Slashdot Mirror
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?
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...
Cloud City Digital: DVD Production at its cheapest/finest
Title of the next article: Game Players Piracy Policy Criticized
I don't think that retailers are very interested in being taken advantage of. If we stop pirating games, I am sure they will be quite willing to liberalize their return policy.
Not always possible. Many games don't have a demo at all, and those that do don't always have accurate demos. It took Epic two or more months to release an updated demo of UT2K3 that accurately represented the final product instead of being the pre-release open beta.
Then you've got console games, where demos are only obtained through magazines and are often inaccurate as well because they're 6-month-old betas in many cases.
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.
You can lose something that is loose, so tighten the loose item so you don't lose it.
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.
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.
See, I used to go to the mall twice a week to "buy" new underwear. I originally bought a three-pack of cotton briefs. Well, I took them home and wore them and even left some small stains. I wasn't happy with the product so naturally I returned it. I did this again and again. The store had a liberal return policy and I got away with it for a while. Then one day they changed their policy. This made me furious. I am obviously entitled to return any product no matter the basis for my "disatisfaction" and even if I used it, right? Well, they changed their policy anyway. I didn't buy any new underwear for a while out of protest, even using underwear my friend had purchased and was no longer using. Soon, however, I realized that I actually liked having own new underwear and that I myself was to blame for the change in policy.
The lesson I learned was about misdirected hostility. It wasn't the stores fault they had to change their policy, it was mine for crapping in their product and demanding my money back. Maybe we should be mad at the people who abused the generous policy instead of the stores who are just trying to run a business. This would entail looking around and in the mirror though, which is much less pleasent than shouting bad words at the sky cursing "them."