GameStop Sued Over Deceptive Used Game Sales.

[Ares]

GameStop Sued Over Deceptive Used Game Sales
Free advertised downloadable content an issue for used market.
by Jim Reilly

March 25, 2010 - A lawsuit filed earlier this week against retailer GameStop says the company is "deceptively misleading" its customers into believing a used game purchased from the store comes with all packaged downloadable content advertised on the box. This content, however, is only made available for free to those who purchase the game new, as the code to access the content can be only used one time.

This problem arose in January when plaintiff James Collins purchased a used copy of Dragon Age: Origins from a GameStop store in Hayward, California. Collins paid $54.99 plus tax for the game, $5 less than a brand new copy.

Collins states he purchased the game in part because of the box cover, which advertised that additional character and quest content could be downloaded for free upon purchasing the game. Collins discovered weeks later, however, he would have to pay an additional $15 to access the downloadable content, ultimately paying $10 more than the cost of a brand new copy with the same content.

When Collins tried to return the game for a refund, the GameStop manager at the store said he could not because the seven-day return window had passed.

"GameStop, who makes more than 20% of its revenue and nearly $2 billion from the sale of used video games, is aware of this issue, and continues to fail to alert customers that this content is not available on used games," the suit states. "As a result, GameStop tricks consumers into paying more for a used game than they would if they purchased the same game and new content."

Collins is seeking restitution, punitive damages for fraud, and interest from the sale of used games that were wrongfully obtained.

IGN has contacted GameStop for comment. The lawsuit in PDF form can be viewed here.

As reported by IGN.

 

[Nugu]

I must say that it's fairly ridiculous that he didn't realize the codes could be used already. He either just got a ps3 or is rather behind the times. I mean yes it's a dupe by the game makers to kill used sales/profit but at this point it's rather blatantly obvious.

 

[j_garcia]

I agree, it should be quite obvious. I bought a used copy of a game that has DLC that was included in the box with the original knowing I would have to pay to get a copy for myself. I think the suit is trying to say that Gamestop should make it OBVIOUS (for people who are clueless like this guy) that you will have to pay. Saving only $5 off a used game already tells me that this person doesn't really know how to shop anyway. If I am getting it used, it better be at least $10 less.

 

[Ares]

I agree that this guy should have been more aware, but this is what the CEO of GameStop has said

DLC will soon become a regular add-on upsell, and consumers will be able to purchase new and used games with the downloadable content added in-store.

I think this is the statement that may cause some issues here, but of course we will have to wait and see.

 

[ragged]

This guy is just trying to pull a fast one.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Cool, I guess this means I can start suing everyone I've bought a used BD from because the digital copy had expired.

 

[Zaluss]

Cool, I guess this means I can start suing everyone I've bought a used BD from because the digital copy had expired.

The guy has a valid point despite it being obvious that the code would be used. Its like its obvious the coffee is hot but not stating such as legal obligations and hence the McDonalds lawsuits over hot coffee.

Not everyone is keenly aware, specifically older adults who purchase video games for their children, of missing content and would be furious over such if the game was misrepresented.

When you buy a used game and read the cover there is no such addendum stating that DLC may not be available on used titles. from the manufacture nor GameStop. GameStop sells these games used under the assumption these are infact the EXACT same included contents that was originally included with the game unless immediately noted by GameStop or its staff that represents the company such as missing covers, manuals, etc all of which are noted when purchasing a game except for DLC.

 

[Jack Hammer]

The guy has a valid point despite it being obvious that the code would be used. Its like its obvious the coffee is hot but not stating such as legal obligations and hence the McDonalds lawsuits over hot coffee.

Not everyone is keenly aware, specifically older adults who purchase video games for their children, of missing content and would be furious over such if the game was misrepresented.

When you buy a used game and read the cover there is no such addendum stating that DLC may not be available on used titles. from the manufacture nor GameStop. GameStop sells these games used under the assumption these are infact the EXACT same included contents that was originally included with the game unless immediately noted by GameStop or its staff that represents the company such as missing covers, manuals, etc all of which are noted when purchasing a game except for DLC.

I agree fully he has a valid point, just not valid enough to warrant punitive damages and a percentage of the sales of all used games.

 

[Ares]

This guy is going to get payed but it won't be to the tune of 5 million and a percentage of used game sales that's for sure. If I was judging the case I would give him $100 gift card to GameStop and that's it.

 

[Nemo128]

Just give the guy his money back and add stickers to the games before shelving that states "DLC not included in used game purchases." Simple solution.

 

[Shock]

Cool, I guess this means I can start suing everyone I've bought a used BD from because the digital copy had expired.

I tend to see how far I can throw my digital copy disks when I find one in the blu-ray package. I honestly didn't think anyone actually used them.

Anywho, DLC is the biggest joke in the gaming industry. The person who thought about charging gamers for an incomplete game then tacking on all this content, that should have been included in the first place, should be castrated.

50 bucks isn't enough for a game anymore I guess. I played WoW for years, paying 15 bucks every month. Some people would see this as the same, except with WoW you got new content all the time, and if not new content, constant changes to the game to make it more enjoyable and balanced. You actually felt like you were getting your money's worth.

Companies want to charge people for new maps for FPS'. How about you create a map editor and charge for that? Then you add unlimited replay value to your game and your customers don't feel like they just got bent over. No one wants to play on old maps when new ones come out. I mean I just played the same maps over and over because the selection is terrible. There is a reason CS is still the most played online FPS and the franchise is over a decade old.