GameStop Pulls PC Version of Deus Ex: HR Off Shelves

[steelbox]

Gamestop should have not open the box and contacted squareenix and demanded that either them replace them without the coupons or be procecuted for altering the product beyond what gamestop agreed. But i thing this way it went better for Square, because gamestop will not have the right to procecute Square.

 

[icepick314]

did anyone picked up Augmented Edition from Gamestop already?

does the OnLive code come in Augmented Edition like the regular edition?

 

[hoofhearted]

[citation][nom]sieged[/nom]IndignantSkeptic :this is blatant theft by GameStop against their customers; robbing them of something they paid for and expected to get.would you complain if best buy started removing the trial versions of Norton from their HP pcs before sale too?Best Buy can remove all of their Bloatware and it would make 90% of us happy.[/citation]

This is completely different. The bloatware on best-buy PCs is "forced" on the user. They have to go through the technical hassle of uninstall and all said dialogs that say crap like "Why are you uninstalling" or redirect you to their survey website. Futhermore, many uninstalls are not "complete" and leave reminants.

On the other hand, this "coupon" requires effort from the user to even redeem it. No trace of onlive on the users PC unless he take the action directed on the coupon. Most perceive this as "value" rather than "hard sell".

 

[dark_lord69]

Gamestop is run by a bunch of greedy a-holes!

Example of a company with integrety...
Sony - On the playstation 3 you can rent movies from sony but Sony wasn't an A55 about allowing Netflix, Hulu, and that new walmart based rental service to run on thier consoles even though those directly compete with them.

Honestly I don't understand how a game box can be open and the store can still sell it as "NEW". The factory seal has been broken by someone other than purchaser. Also, if you open a game box THEY WILL NOT TAKE IT BACK. So I think that this makes them hippocates.

 

[hoofhearted]

As much as I am an Apple hater, I must say that even Apple is above this as they allow Netflix and such on their iThingies (competes with iTunes). Not much better though, as they still take a 30% cut and don't allow linking, but at least they are not outright thugging the coupon away from the user.

 

[GNCD]

[citation][nom]kK-zoNn[/nom]Think the ideas varies, To most parts on ideas of Gamestop, for price issues, to sell lower would basically be in ideas of pawn shops. Which is probably fine, but ideas of interest usually are in that of little money either way. When you might be taking something back 2 days after it was released for whatever reason, not the release of interest, or no manual, maybe defective, interests of values probably change some for some reason. But as to say though that they have rights to do that is anyones guess though. K, you say they are buying outright from whoever that sells them. Directly from the company and the like. Say they would have a certain means of license of resell. Like even for like packaging bundles. Like say stores of these interests do this but not cared for, cause companies get hit up to make older releases again sometimes. Nothing changes from whats sold like here in this issue. This one is say that well, ya know, Gamestop has taken products of their sell, taken less from that of it , which normally would be included, bundled or not. Then took completely off. taking completely off probably is fine. They don't have to sale anything. But the box probably does say included with to a point. Used to be say printed on boxes cause stickers are easy to take off. And opened packages usually aren't good of course but to say that everything is ok or right it anyones guess. Here though seems to just be an interest of own concern of own interest. For the Live idea though is nice, but its still placed within what is that of absence of multiplayer for where there is and isn't, but still kinda is though too. Gamestop to say well, we are taking actions within what is say bought products for the place of interest is only with what probably agreements are made for their purchase of products. They could probably not sale anything the buy all day long. But they probably wouldn't get sold to maybe after awhile on some ideas. Gamestop to have a service like Live might be nice since not everyone has Live or uses it to say. But of it though to say it is ok to take the say voucher or coupon off is anyones guess. But maybe not though. You'd say intially the PC version wouldn't need the Live voucher anyways. But would be nice on ideas of newer releases with ideas of Live, but Live is a conflicting service, I recall correctly, first Xboxes don't work with Live anymore.For the issue of course probably doesn't have much a pretain at times given whats in topic. But still to say that is was ok is probably very subjective and perspective. I'd say no, thats what they either got leased and bought, right, and then changed for a lesser. Cause even against bundles, you still are not getting intial release to a point. Cause Bundles vary of course but do along the lines in which they are. But again is based on that within what is bought isn't "bundled". But this i think would be very variant for the topic. Cause even though to say companies are finding say reductions within whats in releases where possible. They still sale Collectors editions, Limited editiions, Game of the Years, Revised or Remakes, Regular releases, This would be saying on ideas of that for what Regular release and like Deluxe releases would be. But of it though would say a regular release for the PC would be without. And for it the most to say as a bonus is probably just an interest for the idea of online access and usage. Cause PCs don't come with Live. And most games don't require it to have a need for it. Why is anyones guess but still. On sacks of saying to work with to get online, Live would be there for Xbox. For PC might be as useful as it is on Xbox. But still probably not that as much for what that would be. Would be that to use with what is within purchase on an included interest of sale for the release. They probably don't have to be used if they don't want to be used. Some release comes with those offers cause of ideas of ads if i remember right. For the interest is lack with purchase. With intial interest inclined for it. Otherwise, again incling interest is based within interest of interest for or fomr an interest or interest. I can understand the idea of no use of what is there, but idea of interest for it or not. But for an incline of place of it for what it is there though to take off for or away of intial interest without place of intial interest to do so. Might be very subjective and perspective and aid the increas(ed)ingly place of what would be "product" recalls.Which does happen of course but still of it though, does make wonder. On ideas of interests though of many, there is probably only a few that would say otherwise. But even then of those all would need apply. And of it to say taking off shelf was an option of choice. Yes? As with all options say before hand too. But still. The option of intial product without change was an option. Yes? Least here is some reasoning though for any rather true or not.[/citation]

No?

 

[cburke82]

Surprisingly enough, Square Enix is backing this.

http://release.square-enix.com/na/2011/08/24_01.html

“As part of DEUS EX: HUMAN REVOLUTION's boxed offering on PC, Square Enix included a third party coupon. GameStop was not made aware of this inclusion and Square Enix respects the right of GameStop to have final say over the contents of products it sells and to adjust them where they see fit in accordance with their policies.

Square Enix invites gamers who want to purchase the PC version of DEUS EX: HUMAN REVOLUTION without additional coupons to buy the game at any one of over 4000 GameStop stores in North America or purchase a digital download copy online from www.gamestop.com.”

So basically square has no back bone? How many PC games does gamestop sell anyway? I went there looking for a game once and saw like 4 half opened boxes in the back corner of the store and so I walked out and went to steam and best buy if I want the box lol.

 

[cburke82]

I'm on GameStop's side for this one. Well, actually, I'm on everyone's side. If GameStop knew in advance they'd have OnLive coupons included, they wouldn't even have made the order, or accepted it.

They were duped or left out of the loop.

That puts the responsibility on Square Enix. If Square Enix did a better job of taking care of their customers (GameStop) and business associates (GameStop / OnLive) this wouldn't have happened.

I just hope that the GameStop customers do understand exactly why the pc box is open when they're standing up at the register. At that point, if the customers are not informed, then, and only then, would GameStop look bad.

I can't blame GameStop for wanting to protect themselves from helping the competition.

Im sure they wernt telling people that purchased the game " Oh by the way we took that free coupon out just so you know" If they did that and people still purchased the game I guess thats fine but im sure they only said something if someone specifically asked about the coupon but I could be wrong.

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

Who uses Onlive anyway....

 

[AnUnusedUsername]

[citation][nom]Trialsking[/nom]Who the phuc buys PC games from GameStop anyway?!?!?!? Steam, D2D, GoG, hell even Origin are available with better deals. GameStop is console only. And please stop the "I need the actualy DVD" crap. Its 2011, thats like saying I need my analogue TV, I love lead based paints, we need child labor. Its called progress, get on the digital band wagon, sooner rather than later the DVD will be gone and you with your relic DVD's are a dinosaur and you just don't realize it.[/citation]

It's not about actually using the DVD. It's about having something to show for your purchase, much like buying a collectors edition. Ideally, digital copies should always cost significantly less than retail ones, as they cost nothing to reproduce, but since in our broken system companies pay for development only after they've already finished it, the price of a game isn't even remotely related to the cost of producing it. When it's a flat rate (as all new games are) there's no reason to not buy a hard copy and activate it on the digital service of your choice. Not every game is like that yet, but it shouldn't be long before that is the case.

Of course, for older games it's almost always better to buy digital, as digital copies are sometimes cheaper. A used copy usually isn't significantly cheaper than a new one and a used copy doesn't come with anything but the disk, so you still get nothing to show for your purchase.

Of course, it's really too bad that the only surviving videogame store is Gamestop. It wasn't nearly as bad when Electronics Boutique/EB Games was still around. Without a competitor, if you want a retail copy you have to choose between horrible business practices with gamestop and lousy selection, little understanding of the product, and higher prices with retail chains like Walmart or Best Buy. Neither option is very nice...

 

[SapienChavez]

[citation][nom]zuke[/nom]Wow, there's always rumors of GameStop's unethical practices, but this seems pretty undeniable. Very scummy.[/citation]

it is unethical to backdoor your customer. Gamestop is their customer.

im not defending Gamestop, but Square/Onlive really stuck it to them.

they have the right to sell what games they choose.

i work as a distributor and have seen similar (in different industries) issues.

they never lied and were only trying to protect their interests. I fail to see how that is unethical.

 

[robochump]

Gaming stores are dying out (due to downloading of games and large market chains) and GameStop is doing all it can to stay alive. Mainly GS hopes is that streaming service will sustain enough profit to keep stores open that will also promote their streaming service. So this incident not completely whacky.

 

[NuclearShadow]

[citation][nom]elbert[/nom]We can all agree that software with the shrink wrap broken means you cant return software. Does this mean the item is no longer new? In the eyes of most retailers the software would no longer be new. I don't think software with broken shrink wrap and an item removed could possibly constitutes new. If the games was sold as new GameStop better have a recall fast or expect a class action lawsuit. I wouldn't be surprised if the better business bureau comes knocking at GameStops door.[/citation]

You have a interesting point here. Because they took off the original wrapping and even opened the boxes people were indeed buying a used copy of the game. This can also cause massive legal problems as this means that Gamestop accepted the EULA and not the buyer of the software. In-fact it gets worse in the case of PC games you do not have the right to sell a used PC game it would violate the EULA.

 

[cburke82]

it is unethical to backdoor your customer. Gamestop is their customer.

im not defending Gamestop, but Square/Onlive really stuck it to them.

they have the right to sell what games they choose.

i work as a distributor and have seen similar (in different industries) issues.

they never lied and were only trying to protect their interests. I fail to see how that is unethical.

Its like this.... Should Square have told Gamestop yes. But then once Gamestop found out they should have left the games as is and worked out something with square or just shipped the games back and not sold them. The last thing they should have done was open all the boxes and take out coupons that were meant to go to paying customers. Now I was not there so I cant say for sure that they did or did not do this but the only way this is ever ok is if they explained to each and every customer that purchased the game that it was opened by them and that it was intended to come with a coupon that they themselves removed from the box. If even one paying customer purchased this game thinking that there was a coupon inside and then later found out there was not then that to me is theft. Its theft because they took something of value out of the package. If they did tell everybody then thats fine because they made the choice to buy the game knowing what happened.

 

[cburke82]

You have a interesting point here. Because they took off the original wrapping and even opened the boxes people were indeed buying a used copy of the game. This can also cause massive legal problems as this means that Gamestop accepted the EULA and not the buyer of the software. In-fact it gets worse in the case of PC games you do not have the right to sell a used PC game it would violate the EULA.

If i purchased one of these games I would play it for a few weeks and then repackage it and return it. When they told me they can not accept returns for opened merchandise I would simply say that I never used it and it was open when I purchased it. How on earth do they then tell you that you can not return the game? They would not be able to prove that you did or did not open the game at home as there were the ones who opened it in the store.

 

[Guest]

Pulling it from the shelves would have been upsetting but understandable. Stealing from the end user is WRONG! I have been wronged too many times at gamestop now. I no longer shop there and will never shop there again. I have no reason to do so. NO pc gamer that has a good internet service and good pc should ever purchase from them. You will pay WAY too much.

 

[BulkZerker]

Lol @ all the people jumping on the "hur gaemstawpz are theivingz!" bandwagon.

GS as backed by square, is within their rights. Onlive did an underhanded deal here trying to adverize their cometing service through gamestop and potentially hook customers before gs has their streaming service out.Gs is protecting their interests by removing the cupon and minizing the risk that joe pc user would stop buying froom gs and go with onlive.

Though why the hell anyone would want to stream an adverage game (onlive may have a market in rpgs and rts with their model, where a half second of lag isn't going to win or loose a match as mutch as poor strategy will) is beyond me.

As for the whole broken seal, gs is too cheap to buy alpha security cases. That's on them there.

 

[cburke82]

Lol @ all the people jumping on the "hur gaemstawpz are theivingz!" bandwagon.

GS as backed by square, is within their rights. Onlive did an underhanded deal here trying to adverize their cometing service through gamestop and potentially hook customers before gs has their streaming service out.Gs is protecting their interests by removing the cupon and minizing the risk that joe pc user would stop buying froom gs and go with onlive.

Though why the hell anyone would want to stream an adverage game (onlive may have a market in rpgs and rts with their model, where a half second of lag isn't going to win or loose a match as mutch as poor strategy will) is beyond me.

As for the whole broken seal, gs is too cheap to buy alpha security cases. That's on them there.

As I said as long as they told people that were buying the game thats cool but do you think every customer was told before they purchased the game?

 

[Guest]

I've always been wondering this about gamestop (since I never buy from them due to how shitty they are), if they open the game for you, how do you return it for a refund? Do they tell you "Oh sorry you opened the game already"? Cuz if they do, wtf? Seriously?

 

[vigilante212]

I would take my shit back if I had found out they opened my package without my consent.

 

[mister g]

[citation][nom]i_ponder[/nom]I've always been wondering this about gamestop (since I never buy from them due to how shitty they are), if they open the game for you, how do you return it for a refund? Do they tell you "Oh sorry you opened the game already"? Cuz if they do, wtf? Seriously?[/citation]
For me they put a round sticker over the opening (it really sticks!), although if I tried I could have pried apart the corners to get at the disk.

 

[Guest]

Nice going gamestop. You are in the process of stealing OnLive's whole business model and use the advantage that you have store fronts to drive them out of business. This along with coupon stealing. I won't get into the stealing you do with your customer's used games. I don't have a need or desire to use a service like On-Live, but I hope the people who do NEVER use your service to make you go back to the drawing board and come up with your own ideas. On-Live took a chance that everybody else was saying wouldn't work. Now it is working and shame on you for making me wish Walmart buys On-Live and uses their storefront to take a dump on your stocks.

 

[Marthian]

I bet everyone's pissed because its Gamestop. Granted, I don't really like Gamestop either (except for the occasional good deal.), but seriously, would YOU include something in the products your selling that advertises other similar services? I wouldn't. I also don't really see the big deal here either, you guys act like they took out the CDs and spat on them, they're going to be opened sooner or later (unless your weird and DON'T open your games ever.)

 

[neiroatopelcc]

While I don't nessecarily support gamestops actions, I have to respect them for taking responsibility for their actions, and do what they believe is best for their company.

If their online gaming service works though, I hope they'll sell it to valve, to become a part of steam. Would be cool if some of those many games could be run off of a cloud service. Especially the dosbox and opengl based games, as they're not always running perfect on modern computers.

 

[Guest]

Fuck you Gamestop! No wonder nobody likes you! All you do is be selfish as hell. If they had a deal with OnLive, then you HAVE to honor that deal. You can't just go into each case and take out that coupon code. Knowing Gamestop, they'll probably try to sell the codes separate.