Game Retailers' Return Policies Criticized

Thanks to GamersWithJobs for their opinion piece discussing the allegedly harsh return policies for videogame retailers. According to the author, "There is no reasonable reason... why a [non-defective, but unwanted] product in such condition should not be returnable, and any retailer who refuses such should not be burdened with customers or money." However, as a forum reply points out: "...if the policy on returns is too liberal, game stores will turn into free game rental outlets for people who don't want to pay for software." Have retailers been changing policies, and where does the balance lie on this subject?

Comments

Well..

[Firehawke]

Every store I've been to in the past.. oh.. five or six years has had a exchange-only-on-open-box policy, except on games like Everquest or Planetside where the box pretty much says no resale-- those games I can't return if the box has been opened since they can't rewrap the box and resell it.

I'm guessing that's pretty much the standard everywhere in the USA at the very least. It can be frustrating when you buy a complete dud...

Re:If the game's open...

[Vaevictis666]

Some stores will de-shrinkwrap the exchanged product so that you can't do that. The bastards.

Re:Reminded me of when I was a kid...

[MrResistor]

You have to consider the other side of it though.

I have a friend who is a Mac guy. Several years ago he wanted to go to a big LAN party, but at the time pretty much every game anybody was playing wasn't available for MAC. His solution? He went to Fry's on Friday and put a nice gaming system on his credit card, loaded it up with pirated games he got from his brother, went to the LAN party, and on Monday took it back for a full refund.

People really do that kind of stuff.

I know plenty of people who would happily buy a PC game, install it, run the no-cd crack, and take it back for a refund. In that context, it doesn't seem that unreasonable to me that many stores won't take back software in an opened box. It sucks for those of us that are honest, but unfortunately that's the world we live in.

Re:Not so simple...

[xoff00]

Its reasons like these that make me glad of GameFly for my Xbox, and the fact I seem to play more of those games than PC games, now-a-days...

Re:UCC = Uniform Commercial Code?

[Sparr0]

I am going to try to be concise. It will appear that I am leaving many things out, because I am. The UCC is long, like all laws. Feel free to add to this if theres anything you think contradicts it. Please note that I am breaking many heirarchies, do NOT assume that (1) and then (b) means its 1b, it could be 7b, or from a different section. I will keep actually adjacent sections together and nonadjacent seperated by a blank line. The bold italic part near the end is the most important part, so you can skip to it if you just want the answer to your search.

(1) Rejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender. It is ineffective unless the buyer seasonably notifies the seller .

(c) the buyer has no further obligations with regard to goods rightfully rejected.

(1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer
(a) after a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods signifies to the seller that the goods are conforming or that he will take or retain them in spite of their non-conformity; or
(b) fails to make an effective rejection (subsection (1) of Section 2-602 ), but such acceptance does not occur until the buyer has had a reasonable opportunity to inspect them;

(1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose non-conformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has accepted it
(b) without discovery of such non-conformity if his acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances.

(1) Where the seller fails to make delivery or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance then with respect to any goods involved, and with respect to the whole if the breach goes to the whole contract (Section 2-612 ), the buyer may cancel and whether or not he has done so may in addition to recovering so much of the price as has been paid
(a) "cover" and have damages under the next section as to all the goods affected whether or not they have been identified to the contract

(1) After a breach within the preceding section the buyer may "cover" by making in good faith and without unreasonable delay any reasonable purchase of or contract to purchase goods in substitution for those due from the seller .
(2) The buyer may recover from the seller as damages the difference between the cost of cover and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages as hereinafter defined (Section 2-715 ), but less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach.

I would like to reiterate some of the bold parts, paraphrased. If you dont like it, you can reject it. If you dont reject it but it doesnt conform to your expectations, you can revoke your acceptance. If you do either of those then not only are you entitled to recover whatever of the price you have paid, but you also have the nifty option of buying a replacement and having the original seller reimburse you for the difference in cost. That last part applies less so to games than to office software, but a perfect example would be Tax software. You need it and you need it TODAY, so if the software you get doesnt meet the expectations set forth then you have the option of getting a replacement elsewhere at the seller's expense.

PS: 90% of slashdot readers qualify as a Merchant Buyer with regards to purchasing software, which adds a few more really juicy options that take a lot more reading to get into. I leave that as an excercise for the reader.

Problem causing issues

[neostorm]

The real issue at the core of this matter (for me) is that gamers can not get their hands on a game conveniently enough to find out if it's a worthy purchase or not. I live in Downtown San Jose California, a very technically oriented and gamer friendly environment. However it is so nearly *impossible* for me to conveniently get my hands on a game before buying that I have nearly axed my game purchasing all together.

I used to have the wonderful habit of running to Software Etc to check out a new game. Their return policy of "return within 7 days opened or not" was perfect for checking out a new title I wasn't sure about. The only requirement was that you had to keep the game in mint condition. More often than not (due to the large amount of crap games of late), I would return the title to the store, no questions asked, and no money lost. Once in a while i would find a true gem, and I would keep my purchase (or if I found the employees of a particular store to be outright rude, return it and go buy it at the local EB instead).
Regardless, those days recently ended. Software Etc. ceased allowing gamers to return their purchases citing a lawsuit from someone unpleased about being sold an opened game (which information is nearly never made available to the buyer, but most likely because of the "mint condition returns" policy in the first place). From what I understand, EB has ceased to allow open returns as well.

For a gamer on a shoestring budget, this was indeed the beginning of dark times.

For my PC games I turned to downloaded demos. As many have said before me this is hardly ever a reflection of the final product, and is unreliable at best, but still convenient considering I can sit at my desk and pull the game offline right there. However, not all games receive a demo. For those select few I am out of luck, many of which I would die to try out as well, so it breaks my heart to see them pass me buy with no way of getting my hands on them.

For my console fix I turned to rentals; a highly overpriced way of sampling entertainment. Thought it could be said that I am allowed to complete the rented title and rid myself of it with no strings attached, I like to collect games that I find worth keeping, so this route isn't for everyone. Namely people who want to own the titles and play them more than once.
But, despite the insane pricetag my local Blockbuster charges, at least I have access to the console games I desire before I lay down a larger chunk of change to own one or two. But this is not always the case. A staggeringly 9 times out of 10 the video store doesn't get the title in at all! This causes me no end of frustration, especially being someone who enjoys more obscure, less popular titles.
So there goes that solution.

Recently Gamefly.com was brought to my attention, the description of which immediately brought me great hope! However the same problems with Blockbuster plague this new service on a larger level. Call me cheap, but I am not about to lay down $20 a month to rent games, despite being able to have 2 at a time, as well as keep them as long as I want. This is mainly a time issue, since I work full time and attend night classes on the side. The entertainment-to-money ratio is simply not worth either my time or money. I can't play 2 games at once, and I'm lucky if I get halfway through one per month at all. Recently it's been even less (roughly 5 or less hours of gaming a week). Despite this, I was still considering it due to their sweet deal allowing me to keep a rented game by simply paying it's used price. Digging more into this I uncovered another shock that ended my interest in this service. I looked up a recently favorite, semi-obscure title that can be currently picked up at the store for about $10 used. $30. No-Thank-You. I checked another $12 title. $35. That ruled out that option.

Now, one of my final answers, which is probably most peoples first solution: Online Reviews. I don't know how others fare in this regard

From the retail perspective

[kallisti777]

Given the trend of this discussion, I should know better than to post an unpopular viewpoint, but both sides deserve a fair hearing. Flame or mod as ye will.

I currently work for a well-known American computer retailer with a "draconian" return policy. Previously, I worked for several years as a manager of a similar store with a more liberal return policy. While I empathize with Elysium's viewpoint, my own experience tells me that such policies are necessary for a retailer to survive. A few points:

First, there are significant restrictions placed on retail stores by software manufacturers regarding their products. Many vendors will not allow opened boxes to be returned to them unless the product is defective, and a few will not accept returns at all. Some even mandate that the media and manuals be destroyed on return. Since it is illegal to repackage used or opened merchandise and sell it as new (and customer demand for opened boxes without big markdowns is extremely low), the retailers that I have worked for generally treat software returns the same way they do theft: adjust the item out of inventory and throw the box in the bailer.

Second, software piracy IS a huge problem. The article that began this discussion called this position "disengenous" and said that anyone who believed that these policies were designed to combat piracy was "more than naive". I beg to differ. A question for everyone in IT reading this: how long would it take you to get a free copy of Windows if you needed it?

I have overhead or had customers declare outright that they were going to burn and return software. I have seen staff members terminated for bootlegging software on store computers. I have seen every return scam you can imagine, and it is no way naive or disingenuous to suggest that these return policies are a measure against piracy.

(As an aside, the most popular return scam in my area is this. Buy a CD, burn it and/or copy down the key code, then scratch the disc. Return it to the store as defective, exchanging it for the same title in a sealed box. Return this one to another location for store credit. Lather, rinse, repeat. I see this daily).

Third, there are the bottom line considerations. The author of the original article stated that he did not care what the reasons were for these policies and that he intended to vote with his wallet in protest. Aside from the word of mouth Slashdot might generate, let's see how much that "vote" is worth.

Let's say Elysium finds a store worthy of his business - which is to say, a store that will take back any and all opened box software for exchange or refund. Being a hardcore gamer, let's say he spends $100 every week on software, generating five grand annually in total sales and (optimistically) $1000 profit. Let's also assume that a "burn and return" pirate also shops in this store. Pop quiz: how many zeroed-out copies of AutoCAD will it take to neutralize Elysium's vote? How many "unfit for sale" copies of Office and Photoshop will it take to completely disenfranchise him?

In closing, it is unfortunate that some retail salespeople treat honest, decent customers like criminals for trying to return software. At my store, we go to great lengths to explain the policy (and the reasons for it) to customers before they buy software and to offer options in case of problems (vendor tech support or money back guarantees, installation help from our tech department, and so on). There are federal laws demanding equal treatment of every customer, so our rules are rarely bent - lost business, while unfortunate, is better than termination and litigation.

I stand behind my employer on this issue... if you don't like it, then you can complain about me and the evil company I work for, or, more productively, you can support open source software, change the industry for the better, and make retail store policy a non-issue in your life.

Re:Reminded me of when I was a kid...

[Derkec]

The service you are thinking of is GameFly .