GameStop sued over DLC issue

By Robert Purchese Published 30 March, 2010

Project Ten Dollar having an impact.

EA's anti-trade-in scheme Project Ten Dollar has landed US mega-retailer GameStop in trouble.

James Collins, a GameStop customer, is suing the store for being "deceptively misleading". He claims he bought a second-hand copy of Dragon Age: Origins because the box promised him free DLC.

But, as we know, those one-use DLC codes are only for first-hand buyers. Or, rather, they get first refusal.

Collins, who paid $54.99 plus tax (roughly only $5 less than for a retail copy) for his game, soon found that he would have to pay an additional $15 online if he wanted the downloadable content. That would be $10 more than if he'd bought the game first-hand.

He tried for a refund but the GameStop manager told him his seven day exchange window had expired.

"GameStop, who makes more than 20 per cent of its revenue and nearly $2 billion from the sale of used videogames, is aware of this issue, and continues to fail to alert customers that this content is not available on used games. As a result, GameStop tricks consumers into paying more for a used game than they would if they purchased the same game and content new," stated the lawsuit (spotted by IGN).

Earlier this month, GameStop told investors that schemes like Project Ten Dollar weren't compelling enough to consumers to present a real problem.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds. @Clert on Twitter.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (53) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • reality_cheque #1 2 years ago

    Oh this does make me chuckle.

  • stuarty_2003 #2 2 years ago

    It's a genius, although completely cruel scheme to end customers.

    It's like something the Joker would come up with.

  • nickthegun #3 2 years ago

    Project Ten Dollar sounds like an action plan to get Asian Hookers off the game.

  • matrim83 #4 2 years ago

    Stupid fucking lawsuit happy yanks.

  • Branoic #5 2 years ago

    "deceptively misleading"? Is there any other kind of misleading?

  • iamian #6 2 years ago

    in all fairness, the box doesn't say that the DLC is only for 1st time buyers and the fact that stores aren't reducing pre-owned price accordingly (or even informing customers) does take the piss a little.

  • JahB #7 2 years ago

    nice, good to see project 10 dollar working. screw those greedy retailers

  • TeaFiend #8 2 years ago

    @Branoic:
    Obvious misleading? Like my being a Nigerian prince who has several bazillion moneys if you give me your bank details.

  • Cosquae #9 2 years ago

    I wouldn't buy a second hand anything if the discount is less than 10% compared to new. $54.99 for a second hand game? Gamestop saw him comming a mile away.

  • SAMagic #10 2 years ago

    When I first read about this at Gamepolitics, I did think the guy had effectively been misled, but as GP pointed out:

    The back of the Dragon Age: Origins box says “Includes: Downloadable character and quest, A $15 Value.” In small print it reads “One-time use code available with full retail purchase.”

    Regardless of whether you like retail-only DLC stuff or not, I suspect the above will be what gets this settled in court, likely in favour of Gamestop.

  • PYF #11 2 years ago

    I love that this dude is suing because he was done out of a tenner.

    Injustice! Take it to the courts!

  • pbz #12 2 years ago

    Gamestop arn't providing the DLC its is the producer of the game that are - surely he would know that, everyone I know are aware of the state of EA's DLC policy....yet another moron yank in pointless lawsuit claim! /sigh

  • TeaFiend #13 2 years ago

    Wouldn't paying for a lawyer be more than the DLC?

  • Eraser #14 2 years ago

    I'm sure this guy already knew about the problem and simply thought he'd make an easy buck.

    The real issue here is that GameStop is charging $54 for a second hand game.
    Why would anyone get a second hand game if that only spares you 5 dollar?
    I'm not paying more than $20 (okay, €20) for a second hand game.

  • TheSnotGoblin #15 2 years ago

    Don't know what the state of second hand sales are in the UK but in Ireland it's hardly worth it. The prices are barely marked down at all and pretty much without fail you can buy them cheaper, new from an online retailer. Unless you're doing trade-ins I just can't see why you'd bother.

  • JimWest #16 2 years ago

    If something is advertised on the box it should be with the product. If the game is second hand, that sticker should be either removed, or at least covered telling the customer that the advertised item is no longer part of the deal. Sometimes with 2nd games you may get lucky and still be able to use the item code, but the retailer should really be the one to inform the customer if the advertised item is not there, especially if it ends up meaning the customer has to end up paying more than he would have for a brand new game with all the DLC included.

  • miiiguel #17 2 years ago

    5$ diference?! And ppl prefer to buy 2nd hand?! I can't understand it.

  • SleepyDeathFred #18 2 years ago

    What's horrible is that Game Stop probably paid the original owner around $10-15.

  • metalangel #19 2 years ago

    @TheSnotGoblin: same in the UK. Unless you're buying old or obscure stuff there's often not much in it. CEX, once complete legends for their preowned deals, are the worst. Often they want more for used than other nearby shops want for new, never mind online shops!

  • aguaporf #20 2 years ago

    Lovely Gamestop policies.

    Sell a game to them, no matter how new it is, you get less than half the retail price.
    They resell the same game for 5€ less than the RRP of a new copy.

    Everybody loses, Game developers, publishers and in the end, consumers.
    Besides, who the hell buys games from them anymore, the internet is SO much cheaper (Don't know about UK, in mainland Europe for sure).

    Anything bad that happens to them is ultimately better for the gaming industry and the consumers.

    Leeching scum.

    EDIT: I think the project 10 dollars is a brilliant marketing policy, it's surprising how EA became better after Riccitiello came, and how Activision is now the new EA with Mr. Kotick being closer to an evil dictator than a CEO (I know the difference is often subtle).
    Edited by aguaporf at 30/03/10 @ 10:22

  • jambo74 #21 2 years ago

    Print a bunch of stickers
    Attach to used games
    Fin

  • Vice.Destroyer #22 2 years ago

    Is nobody astonished that Gamestop makes nearly $2bn from used games? Although with the prices they are charging, it's no surprise. But still.

  • afghan_jones #23 2 years ago

    the guy is suing over 10 dollars???? Fucking twat.

    Also, bollocks to project ten dollar, its shite for consumers for a lot of reasons.

    1 less control or ownership of your own purchased property
    2 waste of precious and very limited hard drive space
    3 the many people who have a download cap on their broadband waste it getting hold of content they have already paid for.

  • sneetch #24 2 years ago

    @miiiguel
    5$ diference?! And ppl prefer to buy 2nd hand?! I can't understand it.

    It's a €5 difference here in Ireland, I can't understand it either, for the sake of €5 I'd rather take off the shrink wrap myself and not worry about some previous idiot having eaten the manual.

  • M_of_the_sys #25 2 years ago

    Don't most trade in shops give you a third of what they sell the game on for? So they'll give you a tenner for a game but sell it on for around thirty quid?

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought this was the way it's always been.

  • Murton #26 2 years ago

    Now unless the US box is different to the UK there is a quite clearly printed statement, with it's own background to make it stand out, saying that the code is one use only. It's the customers fault for not looking at the box properly and realising this.

    That said though, there is another crime here in that GameStop was selling Dragon Age used for only a 5 dollar reduction on January 6th (the date of purchase quoted in lawsuit document) but you can't sue them for that. The lawsuit also doesn't state whether or not he asked a member of staff if he would receive the code for buying used while it claims that he would have paid the additional $5 had he known that the used copy wouldn't entitle him to content worth $15 without additional costs.

    On the one hand we have a corporation that we know likes to rip people off on used games and on the other we have someone who lacks basic reading and logic skills who thinks he's the victim of an elaborate fraud and deserves massive damages for his own mis-purchase. I'm very doubtful this will get anywhere, if I were GameStop I'd be feeling quite cocky at the moment and offer him a sealed copy of Dragon Age as a settlement while reminding him that the code expires at the end of April, it's certainly more than the court is likely to award and will save him a small fortune in legal costs.

  • Madafunkola #27 2 years ago

    I bought a 2nd hand copy of Watchmen on Blu-ray with a "Digital Copy" (which is a one-use code you type into iTunes to unlock/download a copy of the film to your computer), but I just presumed that it would have already been used. Turns out it wasn't, so I got that too. Happy days.

  • callum9999 #28 2 years ago

    People complaining about Gamestop would make god-awful businessmen. Are you honestly trying to convince me that if you were running a shop, you would discount your products when they sell perfectly fine at the higher price? And you would pay your suppliers more than they were asking for because you feel you are making too much money?

  • blitzpoisonpunk #29 2 years ago

    Everyone commenting about this being stupid (which it is) but saying that Gamestop don't give enough of a discount need to think what they're saying through.
    I don't know the current exchange rate so people from the US will have to guess the equivalant price, I work for an indie retailer in the UK and we were selling ME2 for 39.99 new 33.99 second hand 7 pounds difference not even enough of a difference for the cerberus network.
    BUT, we made about 3 pounds a copy on new copies of ME2,
    and we offer 27 trade on it + VAT will still only make about 2-3 pounds a copy, but no one ever complains when they get a high trade in price for their games, if you want people to reduce pre-owned prices they keep complaining but bare in mind how crap your trade prices will be.

  • Zomoniac #30 2 years ago

    @blitz but there's a happy midway point somwhere. New price is £40, Game sell used for £38, probably buying at £10, this is insane. Why anyone would trade there or buy there is beyond me. But your prices are too far in the opposite extreme. Perhaps if someone tried offering say £22 (inc VAT) trade and selling for £30, customer saves 25% or a tenner on the new price, trader gets more than twice what Game would offer him, and you still get triple the mark-up you're getting now.

  • Gastrian #31 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 17:56:43 13-04-2012

  • metalangel #32 2 years ago

    @Murton: don't forget he's from the same country where you can successfully sue that you didn't know your freshly brewed coffee was hot until you poured it into your crotch.

  • secombe #33 2 years ago

    Worth pointing out that the 'use once' disclaimer isn't on all boxes, in fact none of the games I have with 'includes code for extra content' type stickers have any mention anywhere of the content only being available once.

    If I lived in the US I would probably have sued Turn 10 / Microsoft now, as 95% of the value in the Forza 3 LE is only accessible to Live Gold subscribers (it also doesn't say this on the box)

  • neems #34 2 years ago

    Buy new games online (or in supermarkets), trade in at Game or wherever. I recently got £25 store credit on a copy of FFXIII (PS3). Added to Fight Night Round 4 (from bargain bin) and Uncharted (budget release, bought cheap online) I got God of War 3 for minus £1.

    Presumably Game are now selling my copy of FFXIII for more than I paid for it in Tesco.

  • makeamazing #35 2 years ago

    Anyone who pays $5 less for a second hand game cant complain to be honest (in fact ive never understood why anyone would buy second hand for such a small difference!!!). Ive purchased second hand and i've traded stuff in, so its not a perfect world, but the games i buy second hand are less than £20.

  • davymackie #36 2 years ago

    id say buy 2nd hand games from ebay but everyone seems just as greedy on there these days.

  • steviepunk #37 2 years ago

    Is this the same Gamestop that was recently telling us that 'project 10 dollar' was not relevant to them as the customers that buy used games don't care about DLC? :)

  • hollowroom #38 2 years ago

    Instead of suing he should just relentlessly call them up and ask for Battletoads.

  • jonsaan #39 2 years ago

    Who would buy a second hand game for $5 less than a brand new one?

  • darleysam #40 2 years ago

    This guy has a good claim, and it's a class action lawsuit, trying to get $5m to go to all the people who've been screwed by this. It's actually not a "lawsuit happy yanks" issue, but something good.

    So don't be tools!

  • Geordiemp #41 2 years ago

    I worked out a long time ago there is no point in 'trading in' games.

    Just but every one new 2 months post release for £ 10 to £ 25. When finished, keep it.

    Even if I wanted to trade it in, getting say £ 10 for said game towards purchase of a new £ 40 game is not worth it, still costs £ 30 which is more expensive than on-line deals...

  • SHPanda #42 2 years ago

    @Zomoniac

    That's a typical GAME are a rip merchant with awful trade in prices comment you see from people who don't actually know because they never trade in there.

    I have previously worked for GAME and while I agree that the pre-owned prices need to drop to at least £32.99 at most for a new release. However saying that the trade in prices for a new release are £10 is abosolute rubbish. We used to trade in new releases for £25-30, and infact even Modern Warfare 2 now trades in at £25 and it's not that new anymore. I know that because I did so myself the other day, infact they even had a deal on where you got Bad Company 2 SE for £4.99 when you traded in games like Dark Siders, note that the SE sells for £42.99 new, so you're getting £38 trade there.

    So £25-30 for a new release, selling on at £35, they're making £5-10 at most.

    However their trade in prices for older games are awful £2-5 and selling on for £15-25, but I guess thats assessing the risk, they may trade in an old game that nobody wants to buy, so they have to factor that risk in incase they lose out.
    Edited by SHPanda at 30/03/10 @ 14:51

  • afghan_jones #43 2 years ago

    yeah was just gonna say the same, you will always get about 25 or more trade in for a fairly new game, which makes spending 40 on a non AAA title more attractive as you know you can always get money back.

  • SheffieldSteel #44 2 years ago

    Gamestop is at fault.

    This is really no different from a game that says "Limited edition! Includes edible warrior figurine!" and when you buy it secondhand it doesn't, because the original purchaser ate it. It doesn't matter whether or not there's small print on the box saying "figurine can only be eaten once."

    If the box says "Includes X" and after paying you discover that it doesn't include X, the burden of redress is on the retailer. They need to offer a refund, take it up with the person they got it from (oops for them, in this case), and make sure they stop selling mis-labelled products.

  • Skurmedel #45 2 years ago

    No matter if he should've known or not is a bit moot, or even how small a value, there is a lot of people buying stuff as gifts which doesn't trawl the internet for DLC information. They should inform, to the best of their abilities, about what's missing.

  • metalangel #46 2 years ago

    Just checked all my games with one-use DLC codes (BF:BC2, Saboteur, Dragon Arse: Orifices and Forza 3) and the only one that doesn't say it's a one-use only code is Forza 3.

    @Skurmedel: You'd buy someone a used game as a present??

  • darleysam #47 2 years ago

    And how in the hell will this be the death of 2nd-hand sales? Or the death of games? Some people need to get over themselves. If this devalues the used game market, then firstly it might shake the monopoly out of the hands of GameStop and GAME, and also mean used games actually lower in price beyond the "£3 cheaper" norm I currently see. I'm not even joking when I say my local GAME is exactly that bad. It's absurd and needs to be changed.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #48 2 years ago

    This situation is actually the whole point of the Ten Dollar Project. The damaging second hand sales aren't the ones that happen 2 years down the line, it's situations like this one where stores are selling preowned games at merely a few quid below the full price during the launch period, thus undercutting brand new sales by just enough to make people opt for the cheaper one, ensuring GameSpot get maximum profits and the develop gets nothing. GameStop get no sympathy from me.

    I have nothing against second hand sales, but launch period preowned is an issue. If you have two people - one who buys a game, and one who downloads it. The developer only gets the money once. If you have another two people, one who buys the game and sells it, and then one who buys that copy, the developer only gets the money once. It could be argued that launch period preowned is more damanging than piracy because people are actually looking to buy a game (unlike piracy where it is pure speculation that they may have bought the game).

  • afghan_jones #49 2 years ago

    i doubt that many games actually get traded in the launch period unless people really hate them which is frankly fair enough.

  • Sunyavadin #50 2 years ago

    Stores like this are what allowed Grainger games to go from a single store in an indoor market to being the biggest chain in the northeast. Simply by selling second hand stuff for more reasonable prices.

  • blitzpoisonpunk #51 2 years ago

    @Zomaniac, I agree, but I work in the center of Manchester, we have to compete with two Games, two Gamestations, two CEX's and a load of other general electrical stores, Indies have to be competitive in every way possible.
    @ Gastrian, Yes, we can claim the VAT back, but as i've said above, it is very very important to remain competitive and make profit when we can we aren't a huge company so it isn't quite that easy for us, and regardless, 6 pounds discount isn't bad for second hand on such a new game

  • gjgjg #52 2 years ago

    ffs gstop, just start pricing 2nd copies reasonably

  • DrunkDec #53 2 years ago

    I'd sooner keep 5 quid in my pocket, rather than give it for the same game new in plastic wrap. Think of it as a free pint or two!