Perception makes reality, especially when it comes to transactions. There is nothing irrational about saying that an once-opened box should no longer be sold as "new". If you can't use any other argument than that you disagree with the opened box standard, then your argument falls short about it being wrong on some ill-defined principle of open vs. unopened boxes.
This is still an unethical business practice that should have been openly acknowledged.
My point is that it isn't a standard. It never has been. Some people think it is, because of various "open-box" practices and policies that affect situations completely different than what happened here. But reason and reality aren't on the same side as these people.
You're still totally wrong, but at least you're actually debating the topic. "New" for optical media has always meant "factory sealed."
See, this. It's not true. Never was. I think you confused store return policies (i.e., you can't return it once you break the seal) into something beyond what actually makes sense.
You keep bringing up this legal vs. ethical distinction... and yet you've already admitted that your point is one concerning a semantic technicality rather than any material harm to anyone. Like I said before, if you can't explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way, then you have neither the legal nor the ethical high-ground here.
It isn't a generally accepted practice. As we've discussed already, GameStop as well as pretty much all major retailers of all kinds of products will put boxes that have been opened onto a shelf and call them new, and we've all known this and seen it before. As long as they are doing this according to some official practice that doesn't involve re-selling used items or otherwise meaningfully devalued items, then they aren't doing anything wrong ethically or legally.
I'm pretty sure the issue of GameStop opening the box is only being raised as a kind of sophomoric "gotcha." In practicality it doesn't seem to have any meaningful signficance to the actual issue.
Yar on
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Are there any numbers on exactly how many $50 gift cards have been claimed?
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
You keep bringing up this legal vs. ethical distinction... and yet you've already admitted that your point is one concerning a semantic technicality rather than any material harm to anyone. Like I said before, if you can't explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way, then you have neither the legal nor the ethical high-ground here.
It isn't a generally accepted practice. As we've discussed already, GameStop as well as pretty much all major retailers of all kinds of products will put boxes that have been opened onto a shelf and call them new, and we've all known this and seen it before. As long as they are doing this according to some official practice that doesn't involve re-selling used items or otherwise meaningfully devalued items, then they aren't doing anything wrong ethically or legally.
I'm pretty sure the issue of GameStop opening the box is only being raised as a kind of sophomoric "gotcha." In practicality it doesn't seem to have any meaningful signficance to the actual issue.
It harms the consumers who would have received an additional copy of the game had these coupons not been removed, no?
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
No, it does not harm the consumer that a coupon that was not supposed to be in the box was not actually in the box.
I facepalm at every person who thinks a game isn't new because the box has been opened. You are buying a game to play. If the disc itself hasn't been inserted into an optical drive and played, that game is new. Period.
Arguing otherwiese semantic goosery of an extremely high level.
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
I facepalm at every person who thinks a game isn't new because the box has been opened. You are buying a game to play. If the disc itself hasn't been inserted into an optical drive and played, that game is new. Period.
Arguing otherwiese semantic goosery of an extremely high level.
If a box has been opened, I don't really have any way to know that the game is virginal. Other than gamestop's assurances, which I don't really put much stock in.
Having a standard corporate practice of opening and taking apart some/all of your games just opens the door for employee shenanigans, for one.
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
It harms the consumers who would have received an additional copy of the game had these coupons not been removed, no?
That is more accurately to the point. Did they do something wrong by removing the coupon? That's a relevant question, one that deserves a better treatment than just talking about whether or not GameStop was in the wrong the instant they broke the cellophane.
If it's a coupon that should not have been there, one that (perhaps, according to conjecture) Square Enix was contractually not allowed to put in there, and wasn't advertised as being in the box or part of the product, then I don't know if they were really harming anyone.
If a box has been opened, I don't really have any way to know that the game is virginal. Other than gamestop's assurances, which I don't really put much stock in.
That's not the point. If GameStop reasonably knows that a game is still new, then they can sell it as such. That is plain and simple reason. If they sell a game to someone and it is returned opened, then they can't reasonably know anymore. If they open a box and put an item on display for browsers to demo, then they can't reasonably know. If it shows damage in shipping, they can't reasonably know. If they just open the box to remove a slip of paper that shouldn't be there, or to safeguard the game disc from shoplifting, they still can reasonably assure that the game is a new product that has not been used or devalued.
If you don't trust them, then that is a different matter, and you shouldn't shop there regardless.
Yar on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I think that is the solution to this whole debacle. Gamestop is not the only game in the proverbial town and if they're doing something you find shady, don't give them your money.
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
edited September 2011
Indeed. I shop at Gamestop only when I can't find a better deal online, I have a giftcard, or the game is so cheap I don't need to muck about with any additional savings.
It's definitely a bit shady to not tell the customers, but a $50 giftcard is pretty damn good reparations for a "missing" coupon on a $60 game.
But my point is that a discussion of ethics is pointless because an agreement on GS being unethical here does jack-shit. If I say that GS was totally being ethical then you'd have no argument against it except one that operates under a different ethical system than me. You say they violated GAP, I respond with "so what?"
Who died and made you king of what should and should not be discussed? I don't know what forum you've been reading but 99% of the threads made here don't achieve anything beyond discussion.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Also, it would seem the media shitstorm (see: people discussing this) is at least partially responsible for the compensation GS offered its customers.
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
Hey guess what I bought a game at GS and it was still sealed! I know because Microsoft puts stickers on their games that if broken would be noticeable!
I facepalm at every person who thinks a game isn't new because the box has been opened. You are buying a game to play. If the disc itself hasn't been inserted into an optical drive and played, that game is new. Period.
Arguing otherwiese semantic goosery of an extremely high level.
If a box has been opened, I don't really have any way to know that the game is virginal. Other than gamestop's assurances, which I don't really put much stock in.
Having a standard corporate practice of opening and taking apart some/all of your games just opens the door for employee shenanigans, for one.
I agree. You don't know. But I honestly wasn't even arguing that point. I was speaking directly to the people who think that game boxes are somehow sacred and that having someone else open them somehow tarnishes their gaming experience and/or makes the game "not new".
Here's an anecdote, though: While I know Gamestop has done some really stupid things (and most likely will continue doing so), I have never personally had a problem with them. I've been to multiple stores in my life and the staff have always been nice and helpful when I've asked (which was admittedly rare...I'm a get in, get what I need and leave type of person). On top of that, I've never had an issue with a new game having been played by someone else after I paid full price for it. And if it really bothers you so much that someone may have played your game, ask to see the disc before you purchase it. It's your right as a consumer to check on things before you buy them.
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Opened product = not new, even by the stores standards. If they can make that discretion, so can I.
Unless there was some kind of agreement between Square/On Live and Gamestop, Gamestop was actively defrauding customers by removing an advertised product from the box.
Sheep on
0
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
I facepalm at every person who thinks a game isn't new because the box has been opened. You are buying a game to play. If the disc itself hasn't been inserted into an optical drive and played, that game is new. Period.
Arguing otherwiese semantic goosery of an extremely high level.
If a box has been opened, I don't really have any way to know that the game is virginal. Other than gamestop's assurances, which I don't really put much stock in.
Having a standard corporate practice of opening and taking apart some/all of your games just opens the door for employee shenanigans, for one.
I agree. You don't know. But I honestly wasn't even arguing that point. I was speaking directly to the people who think that game boxes are somehow sacred and that having someone else open them somehow tarnishes their gaming experience and/or makes the game "not new".
Here's an anecdote, though: While I know Gamestop has done some really stupid things (and most likely will continue doing so), I have never personally had a problem with them. I've been to multiple stores in my life and the staff have always been nice and helpful when I've asked (which was admittedly rare...I'm a get in, get what I need and leave type of person). On top of that, I've never had an issue with a new game having been played by someone else after I paid full price for it. And if it really bothers you so much that someone may have played your game, ask to see the disc before you purchase it. It's your right as a consumer to check on things before you buy them.
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
But why would a knowledgeable consumer, aware that Gamestop employee's have often been allowed to "rent" games by opening them, playing them, and then selling them as new, give them the benefit of the doubt?
Why would I want to take the chance that the dipshit clerk who tried to push Lair on me when he thought I didn't know any better while browsing hasn't already taken and redeemed any download code that may be in this open box?
I'm not willing to do either, so purchasing an opened PC game from them would be absolutely out of the question, regardless of any assurances that it was only opened to remove a coupon that they may find offensive, but I would actually like to use in order to give OnLive a try and see whether it might be worthwhile for gaming on a work laptop while on business trips.
I can't possibly know if the game is in fact new once the seal has been broken, and Gamestop has done more than enough in the past to show they aren't worthy of the benefit of the doubt. To be fair, I wouldn't give Best Buy the benefit of the doubt either. I probably would with Amazon, but only because their customer service is so great that I'd actually be confident that if a problem were to arise it would be solved satisfactorily.
If that level of trust doesn't exist for you, then you shouldn't buy things from gamestop. It's not as though it's particularly difficult to re-shrinkwrap a box anyway.
That doesn't mean that by "breaking the seal" and then selling the game as new that the store has done something unethical.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Like I said before, if you can't explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way, then you have neither the legal nor the ethical high-ground here.
No. If you can explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way then you have a legal right to sue
If you cannot explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms in in any way then you still have an ethical claim that the practice is shady so long as it creates potential for harm OR goes against generally accepted practices.
Do you not understand the difference between legal and ethical Yar?
I mean, just substitute "played the game" for what you just said. If you can't demonstrably show that someone playing the game causes you harm then you have no legal or ethical high ground? [There are many many titles where actually playing the game will do no harm to the consumer, but that doesn't mean that you can play the game and sell it as new ethically]
You're still totally wrong, but at least you're actually debating the topic. "New" for optical media has always meant "factory sealed."
See, this. It's not true. Never was. I think you confused store return policies (i.e., you can't return it once you break the seal) into something beyond what actually makes sense.
You keep bringing up this legal vs. ethical distinction... and yet you've already admitted that your point is one concerning a semantic technicality rather than any material harm to anyone. Like I said before, if you can't explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way, then you have neither the legal nor the ethical high-ground here.
Nope. What I actually said was far more conceited than that.
What I said was: I am not even remotely interested in attempting to quantify the amount of material harm infringed on me by selling me an open box product as "new" or any of the other shenanigans Gamestop engages in. I further said that even if the only harm I could prove was a semantic technicality, I would still be correct. That doesn't mean I have admitted that my point solely concerns a semantic technicality, it just means I don't give a shit about this quantifying crap people are trying to pull here and my argument is fully justified even if I am just acting out of pedantic and idiosyncratic self-interest.
And it is a generally accepted practice and no, other retailers in the same or similar industry do not put open box products on their shelves and sell them as "new." Please indicate even one retailer in the games or media sector that does that on a regular basis.
Asking someone to quantify the amount of harm infringed upon them in a situation like this is the first step toward trivialization. This is why I refuse to engage anyone on this point. It is totally irrelevant. The amount of harm, if I even could quantify it, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that "new = factory sealed" is an accepted industry term in the sector Gamestop operates in, and Gamestop uniquely chooses to buck that trend to their own ends. That is the only relevant issue here.
If you want to squabble over whether or not "new = factory sealed," by all means do so. But asking people to quantify the amount of harm inflicted on them by being sold an open box item as new either shows a total lack of comprehension of ethics or is a disingenuous attempt to trivialize the entire subject. Either way, I am not interested. An action or policy is not suddenly ethical because, "hey man, it didn't really hurt you that much, right?"
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Yeah, you can. Check the disc. OH MAN IT'S SO HARD.
But why would a knowledgeable consumer, aware that Gamestop employee's have often been allowed to "rent" games by opening them, playing them, and then selling them as new, give them the benefit of the doubt?
Why would I want to take the chance that the dipshit clerk who tried to push Lair on me when he thought I didn't know any better while browsing hasn't already taken and redeemed any download code that may be in this open box?
I'm not willing to do either, so purchasing an opened PC game from them would be absolutely out of the question, regardless of any assurances that it was only opened to remove a coupon that they may find offensive, but I would actually like to use in order to give OnLive a try and see whether it might be worthwhile for gaming on a work laptop while on business trips.
I can't possibly know if the game is in fact new once the seal has been broken, and Gamestop has done more than enough in the past to show they aren't worthy of the benefit of the doubt. To be fair, I wouldn't give Best Buy the benefit of the doubt either. I probably would with Amazon, but only because their customer service is so great that I'd actually be confident that if a problem were to arise it would be solved satisfactorily.
I give them the benefit of the doubt because I check discs before I buy them and because I've never had any issues with my games being unplayable when I bought them new (or used, for that matter).
You guys are acting like knowing if a disc is going to play or not involves some kind of ritual that involves unicorn dust and chants. "OH DEAR, HOW WILL I EVER KNOW IF MY DISC IS SCRATCHED, ETC". Just look at the disc before you buy it, chief. You're making this whole process a lot harder than it actually is for the sake of complaining about something that, surprise, you don't even have to put up with if you just shop elsewhere. If it really bothers you that much, don't give Gamestop your money.
The goosery up in here is astounding.
ChillyWilly on
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
Asking someone to quantify the amount of harm infringed upon them in a situation like this is the first step toward trivialization. This is why I refuse to engage anyone on this point. It is totally irrelevant. The amount of harm, if I even could quantify it, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that "new = factory sealed" is an accepted industry term in the sector Gamestop operates in, and Gamestop uniquely chooses to buck that trend to their own ends. That is the only relevant issue here.
If you want to squabble over whether or not "new = factory sealed," by all means do so. But asking people to quantify the amount of harm inflicted on them by being sold an open box item as new either shows a total lack of comprehension of ethics or is a disingenuous attempt to trivialize the entire subject. Either way, I am not interested. An action or policy is not suddenly ethical because, "hey man, it didn't really hurt you that much, right?"
Lime.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
If that level of trust doesn't exist for you, then you shouldn't buy things from gamestop. It's not as though it's particularly difficult to re-shrinkwrap a box anyway.
That doesn't mean that by "breaking the seal" and then selling the game as new that the store has done something unethical.
Back to this again, eh? Why, if Gamestop didn't do anything unethical or something contrary to GAP, did they offer $50 Gift Cards? Are they just being nice?
No. Their consumer base reacted to this issue in a way that threatened future profits. Granted, GS is not going to change their policy, but this is at least acknowledgment that they were in the wrong.
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Yeah, you can. Check the disc. OH MAN IT'S SO HARD.
So I took your advice and checked my disc, but it was broken / scratched / when I installed it the CD-key was already used. So I took it back to Gamestop but they won't take it because I opened their seal to check my disc. What do I do now?
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Yeah, you can. Check the disc. OH MAN IT'S SO HARD.
So I took your advice and checked my disc, but it was broken / scratched / when I installed it the CD-key was already used. So I took it back to Gamestop but they won't take it because I opened their seal to check my disc. What do I do now?
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Yeah, you can. Check the disc. OH MAN IT'S SO HARD.
So I took your advice and checked my disc, but it was broken / scratched / when I installed it the CD-key was already used. So I took it back to Gamestop but they won't take it because I opened their seal to check my disc. What do I do now?
So you checked the disc at the store, saw that it was scratched/broken, then STILL decided to take it home and try to play it?
What the fuck kind of scenario is this? No one would do that. And if they did, then they deserve whatever they get.
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
Why is it that the consumer has to be the one to check, and enforce, the quality of goods purchased from a vendor? It's the vendor's priority to make sure they're selling a fully working, quality, product. That's partly what the seal is for.
I don't understand the Schadenfreude in believing that someone who buys a product that's supposed to be "new" deserves it when it turns out that the product isn't new at all.
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Back to this again, eh? Why, if Gamestop didn't do anything unethical or something contrary to GAP, did they offer $50 Gift Cards? Are they just being nice?
Firstly, no one cares about "GAP", except for the people that are misacronizing* "GAAP". It's silly that a something that really isn't even a "thing" has been invoked so many times in this thread.
Lastly, I suspect they offered the giftcards because the cost of this PR move is pretty much nil. Nobody buys PC games at Gamestop. Gamestop barely sells PC games.
* not a real word
Deebaser on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
edited September 2011
The actual monetary cost is irrelevant. The PR damage they would sustain without offering some compensation however, validates the consumer complaints.
You seem to be following the logic that it's not unethical if no harm is done, which simply isn't true. I'm not one of the harmed, because I a) don't shop Gamestop and b) didn't buy this game. But I'll ask again: if no harm was done, why did GS offer compensation?
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
That's what I was getting at. When the factory seals are in place, you know that the game has not been played, online codes have not been used etc. If a company adopts a policy of having their employees gut game boxes, all of that is out the window. Sure, the cases where there is a problem are probably a small minority. But, I don't want to have to deal with that. And since there are a number of other retailers that do not gut game boxes, it's fair to say that gamestop is outside of the game-selling mainstream on this issue.
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
You seem to be following the logic that it's not unethical if no harm is done, which simply isn't true. I'm not one of the harmed, because I a) don't shop Gamestop and b) didn't buy this game. But I'll ask again: if no harm was done, why did GS offer compensation?
No I'm going with there was no harm done, so this is largely false outrage. It's not ethical to lie to a customer about a coupon being removed, but apparently this coupon wasn't supposed to be in the box to begin with so none of the small number of people that purchased the PC version of DX at Gamestop were harmed.
The reason Gamestop is offering the compensation is to offset the bad PR at little actual cost. It has fuckall to do with "GAP".
As we're talking about PC games here, let's be specific.
The newness of a PC product is based on whether or not the CD Key has been previously used. That is why the packages are sealed. Opening a package for a PC game voids this guarantee and thus, the product cannot be sold as "New" in an ethical fashion. You will remember this logic as the exact same one stores use to refuse returns on opened PC software.
How scratched the disk is after it's opened is a different ballgame. Now you're haggling over the incidental damage of used goods. Inspect the goods and take it or leave it, but don't think the product is new just because you're happy with condition of the used goods. That's nonsense.
Why is it that the consumer has to be the one to check, and enforce, the quality of goods purchased from a vendor? It's the vendor's priority to make sure they're selling a fully working, quality, product. That's partly what the seal is for.
I don't understand the Schadenfreude in believing that someone who buys a product that's supposed to be "new" deserves it when it turns out that the product isn't new at all.
I agree. And if Gamestop is selling you a "new" product that isn't actually new (as in, has been put into a PC/console and been played one or more times and/or has damaged the disc in any way when removing it from it's original casing), then you should be angry with them.
This is not the same as being angry with them for opening a case. Being upset about that is what I am calling silly.
And from your second sentence, it's apparent that you aren't actually reading what I'm typing, anyway. Try again. I said that people deserve what they get when they see that a disc is scratched and take it home anyway.
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
The fact that a consumer is demanded to practice lower quality standards than the venue itself is pretty hilarious. A product being opened has compromised any assumption that it is new. There's no reason to give GameStop, or any company, the benefit of the doubt. It is up to them, and not the consumer, to uphold quality.
Considering that any opened GameStop product outside of the initial copy gutted for display purposes was probably "rented" out by an employee and played, that reinforces the suspicion that opened products are not new.
If you agree that GS selling something that isn't new as "new", then why do you object to the notion of GS keeping in line with a policy that is almost a guarantee that the product is new?
Sheep on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
No I'm going with there was no harm done, so this is largely false outrage. It's not ethical to lie to a customer about a coupon being removed, but apparently this coupon wasn't supposed to be in the box to begin with so none of the small number of people that purchased the PC version of DX at Gamestop were harmed.
The reason Gamestop is offering the compensation is to offset the bad PR at little actual cost. It has fuckall to do with "GAP".
I agree that GS gave coupons because it's the easiest, least costly solution to the outrage. You seem to be under the impression that the bad PR they got for this and the customer complaints are separate things. They're not. Whether you believe anyone was harmed, this outrage is stupid, or my train of logic, GS did compensate customers for deciding to remove those coupons. Again: why would GS do this if it was nothing?
Your answer, which is accurate, is damage control. Why would they need to do any damage control if none was done?
The fact that a consumer is demanded to practice lower quality standards than the venue itself is pretty hilarious. A product being opened has compromised any assumption that it is new. There's no reason to give GameStop, or any company, the benefit of the doubt. It is up to them, and not the consumer, to uphold quality.
Considering that any opened GameStop product outside of the initial copy gutted for display purposes was probably "rented" out by an employee and played, that reinforces the suspicion that opened products are not new.
If you agree that GS selling something that isn't new as "new", then why do you object to the notion of GS keeping in line with a policy that is almost a guarantee that the product is new?
Apparently, I haven't been clear enough.
Would it be best for all parties if Gamestop sold everything in factory wrapping? Yes. I completely agree. It would completely eliminate arguments like this. It would make a certain segment of the gaming population who are anal about that kind of thing stop whining. I would be all for it.
But do I personally care if they open up a game, put it in a sleeve without damaging it, NOT play it and still call it new? No, I don't. Because that game IS new. It has not been played. Games are not food. They don't have an expiration date. They do not suddenly start going bad if the seal is popped. To say otherwise is goosery.
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
If that level of trust doesn't exist for you, then you shouldn't buy things from gamestop. It's not as though it's particularly difficult to re-shrinkwrap a box anyway.
That doesn't mean that by "breaking the seal" and then selling the game as new that the store has done something unethical.
Back to this again, eh? Why, if Gamestop didn't do anything unethical or something contrary to GAP, did they offer $50 Gift Cards? Are they just being nice?
No. Their consumer base reacted to this issue in a way that threatened future profits. Granted, GS is not going to change their policy, but this is at least acknowledgment that they were in the wrong.
They offered the certificates because some customers reacted negatively and this is the fastest way to make them be quiet. That doesn't really bear on whether or not the action was unethical.
This idea that the amount of harm is unrelated to whether or not this action was ethical is ridiculous. Standards of ethics are not the same as the law, but they also aren't just vacuous "whatever I say they are" measures. I personally default to standards related to harm in my own ethical reasoning; that isn't the only standard out there, but if you want to use another one, actually articulate it.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
But do I personally care if they open up a game, put it in a sleeve without damaging it, NOT play it and still call it new? No, I don't. Because that game IS new.
But you can't ever guarantee that, hence why opened should not be considered "new". It is not "new" by GameStop's standards nor should it be considered so by anyone else.
Posts
My point is that it isn't a standard. It never has been. Some people think it is, because of various "open-box" practices and policies that affect situations completely different than what happened here. But reason and reality aren't on the same side as these people.
See, this. It's not true. Never was. I think you confused store return policies (i.e., you can't return it once you break the seal) into something beyond what actually makes sense.
You keep bringing up this legal vs. ethical distinction... and yet you've already admitted that your point is one concerning a semantic technicality rather than any material harm to anyone. Like I said before, if you can't explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way, then you have neither the legal nor the ethical high-ground here.
It isn't a generally accepted practice. As we've discussed already, GameStop as well as pretty much all major retailers of all kinds of products will put boxes that have been opened onto a shelf and call them new, and we've all known this and seen it before. As long as they are doing this according to some official practice that doesn't involve re-selling used items or otherwise meaningfully devalued items, then they aren't doing anything wrong ethically or legally.
I'm pretty sure the issue of GameStop opening the box is only being raised as a kind of sophomoric "gotcha." In practicality it doesn't seem to have any meaningful signficance to the actual issue.
It harms the consumers who would have received an additional copy of the game had these coupons not been removed, no?
Arguing otherwiese semantic goosery of an extremely high level.
Having a standard corporate practice of opening and taking apart some/all of your games just opens the door for employee shenanigans, for one.
Rigorous Scholarship
That is more accurately to the point. Did they do something wrong by removing the coupon? That's a relevant question, one that deserves a better treatment than just talking about whether or not GameStop was in the wrong the instant they broke the cellophane.
If it's a coupon that should not have been there, one that (perhaps, according to conjecture) Square Enix was contractually not allowed to put in there, and wasn't advertised as being in the box or part of the product, then I don't know if they were really harming anyone.
That's not the point. If GameStop reasonably knows that a game is still new, then they can sell it as such. That is plain and simple reason. If they sell a game to someone and it is returned opened, then they can't reasonably know anymore. If they open a box and put an item on display for browsers to demo, then they can't reasonably know. If it shows damage in shipping, they can't reasonably know. If they just open the box to remove a slip of paper that shouldn't be there, or to safeguard the game disc from shoplifting, they still can reasonably assure that the game is a new product that has not been used or devalued.
If you don't trust them, then that is a different matter, and you shouldn't shop there regardless.
It's definitely a bit shady to not tell the customers, but a $50 giftcard is pretty damn good reparations for a "missing" coupon on a $60 game.
Oh well hey if Gamestop super promises that's great.
Who died and made you king of what should and should not be discussed? I don't know what forum you've been reading but 99% of the threads made here don't achieve anything beyond discussion.
I agree. You don't know. But I honestly wasn't even arguing that point. I was speaking directly to the people who think that game boxes are somehow sacred and that having someone else open them somehow tarnishes their gaming experience and/or makes the game "not new".
Here's an anecdote, though: While I know Gamestop has done some really stupid things (and most likely will continue doing so), I have never personally had a problem with them. I've been to multiple stores in my life and the staff have always been nice and helpful when I've asked (which was admittedly rare...I'm a get in, get what I need and leave type of person). On top of that, I've never had an issue with a new game having been played by someone else after I paid full price for it. And if it really bothers you so much that someone may have played your game, ask to see the disc before you purchase it. It's your right as a consumer to check on things before you buy them.
But saying that a game isn't new because the seal has been broken, even though the game has never been played? Are you kidding me with that nonsense?
You really can't prove that nothing happened to the game after the seal was broken or that it wasn't damaged during the process of gutting the game. In fact that is the entire point of the seal in the first place to guarantee it's condition and Gamestop is taking that away.
Unless there was some kind of agreement between Square/On Live and Gamestop, Gamestop was actively defrauding customers by removing an advertised product from the box.
But why would a knowledgeable consumer, aware that Gamestop employee's have often been allowed to "rent" games by opening them, playing them, and then selling them as new, give them the benefit of the doubt?
Why would I want to take the chance that the dipshit clerk who tried to push Lair on me when he thought I didn't know any better while browsing hasn't already taken and redeemed any download code that may be in this open box?
I'm not willing to do either, so purchasing an opened PC game from them would be absolutely out of the question, regardless of any assurances that it was only opened to remove a coupon that they may find offensive, but I would actually like to use in order to give OnLive a try and see whether it might be worthwhile for gaming on a work laptop while on business trips.
I can't possibly know if the game is in fact new once the seal has been broken, and Gamestop has done more than enough in the past to show they aren't worthy of the benefit of the doubt. To be fair, I wouldn't give Best Buy the benefit of the doubt either. I probably would with Amazon, but only because their customer service is so great that I'd actually be confident that if a problem were to arise it would be solved satisfactorily.
That doesn't mean that by "breaking the seal" and then selling the game as new that the store has done something unethical.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
No. If you can explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms you in any way then you have a legal right to sue
If you cannot explain why opening a box and then resealing it actually harms in in any way then you still have an ethical claim that the practice is shady so long as it creates potential for harm OR goes against generally accepted practices.
Do you not understand the difference between legal and ethical Yar?
I mean, just substitute "played the game" for what you just said. If you can't demonstrably show that someone playing the game causes you harm then you have no legal or ethical high ground? [There are many many titles where actually playing the game will do no harm to the consumer, but that doesn't mean that you can play the game and sell it as new ethically]
Bull-fucking-shit.
Nope. What I actually said was far more conceited than that.
What I said was: I am not even remotely interested in attempting to quantify the amount of material harm infringed on me by selling me an open box product as "new" or any of the other shenanigans Gamestop engages in. I further said that even if the only harm I could prove was a semantic technicality, I would still be correct. That doesn't mean I have admitted that my point solely concerns a semantic technicality, it just means I don't give a shit about this quantifying crap people are trying to pull here and my argument is fully justified even if I am just acting out of pedantic and idiosyncratic self-interest.
And it is a generally accepted practice and no, other retailers in the same or similar industry do not put open box products on their shelves and sell them as "new." Please indicate even one retailer in the games or media sector that does that on a regular basis.
How ethically a company acts relates directly to how much I trust them as a company.
Asking someone to quantify the amount of harm infringed upon them in a situation like this is the first step toward trivialization. This is why I refuse to engage anyone on this point. It is totally irrelevant. The amount of harm, if I even could quantify it, is irrelevant. What is relevant is that "new = factory sealed" is an accepted industry term in the sector Gamestop operates in, and Gamestop uniquely chooses to buck that trend to their own ends. That is the only relevant issue here.
If you want to squabble over whether or not "new = factory sealed," by all means do so. But asking people to quantify the amount of harm inflicted on them by being sold an open box item as new either shows a total lack of comprehension of ethics or is a disingenuous attempt to trivialize the entire subject. Either way, I am not interested. An action or policy is not suddenly ethical because, "hey man, it didn't really hurt you that much, right?"
Yeah, you can. Check the disc. OH MAN IT'S SO HARD.
I give them the benefit of the doubt because I check discs before I buy them and because I've never had any issues with my games being unplayable when I bought them new (or used, for that matter).
You guys are acting like knowing if a disc is going to play or not involves some kind of ritual that involves unicorn dust and chants. "OH DEAR, HOW WILL I EVER KNOW IF MY DISC IS SCRATCHED, ETC". Just look at the disc before you buy it, chief. You're making this whole process a lot harder than it actually is for the sake of complaining about something that, surprise, you don't even have to put up with if you just shop elsewhere. If it really bothers you that much, don't give Gamestop your money.
The goosery up in here is astounding.
Lime.
Back to this again, eh? Why, if Gamestop didn't do anything unethical or something contrary to GAP, did they offer $50 Gift Cards? Are they just being nice?
No. Their consumer base reacted to this issue in a way that threatened future profits. Granted, GS is not going to change their policy, but this is at least acknowledgment that they were in the wrong.
So I took your advice and checked my disc, but it was broken / scratched / when I installed it the CD-key was already used. So I took it back to Gamestop but they won't take it because I opened their seal to check my disc. What do I do now?
Yell
a lot
So you checked the disc at the store, saw that it was scratched/broken, then STILL decided to take it home and try to play it?
What the fuck kind of scenario is this? No one would do that. And if they did, then they deserve whatever they get.
I don't understand the Schadenfreude in believing that someone who buys a product that's supposed to be "new" deserves it when it turns out that the product isn't new at all.
Firstly, no one cares about "GAP", except for the people that are misacronizing* "GAAP". It's silly that a something that really isn't even a "thing" has been invoked so many times in this thread.
Lastly, I suspect they offered the giftcards because the cost of this PR move is pretty much nil. Nobody buys PC games at Gamestop. Gamestop barely sells PC games.
You seem to be following the logic that it's not unethical if no harm is done, which simply isn't true. I'm not one of the harmed, because I a) don't shop Gamestop and b) didn't buy this game. But I'll ask again: if no harm was done, why did GS offer compensation?
Rigorous Scholarship
No I'm going with there was no harm done, so this is largely false outrage. It's not ethical to lie to a customer about a coupon being removed, but apparently this coupon wasn't supposed to be in the box to begin with so none of the small number of people that purchased the PC version of DX at Gamestop were harmed.
The reason Gamestop is offering the compensation is to offset the bad PR at little actual cost. It has fuckall to do with "GAP".
Source?
The newness of a PC product is based on whether or not the CD Key has been previously used. That is why the packages are sealed. Opening a package for a PC game voids this guarantee and thus, the product cannot be sold as "New" in an ethical fashion. You will remember this logic as the exact same one stores use to refuse returns on opened PC software.
How scratched the disk is after it's opened is a different ballgame. Now you're haggling over the incidental damage of used goods. Inspect the goods and take it or leave it, but don't think the product is new just because you're happy with condition of the used goods. That's nonsense.
I agree. And if Gamestop is selling you a "new" product that isn't actually new (as in, has been put into a PC/console and been played one or more times and/or has damaged the disc in any way when removing it from it's original casing), then you should be angry with them.
This is not the same as being angry with them for opening a case. Being upset about that is what I am calling silly.
And from your second sentence, it's apparent that you aren't actually reading what I'm typing, anyway. Try again. I said that people deserve what they get when they see that a disc is scratched and take it home anyway.
Considering that any opened GameStop product outside of the initial copy gutted for display purposes was probably "rented" out by an employee and played, that reinforces the suspicion that opened products are not new.
If you agree that GS selling something that isn't new as "new", then why do you object to the notion of GS keeping in line with a policy that is almost a guarantee that the product is new?
I agree that GS gave coupons because it's the easiest, least costly solution to the outrage. You seem to be under the impression that the bad PR they got for this and the customer complaints are separate things. They're not. Whether you believe anyone was harmed, this outrage is stupid, or my train of logic, GS did compensate customers for deciding to remove those coupons. Again: why would GS do this if it was nothing?
Your answer, which is accurate, is damage control. Why would they need to do any damage control if none was done?
Apparently, I haven't been clear enough.
Would it be best for all parties if Gamestop sold everything in factory wrapping? Yes. I completely agree. It would completely eliminate arguments like this. It would make a certain segment of the gaming population who are anal about that kind of thing stop whining. I would be all for it.
But do I personally care if they open up a game, put it in a sleeve without damaging it, NOT play it and still call it new? No, I don't. Because that game IS new. It has not been played. Games are not food. They don't have an expiration date. They do not suddenly start going bad if the seal is popped. To say otherwise is goosery.
They offered the certificates because some customers reacted negatively and this is the fastest way to make them be quiet. That doesn't really bear on whether or not the action was unethical.
This idea that the amount of harm is unrelated to whether or not this action was ethical is ridiculous. Standards of ethics are not the same as the law, but they also aren't just vacuous "whatever I say they are" measures. I personally default to standards related to harm in my own ethical reasoning; that isn't the only standard out there, but if you want to use another one, actually articulate it.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
But you can't ever guarantee that, hence why opened should not be considered "new". It is not "new" by GameStop's standards nor should it be considered so by anyone else.