Poll: Should you be able to get a refund on bad games?

[The Boston Dangler]

most music, movies and games give me the same reaction:
"whoa, this really sucks. i want my money back. oh i can't get it back? well, i'll have to get it back somewhere else."

 

[thespyder]

Don't know how you played, but it took up way more then 1% of my game. I really think I spent more time on that silly mini-game then the actual game.

Considering it wasn't a required action to complete the game, sounds like that is your own fault. Even if it wasn't, not liking an individual game element would not (in my mind) qualify for a full refund. And if you played it all the way through even considering that element, sounds like you got your money worth, so why should you get a refund?

You seemed to have missed the entire point of my argument. I'll try to make it again.
I don't really mind the basic elements of the game being dumbed down. That was adequately presented to us before the game launched. What I do mind is time consuming and patently un-fun aspects of the game being added in, most notoriously mini-games like the mining game in ME2, for the pure sake of lengthening the game. Doing that in itself makes me not want to buy the game, doing it and then covering it up is the sort of thing I think qualifies for a refund.

Again, the mining was not a requirement of the game. so the fact that you spent as much time on an aspect of a game that you didn't like, and didn't forward the game, is your fault. Not the designers.

I'm not really an ass about it. I just expect that a professionally cooked meal be properly prepared. Steak should come out at the ordered level of doneness. Pasta should not be so badly over cooked to the point that it is mush. Vegetarian meals should not have meat in them, or use meat products such as chicken broth. I have recently returned meals for all of these reasons, and all at decent to high end restaurants (like wolfgang puck's 560 where a meal listed as, and verified by our waiter as, vegetarian had chicken in it.)

So if you go to a restaurant that is known for not preparing meals in the manner you describe, do you still expect a refund? (in other words do the research). If the meal IS done in the manner you describe (100% prepared properly and professionally) and you still don't enjoy the meal, do you likewise expect a refund?

As far as I know, ME2 was exactly as intended. To extend the metaphor, it was prepared well and professionally, but just not to your pallet. The Mining was well known shortly after launch. As were the changes in the combat and RPG elements. Heck, even the fact that it was more of a transitional piece with no real ending was well known within hours of launch. So you could have avoided the entire experience by doing the research.

I feel that there is a explicit agreement between me and the companies that I deal with that they will provide the product that I paid them for and not try to deceive or scam me to get my money on false pretenses. Personally I feel very sorry for you that you have allowed the companies to convince you that you should have to just accept what ever product they dish out, no matter if it is the product you expect or not, and be happy that they are willing to take your money.How have we gone so far that so many believe that companies should be allowed to lie, cheat, and steal to get our money.

I think you will find you mean an 'Implicit' agreement. Explicit indicates it is spelled out in writing or other manner. Implicit means that it is simply 'understood'. Or do you make the chef and the waiters and the restaurant owners sign a contract before you sit down?

and no one is saying that anyone has to simply 'Accept' whatever trash game designers dish out. We are saying research and investigate before you buy so that you don't get stuck buying something that is trash.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Considering it wasn't a required action to complete the game, sounds like that is your own fault. Even if it wasn't, not liking an individual game element would not (in my mind) qualify for a full refund. And if you played it all the way through even considering that element, sounds like you got your money worth, so why should you get a refund?

Okay, ME2 might have been a bad example. I actually enjoyed the game, and would not have asked for a refund if it was available. I was really just referring to the basic concept of mini-games, and other cheap tricks game producers use to stretch a game. I would put excessive repetitive cut scenes in there as well (although, that seems to have thankfully gone out of style)

Again, the mining was not a requirement of the game. so the fact that you spent as much time on an aspect of a game that you didn't like, and didn't forward the game, is your fault. Not the designers.

I could argue this. I feel that the mining mini-game in ME2 was something like a punishment, it was a hoop you had to jump though to get to the fun bits. Granted in this case the fun bits were good enough to make me want to jump though the hoop.

If the meal IS done in the manner you describe (100% prepared properly and professionally) and you still don't enjoy the meal, do you likewise expect a refund?

I think it is a good idea on the restaurants part, it will get me to come back. As far as deserve? No, I don't deserve a refund for something that was done properly, just not to my liking, as long as it was fairly represented as what it is.

I think you will find you mean an 'Implicit' agreement.

Nope, I meant explicit. I believe the laws of this land explicitly state this. I think this is the very basis of contract law, and has been formally codified that way.

and no one is saying that anyone has to simply 'Accept' whatever trash game designers dish out. We are saying research and investigate before you buy so that you don't get stuck buying something that is trash.

Caveat emptor? Caveat venditor!

 

[thespyder]

Okay, ME2 might have been a bad example. I actually enjoyed the game, and would not have asked for a refund if it was available. I was really just referring to the basic concept of mini-games, and other cheap tricks game producers use to stretch a game. I would put excessive repetitive cut scenes in there as well (although, that seems to have thankfully gone out of style)

You say cheap trick. Someone else might say they loved that aspect. It is HIGHLY subjective. I could have the best steak in the world, but if I don't like it for some reason, doesn't mean I deserve a refund.

I could argue this. I feel that the mining mini-game in ME2 was something like a punishment, it was a hoop you had to jump though to get to the fun bits. Granted in this case the fun bits were good enough to make me want to jump though the hoop.

again, you didn't have to jump through it. You could probably finish the game having spent zero time at mining. And again, your like or dislike of this element is highly subjective. Which is where I have the major problem.

I think it is a good idea on the restaurants part, it will get me to come back. As far as deserve? No, I don't deserve a refund for something that was done properly, just not to my liking, as long as it was fairly represented as what it is.

This would probably put most restaurants out of business. Everyone would subjectively claim that they didn't like x or y or z and get a free meal. People would abuse the heck out of it.

Nope, I meant explicit. I believe the laws of this land explicitly state this. I think this is the very basis of contract law, and has been formally codified that way.

I would really like to see where it is written that failure to be 100% fully satisfied with a meal or entertainment form guarantees the right to a full and uncontested refund. You mean implicit.

Caveat emptor? Caveat venditor!

Which is fine so long as you have the legislation to back you. it is a great catch phrase, but if you were to take a claim to court on the order of 'I failed to enjoy BF3 and therefore require a full and complete refund from the publisher' you would find out how quickly it comes down to 'Caveat emptor'.

And Caveat venditor has a place with intelligent consumerism. Do the research first and don't impulse spend and the publisher will lose out. But to expect that the world will hold your hand while you make mistake after mistake after mistake simply because you can't be bothered to do some research seems quite childish in my view.

Vive La Revolucion'

 

[Via]

And is someone returning a game such a big deal that they need to write an article about it?... Seriously think about what you're saying for just a brief second and realize how ridiculous you sound. Do you let the world know that Macys accepted your return by writing an article about it?

So those gamers were able to return the games if they wanted to?

 

[PowerYoga]

Don't know how you played, but it took up way more then 1% of my game. I really think I spent more time on that silly mini-game then the actual game.

As others have said, that sounds like a personal playstyle choice. I played the mining game for 5 minutes then skipped it. The minigame sucked but it's not an essential part of the game.

You seemed to have missed the entire point of my argument. I'll try to make it again.
I don't really mind the basic elements of the game being dumbed down. That was adequately presented to us before the game launched. What I do mind is time consuming and patently un-fun aspects of the game being added in, most notoriously mini-games like the mining game in ME2, for the pure sake of lengthening the game. Doing that in itself makes me not want to buy the game, doing it and then covering it up is the sort of thing I think qualifies for a refund.

Poorly made minigames in your opinion. In the dev's opinion it might not be bad, especially they have an option for you to skip it. Not everything in the game will be eye poppingly fun, there will be mundane parts. This is more of an issue with realistic expectations being set. Some people find crafting boring, some people find crafting fun. But in the end it's a design decision and doesn't qualify for "broken game".

Now shit like ME3's multiplayer store qualifies for the "bullshit moneysucking" category, but it's still not broken. I choose not to play the multiplayer anymore but I'm not returning the game because EA is a money-leeching shithole that screwed up the multiplayer.

I just expect that a professionally cooked meal be properly prepared. Steak should come out at the ordered level of doneness. Pasta should not be so badly over cooked to the point that it is mush. Vegetarian meals should not have meat in them, or use meat products such as chicken broth. I have recently returned meals for all of these reasons, and all at decent to high end restaurants (like wolfgang puck's 560 where a meal listed as, and verified by our waiter as, vegetarian had chicken in it.)

See, that's the thing. Meals as you have described would be "broken", or not-prepared as specified. That qualifies for a return. Returning pasta because you don't like the taste or because you don't like the capers in the sauce is the equivalence of what you have been describing.

I feel that there is a explicit agreement between me and the companies that I deal with that they will provide the product that I paid them for and not try to deceive or scam me to get my money on false pretenses. Personally I feel very sorry for you that you have allowed the companies to convince you that you should have to just accept what ever product they dish out, no matter if it is the product you expect or not, and be happy that they are willing to take your money.

How have we gone so far that so many believe that companies should be allowed to lie, cheat, and steal to get our money.

Again, realistic expectations. I fully expect a functional product that does what is being sold. I will not bat an eye at returning a broken TV, meat in my vegetarian dish, or something I paid for and didn't get. Nobody's bending over backwards to kiss a corporation's ass, but your expectation of returning a game because you didn't like parts of it is unrealistic.

 

[PowerYoga]

So those gamers were able to return the games if they wanted to?

Why don't you ask them?

 

[SMOGZINN]

I would really like to see where it is written that failure to be 100% fully satisfied with a meal or entertainment form guarantees the right to a full and uncontested refund. You mean implicit.

Now you are beating on a straw man. I never said that I had to be 100% fully satisfied, or even 10% satisfied. I said it should be what was advertised and not have hidden or misleading information purposefully intended to prevent me from making informed choices. I think you will find that our laws do state that, explicitly.

The problem I have is that the video game industry is doing exactly this. They know that once they get your money you have basically no recourse. They know that most of their money will be made in the opening week, before all the word of mouth sort of information you are saying we need to know if it is worth buying gets out there, and that brand loyalty is not all that important to them considering that game production companies come and go, change names and reform, to often to build much of a following.

They are abusing the current system. The balance of the system needs to move a little more in the direction of the consumer.

 

[thespyder]

Now you are beating on a straw man. I never said that I had to be 100% fully satisfied, or even 10% satisfied. I said it should be what was advertised and not have hidden or misleading information purposefully intended to prevent me from making informed choices. I think you will find that our laws do state that, explicitly.

The problem I have is that the video game industry is doing exactly this. They know that once they get your money you have basically no recourse. They know that most of their money will be made in the opening week, before all the word of mouth sort of information you are saying we need to know if it is worth buying gets out there, and that brand loyalty is not all that important to them considering that game production companies come and go, change names and reform, to often to build much of a following.

They are abusing the current system. The balance of the system needs to move a little more in the direction of the consumer.

And again you are blaming everyone else instead of taking responsibility for your own actions. No one is forcing you to buy in the first day or week. So claiming foul because you 'Choose' to do so is your own fault and problem.

Also, another thing I have a problem with using the meal or movie analogies. If you sit down to eat a meal and then decide that it is horrible and want a refund, chances are there is 90% or more of the meal left over. it is a clear thing. And if you ate half or more, you probably were just trying to get something over. Same with a movie. There is a discrete ending point. if you stay to the end then you are the fool.

Video games are not the same. If I return the game within one week, who is to say I didn't play the heck out of it in the first day and, after 100+ hours of game play over the next five days, then return it? No one. it isn't apples to apples.

And again, if your dislike is based on subjective criteria, you are never going to win. If what you bought is broken or doesn't do (on a basic level) what was advertised, then absolutely get your money back. or at minimum be provided with a workaround (bug patch or fix) to make it work as intended (not based on your subjective opinion of how it SHOULD work).

 

[Veliko]

And again you are blaming everyone else instead of taking responsibility for your own actions. No one is forcing you to buy in the first day or week. So claiming foul because you 'Choose' to do so is your own fault and problem.

And again, if your dislike is based on subjective criteria, you are never going to win. If what you bought is broken or doesn't do (on a basic level) what was advertised, then absolutely get your money back. or at minimum be provided with a workaround (bug patch or fix) to make it work as intended (not based on your subjective opinion of how it SHOULD work).

You seem to be contradicting yourself a bit here; do you believe that someone should be able to get a refund or not?

 

[thespyder]

You seem to be contradicting yourself a bit here; do you believe that someone should be able to get a refund or not?

No contradiction at all. If it is clearly broken, then get a refund (or a fix). what is by and large being discussed is wanting a refund based on subjective reasons. The thread was started because the OP didn't like their experience with BF3. Which I am firmly against.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Yes except...

Numeric reviews are too flawed now. Im glad engadget got rid of the number scale in theirs.

Btw ME3 was worth the 90% given. Just because the ending was horrible doesnt mean the entire game was.

 

[thespyder]

Numeric reviews are too flawed now. Im glad engadget got rid of the number scale in theirs.

Btw ME3 was worth the 90% given. Just because the ending was horrible doesnt mean the entire game was.

Pretty much. Don't look at the number. it is way too subjective. Read the reviews and digest the information. Understand what the game is about and what people are saying. Then decide for yourself.

And also agreed that ME3 was a pretty awesome game and didn't deserve to get crapped all over because of poor ending choice.

 

[Golgatha]

Unless they game is literally broken, then no.

I think if the software is broken out of the box, the user ought to be able to return it. e.g. Software is so buggy as to be almost non-playable or DRM authentication servers are keeping the game from installing or playing.

 

[Golgatha]

Absolutely not. No. Never. What the fuck. No. This is so stupid I don't even... I mean, yes, I get where you're coming from, but seriously, if you buy the product and it doesn't live up to your expectations, you're at fault. You shouldn't have bought it. That doesn't mean you're entitled to a refund. What in God's name happened to people that we think we deserve our money back every time things aren't perfect for us? What a whining, cry-baby, pussy-ass, bullshit, worthless, arrogant, stupid culture we've become. When I was growing up and I bought a Ninja Turtle toy that sucked, did I go demand my money back from Toys R Us? Of course not. Because it would have been stupid and sad. Where the hell do we get off demanding that no product ever leave us wanting?

Sorry for the rant, but this gets under my skin. And that's nothing against the OP; I get it. I hate buying a bad product. But we don't "deserve" anything by virtue of being customers. If we buy a shitty product, that's just a mental note for us: "don't buy that again." This idea that you should get a refund because you fucked up... No. Just no. You've made your bed, now lie in it.

So if product X claims to do Y, and doesn't do Y at all, I should just eat the cost? Fuck that!

 

[BlitzPuppet]

So I'm playing BF3 again, trying to get some enjoyment out of it. DICE completely ruined BF2 towards the end, and BC2 was literally one of my least favorite games. BF3 is better than BC2, but I still really don't like it.

It led me to think, should you be able to get a refund on games? Since this wasn't a Bad Company title, I thought there might be some hope for it. I was wrong. In general, should you be able to get a refund on games you don't like, or are buggy?

OMG You don't like BF3? Holy shit you better not let the DICE or COD Fanbois that are all over the forum find out! Insulting BF3 is like insulting their religion/mother/dog.

Seriously though I agree, the game sucks and it sucks that I spent $50 (Amazon Preorder) for a game that ends up sucking. Physical items are not an issue, but software is a different matter .

 

[PowerYoga]

So if product X claims to do Y, and doesn't do Y at all, I should just eat the cost? Fuck that!

Depends. Did you buy a vaccum and expect it to be able to do your dishes, or did you buy a vaccum and expect it to suck dirt up? There's a difference between "claims to do X but doesn't" versus "you expect it to do X and it doesn't". The first is false advertising and you're entitled to get your money back, the second means you should've done your research.

Also, claims it will be fun but in reality isn't doesn't fall into the first category. Really, it doesn't.

 

[Chaotic42]

OMG You don't like BF3? Holy shit you better not let the DICE or COD Fanbois that are all over the forum find out! Insulting BF3 is like insulting their religion/mother/dog.

Seriously though I agree, the game sucks and it sucks that I spent $50 (Amazon Preorder) for a game that ends up sucking. Physical items are not an issue, but software is a different matter .

Strangely enough I disliked all of the CoD games except MW2. For some reason I really liked that one. Oh, well. I just bought the Arma X super pack, so I should have plenty of gaming for a while.

 

[tornadog]

With console games, I always try and buy by renting the game from gamefly. If I like it, I just use the Keep option in gamefly. With pc games I dont have that option. Which is why my pc game purchases have been almost down to zero. Theres hardly any pc only games anymore, so I have not been missing much.

But I preordered Diablo 3!!!!

 

[Atomic Playboy]

So if product X claims to do Y, and doesn't do Y at all, I should just eat the cost? Fuck that!

When the claim is "this product will entertain you" and you feel you weren't entertained sufficiently, no, I don't think you deserve your money back. Part of being a good consumer is doing research before you purchase the product. If you pre-order something months in advance and it doesn't live up to your expectations, that was you taking a calculated risk; you would get the content sooner than other people, and often some bonus content, but at the risk of not having the opportunity to see reviews of the finished product. That's just the breaks.

Now if the software were to install DRM that actually breaks your machine, then yes, I think you have a legitimate gripe. But you don't deserve your money back just because a product designed to entertain didn't live up to your expected level of enjoyment.

 

[SMOGZINN]

And again you are blaming everyone else instead of taking responsibility for your own actions. No one is forcing you to buy in the first day or week. So claiming foul because you 'Choose' to do so is your own fault and problem.

Someone has to buy it in that first week, or where does the real information come from?

And again, if your dislike is based on subjective criteria, you are never going to win. If what you bought is broken or doesn't do (on a basic level) what was advertised, then absolutely get your money back. or at minimum be provided with a workaround (bug patch or fix) to make it work as intended (not based on your subjective opinion of how it SHOULD work).

This is most of what I'm saying as well. We mostly disagree on what 'broken' means when it comes to software.

Video games are not the same. If I return the game within one week, who is to say I didn't play the heck out of it in the first day and, after 100+ hours of game play over the next five days, then return it? No one. it isn't apples to apples.

I think that the main difference you and I have here is that you believe that companies need to be protected from the consumer, I believe the consumer needs to be protected from the companies.
Personally, I think you are on the wrong side of this issue. I think that we need to let the consumer have the agency they need to reward or punish companies based on their pleasure or displeasure of the products, and leave it to the companies to figure out how to make a profit.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I think that the main difference you and I have here is that you believe that companies need to be protected from the consumer, I believe the consumer needs to be protected from the companies.
Personally, I think you are on the wrong side of this issue. I think that we need to let the consumer have the agency they need to reward or punish companies based on their pleasure or displeasure of the products, and leave it to the companies to figure out how to make a profit.

You already have that ability; you can choose to not buy the product in the first place. You don't want to be protected from greedy corporations, you want to be protected from yourself, because apparently your inability to not purchase a video game the second it is released is the fault of the big evil corporation and not a product of your own poor judgment. If you continually get burned by buying things and not liking them, maybe you should try not buying them blindly and use reviews to help guide your purchasing decisions.

The government has a duty to protect you from a company that willfully misrepresents its products. But they don't have a duty to insure that you, specifically, are entertained by a product. You may think that Battlefield 3 sucks and you regret buying it, but that doesn't entitle you to a refund.

 

[thespyder]

Someone has to buy it in that first week, or where does the real information come from?

Yes, someone has to buy the first week. That someone doesn't need to be you, or me.

This is most of what I'm saying as well. We mostly disagree on what 'broken' means when it comes to software.

My definition is very simple. Does it boot up? Does it run (on appropriate hardware) at greater than 10 fps. Does it not CTD periodically. Does it not eat hard drives (no lie, an early version of Diablo did that). Pretty much it.

Your definition appears to be much more lenient.

I think that the main difference you and I have here is that you believe that companies need to be protected from the consumer, I believe the consumer needs to be protected from the companies.
Personally, I think you are on the wrong side of this issue. I think that we need to let the consumer have the agency they need to reward or punish companies based on their pleasure or displeasure of the products, and leave it to the companies to figure out how to make a profit.

I don't think that companies need to be protected from the consumer. Not in the slightest. I think companies ARE protected from the consumer and that whining and complaining isn't going to change that.

I do believe that people should stop thinking that it is OK to not take responsibility for their own actions and just feel someone should Give them a free pass if they mess up or are to lazy to do the proper research and preparation. And I include companies in this as well. If a company makes a series of crappy games, they should go out of business.

But Man up. We are all (or mostly) adults. If you make a mistake, don't cry and say 'No fair'. Stand up and learn from your mistakes. And saying "I didn't like BF3 (or whatever), give me my money back." really puts me in mind of some 10 year old kid who is crying at the top of his lungs in the center of the department store because Mommy didn't buy him ice cream.

 

[SMOGZINN]

The government has a duty to protect you from a company that willfully misrepresents its products.

And I've said several times that I believe that game publishers tactics of controlling information with DNRs, bribery, and flat out coercion amounts to willful misrepresentation their products.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

And I've said several times that I believe that game publishers tactics of controlling information with DNRs, bribery, and flat out coercion amounts to willful misrepresentation their products.

Unless they specifically advertised the game as being DNR free, how could you possibly claim that including it is a misrepresentation of their products? I'm browsing Amazon and I see this on the product page for Battlefield 3 under system requirements:

Requires Origin account for game activation and online play.
You may download your purchase through Your Games & Software library at Amazon.com, or redeem your product key directly through Origin and download through their service.

That lets me know, in no uncertain terms, that I'm going to have to use Origin to run the game (which is the only reason I haven't purchased BF3 yet). They're telling me upfront that I'm going to be required to use their DNR system with the game; that's not misrepresenting the product in the slightest. And the same is true of games that run through Steam. So I'm wondering why you think that this somehow represents a lie that you, the innocent consumer, have been tricked by, a shady tactic for which the only justice must be a complete and full refund?