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

Reminded me of when I was a kid...

[heldlikesound]

I was about 13 years old, and bought Zelda: 4 Seasons (or something like that) for my Game Boy, I beat it in like 2 days and wondered why I had spent all that money.

So, I got my mom to take me back to K-Mart, presented my receipt and the game, in it's packaging, but obviously opened. They asked my reason for returning it and I simply told them I was unsatisfied with my purchase, they gave me my money back and that was that. I remember feeling quite good about myself on the ride home.

How things have changed...

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

[Slowping]

back to K-Mart, presented my receipt and the game, in it's packaging, but obviously opened. They asked my reason for returning it and I simply told them I was unsatisfied with my purchase, they gave me my money back and that was that

I think you (and K-Mart) had it right on. I think that a reasonable window for full refund is perfectly fine. After a window for returns, say seven days, then it can slip back into something like exchanges only.

I think that the few times where customers will take advantage of the return policy in bad faith (playing it for 6 days and then returning it) will only be a small burden compared to the extra customers and sales you will gain because they feel more comfortable purchasing with confidence.

I know that there are many times I've held onto my money simply because I wasn't sure if I'd still like the game after two days, and the return policy sucked. And there are plenty of times where I purchased a game on a hunch, and the game turned out to be quite fun and worth the money. I'm sure I'm not alone, and I'm sure many more games would get sold with a better return policy.

It all comes back to treating customers right... Many games stores need to learn from the RIAA's mistakes. ... but I'm starting to digress now so I'll stop.

The GameStop policy on used games works!

[cjmnews]

If you pick up a used game, try it and hate it, return it within 7 days for a full refund. Of course if it is defective the same rule applies.

They do this with the console games at least. I'd buy a lot less games if this wasn't the policy.

For NEW games they'll buy it from you at a used price, which is ok (75-25% depending on the age of the game, and number of used copies), but it would be better if they would have the same policy of the used games for the new.

Easy solution

[splattertrousers]

Game boxes should come with two CDs: the first is the full version of the game, and the second is a demo which is an exact copy of the full version except that only the first couple levels are available, or it only lets you play for 2 hours or whatever. (As opposed to a demo version that comes out months before the full version and therefore has bugs.)

If you open the real CD, you can't return the game. If you only open the demo, you can return the game. That way, if it doesn't work on your computer for some reason and you don't feel like waiting for the patches, you can return it.

Game stores could stop people from buying and returning games just to play the demos by providing extra demo CDs, or by giving store credit instead of cash in exchange for a returned game.

Of course, the problem is that it's up to the game publishers to implement this and who knows if they'd be up for it.

Not so simple...

[NetDanzr]

I wish it was so simple. However, recently I noticed an increase in games that don't work, even though the demos work fine. In most cases, this is being caused by the excessive copy protection included in the game. Here's my two most recent examples:

Temple of Elemental Evil (Troika Studios/Infogrames). Infogrames is notorios for its copy protection (using SecuROM), which prevented plenty of players to enjoy games like Neverwinter Nights. ToEE doesn't fare much better; if I didn't have two computers, I wouldn't be able to play it as the CD doesn't like my CD-RW drive.

Homeworld 2 (Sierra). Upon contacting Sierra tech support, I was told that it was my responsibility to get a compatible CD drive. All the hardware requirements on the box mention is a 16x CD-ROM, and not even the readme file mentions any other CD-ROM requirements. So how am I supposed to know whether my CD-ROM is compatible without opening the box and trying to install the game?

I have pretty much stopped buying new games, limiting myself to independent titles downloadable from the Internet and the occassional adventure from The Adventure Comnpany. As such, I can talk only about these two recent examples. However, there are many more instances when a game doesn't run at the stated hardware requirements. That is something one can find out only by opening the box and installing the game. In such a case, your solution would simply lock gamers into an endless cycle where they are unable to return a game that doesn't work.