GameStop Sued Over Deceptive Used Game Sales

[OrlandoEastwood]

I would have filed a lawsuit against Gamestop if I didn't get my soundtrack with Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. It was a pre-order bonus item and I had reserved the game in September, and the game didn't get released until January. They had no copy of the soundtrack when I went to the store to pick it up and I ended up filing a complaint at the website. It's like; "You don't tell me to pre-order my game because you want money. If I would have known there was no soundtrack, I wouldn't have pre-ordered and would have taken my ass to Best Buy!" I got my soundtrack two weeks later, those S.O.B's.

[MCT]

Originally Posted by GoPens78

$54.99 is WAY too much for a used game! I would rather spend the extra $5 to get a brand new one. This guy should've been smacked upside the head for actually buying the game used at $54.99 in the first place. I hardly ever shop at GameStop. Their prices are ridiculous!

verbatim

LOL @ a "used" game being only $5 cheaper....get the f outta here.

[Wingman1977]

While I'm not a fan of scam stop, they are not at fault for this. The buyer is a idiot for buying a used game that costs $5 less than what it costs new. There's no way he'll win this case. Some of their policies need to be changed (selling opened copies of brand new that the case is used as a display for the same price as a sealed copy).

[OrlandoEastwood]

I don't know about that, Wingman, the PDF file had scans of the back cover which at the top of the back cover states that it these extras. It would have fooled me if I bought it used for that stuff.

[CasualKiller]

Originally Posted by Wingman1977

While I'm not a fan of scam stop, they are not at fault for this. The buyer is a idiot for buying a used game that costs $5 less than what it costs new. There's no way he'll win this case. Some of their policies need to be changed (selling opened copies of brand new that the case is used as a display for the same price as a sealed copy).

I don't think he's an idiot, Gamestop/EB Games cardholders get additional discounts on used games on top of the 5 dollars less. He would have actually got it for 44.49 instead of full retail, 60.00.

[UK_fan_05]

Originally Posted by OrlandoEastwood

I don't know about that, Wingman, the PDF file had scans of the back cover which at the top of the back cover states that it these extras. It would have fooled me if I bought it used for that stuff.

Exactly. I think in the end of this, it will force GS to change. Even if the guy loses, I' am sure GS will put in a new policy to make their stores place stickers that say "May not contain DLC" or something along those lines. Also, they could throw away the actual game case and place them in the GS used game cases that has their logo on it so no one can say it is written on the box because only the name of the game and Gamestop will be on the cover.

[My_Two_Cents]

Originally Posted by OrlandoEastwood

I don't know about that, Wingman, the PDF file had scans of the back cover which at the top of the back cover states that it these extras. It would have fooled me if I bought it used for that stuff.

If it's simply what's advertised on the retail version of the box, then the case should be thrown out. Everyone should know that these codes should not still be good on used games. The language also states "...available with full retail purchase". This was not a full retail purchase. It was purchased used. Now, if Gamestop was advertising the inclusion of this content with their used games, then they should be held liable.

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by CasualKiller

I don't think he's an idiot, Gamestop/EB Games cardholders get additional discounts on used games on top of the 5 dollars less. He would have actually got it for 44.49 instead of full retail, 60.00.

Well, according to the article, he paid $54.99 for it so he's a idiot. Bottom line is there is no excuse for when person to pay a certain price for a game used when the brand new sealed copy costs $5 more.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Ricshoe

Well said. I'm so tired of the "it's not my fault I'm an idiot" and the "big corporations are bad" mentalities these days. No one takes responsibility for their own actions/inactions, and instead want to blame someone else. I'm sorry, but if you are too stupid to:

1) Not understand that downloadable content (using a code) will NOT be valid in a used game

or

2) Not realize that you are being ripped-off paying only $5 less for a used game

then you deserve what you get (or don't). Start shopping smarter and you won't have these problems. Even my teenage kids understand what they can and cannot get with used games at Gamestop.

Exactly. If I were required to admit I was an idiot before I could sue someone(which is what this guy is doing) I might find another way to make a few extra bucks. I have too much self respect to publicly ridicule myself like that. But hey, I routinely at what pases as legitimate lawsuits these days.

[Lord_Stewie]

This isn't a discussion of whether you agree or disagree in general.

Bottom line is that Gamestop and other corporations as well continue to advertise/provide/give out wrong information to the public. While I understand that its business, this one in particular is dirty business and shouldn't be allowed as well.

If you provide a product to serve the public the least you could do is make sure you provide the item the public asked for in this case.

In this case I would say the person suing is at fault for purchasing a product fully knowing that its used, and that's not Gamestop's fault. However, Gamestop is wrong by falsely advertising the product in this case.

[lDlisturb3d]

I hope and pray to the Gods of Olympus that he wins and fu**s up Gamestop, they are such rip offs!!!

[MaCruz]

It's new news for me. Glad I never really dealt with them after they took over EB or whatever it was.

[Show spoiler]Hopefully their family chain moviestop doesn't do the same.

[mikejet]

Originally Posted by Ricshoe

Well said. I'm so tired of the "it's not my fault I'm an idiot" and the "big corporations are bad" mentalities these days. No one takes responsibility for their own actions/inactions, and instead want to blame someone else. I'm sorry, but if you are too stupid to:

1) Not understand that downloadable content (using a code) will NOT be valid in a used game

or

2) Not realize that you are being ripped-off paying only $5 less for a used game

then you deserve what you get (or don't). Start shopping smarter and you won't have these problems. Even my teenage kids understand what they can and cannot get with used games at Gamestop.

So it's OK for Gamestop to OPEN a new game, let it's employees take it home and play it, then to turn around and sell said game as NEW?

[krazeyeyez]

Can't believe no one mentioned that maybe he got it used at that price BECAUSE he did not have $60 for it new, but he did have old games/movies/etc.. for trade. I do this quite often. I also buy much of my stuff used, although not from gamestop, i try to help out local small business in this area. But to call the guy an idiot for trying to save $5, i don't see it. If the DLC incident had not happened then he would have just bought the same thing as everyone else for LESS.

I know my blockbuster labels rental and PRP copies of blu-rays that have inserts with digital copies etc... as just containing the movie. If gamestop did not label it as such, and THEN gave this guy a hassle on the refund, then they deserve a lesson imo.

[Steve]

After re-reading the OP I think it's worth pointing out that it states it took the guy "weeks" to figure out that he couldn't get the DLC for free. It also says that when he tried to return it for a refund the store manager told him he couldn't because it had been longer than 7 days. So if the guy had bought the game and tried getting the DLC within the first week he could have returned it without a problem. It's not like he didn't have a chance.

[My_Two_Cents]

Originally Posted by mikejet

So it's OK for Gamestop to OPEN a new game, let it's employees take it home and play it, then to turn around and sell said game as NEW?

Oh, not at all. I was only commenting on the suit claiming false advertising because the game case (as it came from the manufacturer) listed a downloadable content code that wouldn't work because someone used it already.

I refuse to buy new games from them because you don't get a sealed copy, and I have no faith that someone hasn't already played it. That's a policy that makes no sense, and if they are lending these out and then selling them as new, they need to be forced to stop immediately (or fully disclose to the buyer what they are doing).

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by Steve

This I have to agree with.

Personally I would just pay $60 for a new game instead of $55 for a used one. I don't normally mess with used games until they've fallen 50% or so in price.

I agree with it as well, most of my games I've bought used {with a few rare new ones} and for the most part, I wait until the deal is something I can't pass up before I purchase anything used.

For example, I bought Hellboy for the PS3 used for $4.99. The game isn't that great IMO, but I only spent $5 on it {which is the cost for a weekly rental} so I'm not really losing out on that much.

Logan

[My_Two_Cents]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

For example, I bought Hellboy for the PS3 used for $4.99. The game isn't that great IMO, but I only spent $5 on it {which is the cost for a weekly rental} so I'm not really losing out on that much.

Logan

You sound like my Father-in-law talking about the local diner they eat at all of the time. He says "The food's not real good, but it's cheap!"

[mikejet]

Originally Posted by Ricshoe

Oh, not at all. I was only commenting on the suit claiming false advertising because the game case (as it came from the manufacturer) listed a downloadable content code that wouldn't work because someone used it already.

I refuse to buy new games from them because you don't get a sealed copy, and I have no faith that someone hasn't already played it. That's a policy that makes no sense, and if they are lending these out and then selling them as new, they need to be forced to stop immediately (or fully disclose to the buyer what they are doing).

Well that practice has been going on for years. It still goes on today. If you are at the store at the right time sometimes you can see an employee come in and bring a game back or take one out and fill out the log book. They have no reason to ever open a new game. None of the major retailers do that. Well, they do for their demo units but they won't turn around and sell that game later.

[Secretagentnumber6]

Originally Posted by mikejet

Well that practice has been going on for years. It still goes on today. If you are at the store at the right time sometimes you can see an employee come in and bring a game back or take one out and fill out the log book. They have no reason to ever open a new game. None of the major retailers do that. Well, they do for their demo units but they won't turn around and sell that game later.

Yeah, that practice is disagreeable. I have bought games that were already opened, but I am not a complainer really since really as long as it is not scratched it is fine for me. I just let it slide if I want the game bad enough.