If this guy should be given ANYTHING, it should be a return for credit, nothing more.
 
[quote name='Freemason']lawsuits like this are part of the growing expense pool that RAISES prices on games for the rest of us that pay this guys lawsuits on the back end of our next purchase[/QUOTE]

^
This is true and another reason why frivolous lawsuits are not helpful.

The problem is people really want companies to wake up and start treating customers better, so it becomes tempting to cheer when you see a lawsuit like this. But what has to be realized is these kinds of lawsuits are a big part of the problem. They simply serve to make the customer the enemy. The best thing to do if you have a CS problem (especially in store), is to write letters/emails to people in the company, whomever (and everyone) you can find the contact info for. If you are polite and clearly state your problem you will be surprised at how often they will do whatever they can to fix the problem for you and often they will throw in extra compensation for your trouble. This is the win/win solution to the problem, it takes time and patience but then again so does a lawsuit (which will also cost you money), and letter writing will have much better results for everyone.
 
[quote name='youbastards']WTF, when did McDonald's put a sex mini-game in a Happy Meal???[/QUOTE]
When they changed the name to Happy Ending Meal.
 
This is why tort reform (as a whole, not just for health care) is so badly needed. Institute a loser-pays system so people won't be so quick to sue and slip-and-fall lawyers won't be so quick to take on these cases.
 
I'm not sure who would win this. Did the specific Gamestop this guy is suing over say you get everything on the box or did the guy even ask? I'm guessing he didn't. He could've just returned the game for a full refund.

Has anyone considered this to be EA's secret plan against Gamestop? Get a whole bunch of games out there with DLC codes leading to lawsuit trolls suing Gamestop over missing content?
 
[quote name='wildcpac']Required? You are joking right? The DLC is an optional character and quest that has no bearing on the complete game. The DLC is 1/10000000 of the complete game. Lastly, when you load up the game, EA doesn't force you to buy the DLC before you play the game. How is it required? All DLC for every game has been completely optional and a small fragment of the main game.[/QUOTE]

Well, then, that is my lack of understanding with this particular game. If it's merely add-on stuff, then I would feel a little differently about it. But there are companies (EA *cough*) who have been looking at making some of this "required," and without knowing this particular game I thought that was the case here given the lawsuit. In any event, it's probably good to get this cleared up now. My position is, if it's extra stuff you have no complaint, but if it's required then GS should inform the clueless or adjust its prices.
 
He should have Just talked to the Distric manager and they would have hooked him up, some one REALLY needs to start a Union or sue on behalf of the employees that work their. Just look at the Comdata card, I've at least lost more then $20 of wages figiting with that damn thing and that 20 was half my paycheck.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Has anyone considered this to be EA's secret plan against Gamestop? Get a whole bunch of games out there with DLC codes leading to lawsuit trolls suing Gamestop over missing content?[/QUOTE]

All EA cares about is being able to find some way to get some profit off the used game market.
 
I don't like Gamestop any more than the next guy, but this lawsuit is not about bringing down used game prices. It's about "false advertising". And in that respect, I have to say this guy did not do his due diligence as a consumer. You remember that little test your english teacher gave you in middle school where it starts off "Read all instructions before doing anything", and then has like, fifty things it's telling you to do, the last of which is "Ignore 1-49 and do 50 only"? THIS GUY FAILED THAT TEST AND IS TRYING TO GET MONEY FOR IT. F*** HIM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='soonersfan60']...there are companies (EA *cough*) who have been looking at making some of this "required,"...[/QUOTE]

Yeah, except no one has actually done that yet to my knowledge (at least not on a console game). So what non-existent game did you assume this was?
 
I understand some people are on a tight budget, but when a new copy is only $5 more, what the hell, just buy it. You're supporting the developers more, you're getting a clean, never-played copy, and you can avoid all these DLC issues. Seriously.
 
[quote name='yesiamaplant']I don't like Gamestop any more than the next guy, but this lawsuit is not about bringing down used game prices. It's about "false advertising". And in that respect, I have to say this guy did not do his due diligence as a consumer. You remember that little test your english teacher gave you in middle school where it starts off "Read all instructions before doing anything", and then has like, fifty things it's telling you to do, the last of which is "Ignore 1-49 and do 50 only"? THIS GUY FAILED THAT TEST AND IS TRYING TO GET MONEY FOR IT. F*** HIM.[/QUOTE]


This reminds of something that happened during a speed reading course I took while in school. We were given a very lengthy test that required long written answers. The teacher beforehand instructed the class to read through the entire test very carefully before answering any questions. During the test myself and 1 or 2 others sat there doing nothing while everyone else was hard at work. At the end of the time period the teacher pointed out the line on the bottom of the last page that said not to answer any questions. The groans could have caused an earthquake ;)
 
[quote name='Jodou']Doesn't matter, he could have been fully aware and still have a case. McDonald's already learned that lesson over hot coffee.[/QUOTE]


Off topic...but the McDonald's coffee case(liebeck vs. mcDs) is not really as ridiculous as it is made out to be...the lady had major 3rd degree burns and had to have surgery along with 8 days in the hospital. Additionally, McDonalds allegedly kept their coffee much hotter than the industry standard(they had it at 180-90 degrees) because they determined it some how increased the taste. The temp makes burns occur far quicker than normal coffee. There were also dozens of past cases of burned customers. They also new people would drink it while driving but kept it hotter then necessary any ways. Also, the initial jury determined the lady was partially at fault and reduced damages accordingly. You may still think its a ridiculous case-that a burn is an inherent risk of drinking coffee, but usually people don't know some of the details on this case.
 
[quote name='Cantatus']All EA cares about is being able to find some way to get some profit off the used game market.[/QUOTE]


why go for profits on used games??? EA wants you to just buy a new one and not go used.

I'm surprised we haven't seen Digital Download BETA v0.5 (introducing Physical Media Man):

1)Buy retail CD.
2)Retail has KEY
3)Create account (EA)
4)Tie Key to Acount (EA) [Windows Live already does this on the PC side]
4a)Key can't be used again!
6)???????
7)Profit (EA)
8)Mother of 6 needs to find game, buy NEW no used available.

Ultimately kills GS in the used markets... Retail purchases for games goes sky high, game sales are high, average sequels increase, more games purchased and money to EA.
 
[quote name='GameOverSuckas']Gamestop is a RIPOFF! they take all of these games in and don't give shit for them.. games barely a month old.. they give you half of what it's worth or less.. then turn around and sell it for double or more of what they got it from you for. All because kids can't go on ebay and sell their games and get what they're worth.. they fleece kids for their games.. Parents of course want their kids to be happy and pay full price then end up turning it shortly after at a huge loss...

If Gamestop were a car lot.. People would tell them to go fuck themselves that they were crazy, adults who turn their games in are too lazy to sell on craig's list or ebay.. kids can't.. so they have no other outlet[/QUOTE]

[quote name='intoxicated662']just like when a person drives their car on the road and when on a busy street, I suppose in your logic they should expect an accident sooner or later..serves them right I guess. I agree with the lawsuit as no where does it state on used games that it does not come with content as stated on the box[/QUOTE]

Just wanted to point out the absolutely absurd amount of fail in these two posts.
 
Wow, and I came in here expecting an interesting case against GS...which you would think someone could cook up already. This is beyond silly, plain and simple. All that's going to happen is that GS is going to start putting a warning on games that come with DLC vouchers, so that people like this guy, who don't read and don't research products they are buying, don't get confused.
 
You know, I didn't even realize at first how dumb you'd have to be not to realize that content is only available if you buy the game new (or if the person who traded-in didn't actually use the code). I just looked at my copy and realized that right under the part about the DLC is the disclaimer.
 
Alot of PC games (especially MMORPGs) work the same way (the whole one time use CD Key thing), that is why there is almost no used game market for PC games. It would make sense if developers were trying to do the same thing with console games.
 
[quote name='GameOverSuckas']Gamestop is a RIPOFF! they take all of these games in and don't give shit for them.. games barely a month old.. they give you half of what it's worth or less.. then turn around and sell it for double or more of what they got it from you for. All because kids can't go on ebay and sell their games and get what they're worth.. they fleece kids for their games.. Parents of course want their kids to be happy and pay full price then end up turning it shortly after at a huge loss...

If Gamestop were a car lot.. People would tell them to go fuck themselves that they were crazy, adults who turn their games in are too lazy to sell on craig's list or ebay.. kids can't.. so they have no other outlet[/QUOTE]

Yes. That's called "economy."

This argument is reserved exclusively for people who got themselves lowballed and were too stupid to see it coming. You think car lots are any different? That's how resale works. What are they supposed to do, give you back what you paid and go out of business?

It's 2010, if you can't figure this out, go sit in the corner.
 
Even better example than the car lot...how about if YOU (the people who cry about GameStop) owned a game store? Would you give people $45 for a game you're going to TRY and sell for $50 or $55? Yeah, I didn't think so. Now, go back to the corner where you belong. Better still, go home and get your fucking shine box.
 
The irony is, this whole issue is caused by gaming publishers, and not Gamestop per se. It's game publishers who are creating these one off promos where you can get downloadable content for buying a game new. I don't see why it wouldn't be easy for Gamestop to just put up a sign that says "Used games may not have all unlockable content." Wouldn't that solve the problem to an extent?
 
In the war of the companies who are dicks, who wins? Before the GS haters say GS should lose this lawsuit, I think it would be better to target the terrible companies that use this practice. It sets dangerous precedent and pisses all over first sale doctrine. Boo @ EA, Activision, GameStop, and the rest of the awful companies out there.
 
[quote name='CaptainSwag']The irony is, this whole issue is caused by gaming publishers, and not Gamestop per se. It's game publishers who are creating these one off promos where you can get downloadable content for buying a game new. I don't see why it wouldn't be easy for Gamestop to just put up a sign that says "Used games may not have all unlockable content." Wouldn't that solve the problem to an extent?[/QUOTE]

Pretty much. I mean, I want ME2 at some point but I certainly know enough about the DLC situation to not buy a used copy. I wouldn't expect some 13 year old's mom to have the same level of knowledge.
 
[quote name='xycury']why go for profits on used games??? EA wants you to just buy a new one and not go used.

I'm surprised we haven't seen Digital Download BETA v0.5 (introducing Physical Media Man):

1)Buy retail CD.
2)Retail has KEY
3)Create account (EA)
4)Tie Key to Acount (EA) [Windows Live already does this on the PC side]
4a)Key can't be used again!
6)???????
7)Profit (EA)
8)Mother of 6 needs to find game, buy NEW no used available.

Ultimately kills GS in the used markets... Retail purchases for games goes sky high, game sales are high, average sequels increase, more games purchased and money to EA.[/QUOTE]

Because, as much as EA (as well as probably just about every other game publisher) wants the used game market to dry up and go away, they know that it's not going to. So, they might as well do something where they can still profit from used games rather than sitting back and letting GameStop have the entire pie.

[quote name='CaptainSwag']The irony is, this whole issue is caused by gaming publishers, and not Gamestop per se. It's game publishers who are creating these one off promos where you can get downloadable content for buying a game new. I don't see why it wouldn't be easy for Gamestop to just put up a sign that says "Used games may not have all unlockable content." Wouldn't that solve the problem to an extent?[/QUOTE]

I imagine if GameStop wanted to be underhanded about this, they could just include something like that in their used game policy, and just point to it every time someone has a complaint. It'd be much easier for them to do (since it wouldn't require labeling specific games), and they wouldn't have to worry about a sign dissuading the uninformed.
 
This lawsuit is kind of weird to me.

Used games usually do not include content that comes with a fresh copy. A lot of people do not know this, especially people who do not look into video game news that tells people about the fresh content in new copies.

Gamestop should have the decency to put a sticker or something on their used games saying the content on the box may or may not appear in the package. People, however, should read the box and ask the person at the front desk if it contains that DLC to better their purchase value and not have this situation arise.

I totally wish for this man to win his case, but I don't think he has much to start.
 
While GameStop should have warned him, the customer should also have asked before buying. It is not GameStop who does these promos, it is the publishers themselves.
 
[quote name='GameOverSuckas']
If Gamestop were a car lot.. People would tell them to go fuck themselves that they were crazy, adults who turn their games in are too lazy to sell on craig's list or ebay.. kids can't.. so they have no other outlet[/QUOTE]

Have you ever tried selling something on Craigslist? Seriously? It's a lowballers paradise. I put up a $270 or so Gamestop gift card and I put up a price for 20% less than face value. I eventually sold it for $160 after I had taken it down to around $220 or so by buying a game or three.

I was offered $60 in the first response. I told the potential buyer to eat shit and die essentially. On Ebay, you're dealing with fees galore and the chance that the buyer may try and come back and say they either A)didn't get the item or B) it wasn't as described.

Then you have to refund their money(or have it taken by force via Paypal)and may or may not even get your shit back if it's under option B.

Yeah. I'll stick to Gamestop when they have a good promo for trying to get back some portion of what I paid versus dealing with the even bigger assholes on Ebay and CL.

As for this lawsuit, as much as I hate and loathe Gamestop(though they do serve a purpose when cheap flipping possibilities come around:D), the guy has no case at all. But like others said, GS will settle with the asshole and add yet ANOTHER sticker to the fuckin' cases that're already plastered with 10 billion of the shitty things to begin with.:roll:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But, if he was a CAG member, he would've been able to order Dragon's Age Origins from EA this weekend for 20 and change. fuck him and the ignorant consumer.
 
[quote name='xycury']why go for profits on used games??? EA wants you to just buy a new one and not go used.

I'm surprised we haven't seen Digital Download BETA v0.5 (introducing Physical Media Man):

1)Buy retail CD.
2)Retail has KEY
3)Create account (EA)
4)Tie Key to Acount (EA) [Windows Live already does this on the PC side]
4a)Key can't be used again!
6)???????
7)Profit (EA)
8)Mother of 6 needs to find game, buy NEW no used available.

Ultimately kills GS in the used markets... Retail purchases for games goes sky high, game sales are high, average sequels increase, more games purchased and money to EA.[/QUOTE]

Publishers have delusions where 100% of the consumers that can't buy a discounted used game instead purchase it at full retail.
 
[quote name='Halo05']Pretty much. I mean, I want ME2 at some point but I certainly know enough about the DLC situation to not buy a used copy. I wouldn't expect some 13 year old's mom to have the same level of knowledge.[/QUOTE]

Yes because everyone knows that mothers with 13 year olds are too stupid to live :roll:

Notice the guy suing here is not a mom but a gamer dood....
 
[quote name='leeloo1977']Yes because everyone knows that mothers with 13 year olds are too stupid to live :roll:

Notice the guy suing here is not a mom but a gamer dood....[/QUOTE]

Where did I equate not understanding the intricacies of DLC with stupidity?

My point was simply that Gamestop should put up a sign that mentions something about certain games having one-shot DLC and that used copies of those games may or may not include said DLC.

Christ mom, bite my head off whydontcha?
 
While you are right about GS putting some kind of disclaimer up and/or on the boxes (would prefer them not sticking anything else on the cases), I think in most cases there really isn't anything to be confused about. If the whole argument is that "Hey, I saw this thing about the free DLC, and then there was no free DLC!", the disclaimer about the code being for one use is right underneath. If someone, be it a gamer or non-gamer, can take the time to read the first part, they should probably read the second part, too.
 
[quote name='diddy310']I fear the outcome of this will be GS putting another fucking sticker on the used game cases.[/QUOTE]

This. And at the end of the day, it's built around a false premise. The guy claims the added DLC is MANDATORY, when it's completely optional.

Next we'll see people sue because their Rock Band 2 doesn't include the 20 free songs, or their copy of Gears of War 2 didn't come with the free flashback maps. It's not Gamestop's fault, it's the companies that throw the free DLC in the game in a vain attempt to stymie used game sales.

Technically, the kid should be going after EA as well, if not in the first place (in truth, the kid only has himself to blame for such a silly mistake, but no one will ever blame themselves in this day & age).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top