Support NeoGAF

[Tak3n]

and as far as I can tell just about every company who sells games if going to fall foul of this law..

Steam, Sony, MS, Game et al

There is no longer any ambiguity here, if it is broken you get your money back, or if the service is not as agreed you get you money back (MCC, BF4) to name a few

If i am reading this right, one could argue that is for example Xbox Live goes down in your first 30 days and it was not agreed by you then you are entitled to some money back

the right to goods and digital content being fit for purpose, and services
being performed with reasonable care and skill;

This will be the first time that rights on digital content will have been set out in legislation. The Act gives consumers a clear right to repair or replacement of faulty digital content such as online film and games, music downloads and e-books. The law here has been unclear up until now and this change brings us up to date with how digital products have evolved.
For the first time, there are clear rules for what should happen if a service is not provided with reasonable care and skill or as agreed. For example, the business that provided the service must bring it into line with what was agreed with the customer or, if this is not practical, must give some money back.

it also covers F2P paid element, if you buy a IAP and it does not meet the level of quality you can get a refund

You no longer have to go to court, a new service acts on your behalf

it is not all gravy, after one month if you console goes faulty the company no longer has to replace or refund, they are now legally allowed to repair it first

unless I am missing something here, there is about to be a lot of arguments with retailers, I dont think they can now shove a load of T+C's on your screen saying these laws do not apply to them

What do we think?

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...e-consumer-work/the-consumer-rights-act-2015/

 

[LilJoka]

does it apply to purchases made only after 1st Oct?

 

[darkwing]

hmm so you can finish a game then return it?

 

[Acquiescence]

I wish this law was in effect back when I bought the broken piece of shit that is Skyrim.

 

[Rich!]

Good.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

This only sounds like a good thing:

 

[jonno394]

hmm so you can finish a game then return it?

No. Its to do with broken games and services

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

and as far as I can tell just about every company who sells games if going to fall foul of this law..

Won't affect GOG, they've had a 30 day money back policy for faulty products for two years now.

And if you haven't downloaded the game (mistaken purchase etc), you can get a refund in the first 14 days without any questions.

 

[MilkyJoe]

I heard this on the news headlines this morning, I will have a closer look, but if correct broken games are going to fall foul of the law. Ubisoft probably have a team of lawyers picking at it, trying to find loopholes, as we speak.

 

[Poetic.Injustice]

Returning physical games would be a massive loss for retailers.

 

[darkwing]

No. Its to do with broken games and services

what is an example of a game that is broken? do bugs cover it?

 

[jwk94]

Why doesn't stuff like this exist in the US?

 

[Skux]

Who decides if a good or service isn't up to scratch?

 

[neogaffer1]

i imagine this is a pretty massive game changer

and something the industry needs. we don't need another bf4/mcc/unity/driveclub/thps5.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Seems like something that could be very easily abused but at the same time, there needs to be some accountability in this industry.

 

[the_batman]

seems like a good thing, though some people will find a way to abuse it.

 

[jonno394]

what is an example of a game that is broken? do bugs cover it?

I wouldn't know but hypothetically, say splatoons net code was awful and didn't work 50% of the time, that should count.

Maybe if fallout 4 crashes a lot for you due to a shitty engine?

I imagine guidelines will be laid out by lawmakers.

 

[Rich!]

Who decides if a good or service isn't up to scratch?

The consumer. As it should be.

 

[darkwing]

ohhh what if the game says it's 60fps at the back cover, but DF says it sometimes dips to 55 or 50 fps, can I return it?

 

[Anfony O]

Right in time for Tony Hawk then.

 

[Occam]

I heard this on the news headlines this morning, I will have a closer look, but if correct broken games are going to fall foul of the law. Ubisoft probably have a team of lawyers picking at it, trying to find loopholes, as we speak.

All they need to do is replace lawyers with programmers, and loopholes in the law with bugs in their games. Problem solved.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

ohhh what if the game says it's 60fps at the back cover, but DF says it sometimes dips to 55 or 50 fps, can I return it?

Well, the game isn't broken. Also, it would probably need to say it's locked at a constant 60 fps to be considered false advertising.

 

[show me your skeleton]

No. Its to do with broken games and services

so previously a game/service deemed broken was not protected simply because it was digital? that's insane.

 

[Tak3n]

Who decides if a good or service isn't up to scratch?

You, you do not get to be told you are wrong..NO MORE!

lets be honest, the retailer can still refuse, you can not call the police, but you no longer have to take them to court, you now have a ombudsman who will decide, and let me tell you they are always very sympathetic to the consumer

 

[darkwing]

Well, the game isn't broken. Also, it would probably need to say it's locked at a constant 60 fps to be considered false advertising.

I guess they can just change the label to 'Max 60fps' at the back then

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

If a European buy a from a US based company, are they still entitled to the refund?

 

[Tak3n]

ohhh what if the game says it's 60fps at the back cover, but DF says it sometimes dips to 55 or 50 fps, can I return it?

as i read it you would entitled to a refund in the first 30 days, or money off the product as they are not giving you what was agreed, it is was only once or twice you would be on a bit of a sticky wicket, but constant drops would certainly fall foul

 

[Prophet Steve]

hmm so you can finish a game then return it?

It is right there in the OP, only if it is faulty.

 

[Militaratus]

Why doesn't stuff like this exist in the US?

Because Europe has Consumer-Friendly laws, US has Corporation-Friendly laws. It's the American way it seems.

 

[texhnolyze]

what is an example of a game that is broken? do bugs cover it?

This is going to be the most difficult thing to measure.
I mean, people throw around 'broken' and 'unplayable' words in almost every game discussion.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

does it apply to purchases made only after 1st Oct?

Very likely.

Good law, glad it's finally come into power. Let's see what everyone now does to try and get around this...

 

[Occam]

If a European buy a from a US based company, are they still entitled to the refund?

Depends on where the sale happens.

 

[the_batman]

The consumer. As it should be.

nope. the consumer isn't always right.

 

[oti]

AC Syndicate...

 

[Rich!]

nope. the consumer isn't always right.

And thankfully now the retailer cannot be the judge of that.

It's law now. End of, and I'm happy with it.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Ubisoft would be wise to delay Syndicate.

 

[milanbaros]

so previously a game/service deemed broken was not protected simply because it was digital? that's insane.

I believe it had to be repaired or replaced. This is a refund.

 

[BHK3]

Hope this ends up really sticking it to some publishers but I fear they make take their rage out on the developers in turn. Say somethings broke and Warner/EA say there's a patch coming within a certain timeframe, patch comes and doesn't fix anything OR patch misses deadline and now the developers in trouble.

 

[NolbertoS]

How would it work, if say a UK customer bought a game in Continental Europe via amazon europe. Would the law fall into effect too?? If yes, then watch amazon, zavvi and game find a way to refund partially as technically its not a new game anymore and wind up in court about it. I'm sure somebody will challenge the law soon.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

Serious question, what's stopping this from being abused and then shitting the bed for the rest of us?

 

[Prophet Steve]

About the paying for repairs after one month, judging by one of the examples (the first one) that doesn't seem to be true, but I'm not checking the full legislation at the moment.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/Migrated_Documents/corporate/cra2015-practicalexamples.pdf

Serious question, what's stopping this from being abused and then shitting the bed for the rest of us?

It needs to be broken or not fit the specifications, you can't just get your money back because you want to for 30 days. That and it isn't like refunds are some revolutionary new thing.

 

[Son Of D]

Tony Hawk releases tomorrow in Europe... So there's our first game affected by this.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

If it discourages shit like the recent Tony Hawk game that flat out crashes during the Activision logo from happening as often, great.

 

[Kathian]

Seems like something that could be very easily abused but at the same time, there needs to be some accountability in this industry.

Its practised by plenty on industries why people act like games are special always confuses me.

 

[Dambrosi]

I heard this on the news headlines this morning, I will have a closer look, but if correct broken games are going to fall foul of the law. Ubisoft probably have a team of lawyers picking at it, trying to find loopholes, as we speak.

There might already be one, you pointed it out yourself:

it is not all gravy, after one month if you console goes faulty the company no longer has to replace or refund, they are now legally allowed to repair it first

I'm assuming that also goes for game services and online infrastructures, i.e., you have to allow the devs to try to fix it through patches first, and that can take much longer than 30 days on some games. Unless I misunderstood something, I'm not exactly a law student here.

If that doesn't turn out to be usable as a get-out-of-responsibility-free-card for the pubs, then this new law could really hurt the "games as services" model and f2p gaming in general. to which I say "Good Riddance".

 

[BibiMaghoo]

it is not all gravy, after one month if you console goes faulty the company no longer has to replace or refund, they are now legally allowed to repair it first


https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...e-consumer-work/the-consumer-rights-act-2015/

As far as I know this has always been the case. Manufacturers have the option to refund or replace - at their discretion if under warranty - and repairing counts as replacing - they are replacing your broken hardware with working hardware.

So I don't think that has changed.

 

[Monty Mole]

Who decides if a good or service isn't up to scratch?

The onus is on the retailer to prove that it is up to scratch, not on the consumer to prove that it isn't.

 

[milanbaros]

An interesting point is that when a game has been deemed 'broken' it will either have to be taken down or everyone can download it in the knowledge that they can get a refund.

Edit: unless they patch...hmm

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Its practised by plenty on industries why people act like games are special always confuses me.

Well............this is a video game message board, friend. I'm not talking about any other industry when I post here.

 

[hobblygobbly]

Serious question, what's stopping this from being abused and then shitting the bed for the rest of us?

Going by EU law of being able to return any good/service (few exception like hotel bookings) within 14 days for any reason (if you simply do not want it any more, it's a valid reason), it'll probably not be abused. Nobody abuses that system and surprisingly a lot of people are ignorant about it. Steam got a refund system (which doesn't 100% comply with EU law but I guess they worked out a deal) which was pressured by that law in EU in order for them to properly operate in EU.