njean777
Member
You are wrong, not everybody knows as much as we do about games. To assume it is the consumers responsibility after they legally purchased something not to play it due to release date is just stupid.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Just got my console (and I assume my account) banned from Live for playing Halo 4.
- Thread starter Skel1ingt0n
- Start date
You are wrong, not everybody knows as much as we do about games. To assume it is the consumers responsibility after they legally purchased something not to play it due to release date is just stupid.
why would this have anything to do with being allowed to play online?
op had the game not just a couple days but at least over a week early. he shouldnt sign to live.
is not about playing online but having the game so much earlier that it looks like it could be a pirate copy is not like microsoft has any other way to determine that except the op playing it way earlier.
this is not the first time it happens and regardless of policy op should have known its happened before and could happen here.
getting a receipt with a november date if that was the case would not mach since he was playing. in. october
TheBryanJZX90
Member
The store didn't really do anything wrong to the OP, they were doing the OP a favor. What benefit does the store get from selling 1 copy of 1 game a week early? They make the same few dollars of profit from the OP whether he buys the game a week early or on release day. This sounds more like a favor that the OP asked for and the store was willing to give.
It might be different if this was a widespread practice at the store, that the store had knowledge that their customers were getting consoles banned, and yet the store still let it be known to their customers that if they wanted to get their games early they should make sure to buy at this store. Then the store would actually be getting a benefit by drawing sales away from their competition, at their customers' expense.
But that doesn't seem like something most stores would do, because the more games they sell before release date the more likely it is a customer is going to get caught and rat them out, which apparently has pretty severe consequences.
Instead, if I was a store manager and a customer asked me to sell them a game early, if I agreed to do it as a special favor I would make sure to let them know that they could never tell Microsoft where they got the game or else my job or my store would be in jeopardy, and I would make clear to that customer that I was doing it as a favor to them, that it wasn't benefiting me.
TheBryanJZX90
Member
Not everyone knows release dates, but everyone that specifically asks a favor to get a game before a release date sure as hell knows when the release date is. And if a customer somehow accidentally buys a game before its release date, then they're not going to have a problem telling Microsoft where they got that game, and Microsoft isn't going to have a problem with the consumer.
Love the "if you did nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide" thinking.
polyh3dron
Banned
I can show you a contract that basically says "MS can ban your console and account for any reason they see fit, u mad?"
It's shitty, but it is what it is.
The OP did know and actively circumvented the rules. He chose the outcome your point is moot in this case.
That's how I feel about everything. Police, taxes, life in general. It's their service and their rules.
You won't mind if I set up a few cameras in your house then? Surely if you have nothing to hide, you won't mind?
faceless007
Member
What specific rule was he bound by that he actively broke?
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Someone clearly hasn't read their true gamer's handbook. How'd you even get on gaf?
faceless007
Member
Bought a username from some guy on the street. Said it was legit. Bastard told me it was a mod account too.
TheBryanJZX90
Member
I'm not saying that to attack the OP, I'm saying that to attack all the handwringing about "ohh what will we do when Joe Casual sees a copy of Madden on sale a week early and buys it without knowing the release date"
I don't think Microsoft's policy in general is necessarily anti-consumer, but that it was in this one case. If I was in charge I would have banned the OP for a month or something. That seems like a relatively minor punishment for a relatively minor infraction of the rules. Plus it has a nice ring of poetic justice. Oh you can't wait until release date like everyone else to play the new game? Bam, now you have to wait a month after everyone else. But yeah, completely banning his account and console is too much.
I'm curious about how downloaded games work. Can he still use the banned console as long as it's not online? Can he still play previously downloaded games as long as he's not online?
There is nothing wrong with buying and playing a game early. The only reason publishers get their undies in a twist is because they don't want widespread street date breaks to take attention away from launch events. A few people will always get the game early through connections that are still legal.
But why did he get the same punishment a pirate would have gotten? Is there no middle ground?
Nothing suggests this was a fair treatment by MS and they really shouldn't be banning people for playing legit copies early.
Anyone who defends this practice needs to take a long hard look at themselves, as their position is morally unjustifiable.
Pretty much how I feel. This isn't a case of someone picking up a copy of Dora's Big Time Adventure a couple of hours before release. It's Halo- MS's biggest IP that they've spent millions on and want to protect. They threw out a huge net, and some folks who purchased the game early got caught up in it.
Stinkles said some have had their accounts reinstated. The OP unfortunately has not been so lucky. Given that, the only conclusion I can draw is that the OP's case isn't completely black and white. But I don't think it should be a permanent ban, and honestly, even if the receipt didn't show the store's name, it seems like they could look at his account and extend an olive branch.
Mackenzie 92
Member
Strange that Skellington never answered this, and it sounded like he traded it in, so the person buying it is gonna be screwed, hopefully they will be able to return it. Says a lot about his character and honesty.
The bullshit indicator coming off of this guy is crazy, strange that people fall for it, despite Stinkles and Lexi's posts indicating he's being deceitful, it's like it's right there, but people can't or won't see it.
That's pretty depressing.
You realize there are people that purchase banned consoles right? And actively look for them in local listings.
vikingvessel
Member
You can't just keep throwing ridiculous at others after posting Also, breaking street dates is one of the only legs up local mom and pop stores could possibly use to combat the huge corporations. That was ridiculous and no different than suggesting they sell stolen merchandise to get a leg up on operating costs. And there is no need to come back with the totally different situation rebuttal, it isn't.
Uno Venova
Banned
We are really pulling out all the stops aren't we.
onlyindreams
Banned
It is, though.
Why does it matter if one guy is playing it early? Any ban for this is completely anti-consumer. If someone reports the store that sold it then fine, punish them, but going after customers is ridiculous. They didn't even have the decency to respect his time and money put into their product enough to give him a real person to sort this out with.
"Some" reinstated. So you have to hope you get lucky if this happens to you. What a joke. How can you guys even defend this?
vikingvessel
Member
I'm with you. Breaking street dates is one of the only legs up local mom and pop stores could possibly use to combat the huge corporations was a real knee slapper in a thread where people are demanding a poster who happens to work for Microsoft reveal all that he knows about this incident.
I worked with Stinkles for years. I trust him implicitly. When he offered to help, you can take it to the bank he tried to help. If he suggested something untoward might be going on, he wasn't just toeing the company line.
You see he's a Microsoft employee and look for the pitchfork.
d00d3n
Member
Would a stinkles jpeg/gif gaf meme be out of the question because of the rules against personal assaults? Something that includes his empty promise and rejection of said promise because of diffuse and non-transparent reasons? Dealing with a pr catastrophe in a short sighted manner? Corporate schillism? I lack the artistry to produce a meme that will stick, but it certainly seems appropriate given what we know at this point. I don't know how much precedent there is. It could be argued that stinkles is too unknown for this to be allowed, compared to say the doritogate situation.
I would suggest taking the time to make 11 quality posts before putting a plan such as this into action.
- The OP is accused of piracy. Stinkles, aka Frankie, aka "the Franchise Development Director for the Halo franchise at 343 Industries" offers to help.
- The OP claims that he sent stinkles an unaltered copy of his receipt on the condition that his store doesn't get in trouble.
- Somebody gives Microsoft a copy of the OP's receipt with information edited out. The OP claims he never contacted Microsoft. He let stinkles handle it. Microsoft refuses to take action until they see the unmodified receipt.
Speculation:
The Franchise Development Director for the Halo franchise personally viewed the receipt, edited out the damaging info, and sent it in, personally verifying it's legitimacy. This should be enough to dissuade any accusation of piracy.
But that's not good enough for Microsoft. They want the store's name. This was never about piracy. Stinkles is no longer allowed to comment on this matter.
- The OP claims that he sent stinkles an unaltered copy of his receipt on the condition that his store doesn't get in trouble.
- Somebody gives Microsoft a copy of the OP's receipt with information edited out. The OP claims he never contacted Microsoft. He let stinkles handle it. Microsoft refuses to take action until they see the unmodified receipt.
Speculation:
The Franchise Development Director for the Halo franchise personally viewed the receipt, edited out the damaging info, and sent it in, personally verifying it's legitimacy. This should be enough to dissuade any accusation of piracy.
But that's not good enough for Microsoft. They want the store's name. This was never about piracy. Stinkles is no longer allowed to comment on this matter.
Judging by his Achievements this isn't the first time he's managed to convince someone to sell a Halo game early. Not sure why he didn't do the same 'play offline' thing this time around.
"convince" lol. In my experience, many stores that do things like this make it known as they're fully aware of what it takes to get customers these days. With big boxes able to give heavy discounts and even getting preorder bonuses, who could blame them?
OP, did you provide a pic of the receipt to MS customer services, or just stinkles? One of your previous posts sounded like it was just sent to stinkles, but then you say you provided it to MS. They aren't the same thing.
cheerilee, your post sounds like my thoughts on it.
We need to separate two things out now - having them intertwined is confusing things.
1) if the OP still hasn't contacted MS directly, or provided a receipt, then I think we're flogging a dead horse in this specific case. Perhaps lexi could take a look at the receipt but I don't know.
2) the broader discussion about whether MS should be able to ban accounts and consoles based on no evidence, and putting the onus on the consumer to provide proof. Personally I think they shouldn't be able to punish you without proof on their end (innocent until proven guilty etc), and they certainly shouldn't be removing access to things you have paid for (online portions of games, XBLA purchases etc)
MS should put in place more consumer friendly methods to catch pirates and prevent early online play of games. They have a 'ring of fire' around the release date, so if you're not on the whitelist and go online you get flagged (probably how the OP got caught in the first place'. Why not simply put up a message saying you can't play online until X date?
If you want to go further, then for Internet connected consoles you could prevent single player by doing a quick check on date.
It's poor practice to review online when there's no one else playing, though. Many reviews often say they'll update later with a review of the online aspect. Anyway, it's not a problem making a white-list for those who actually can access the game earlier. mrklaw also makes an excellent point - it's likely a white-list that makes them able to catch people in the first place, so it's absolutely ludicrous to ban them and not just restrict access. MS obviously finds people playing too early, why do they let them continue, then punish them? It makes it seem like they really don't give a shit about the user and would rather take them hostage to have them give up stores.
But I think it's a pretty accurate theory that someone else had - I wouldn't be surprised if it's MS that leaks the rips in the first place, to go after the ones that download the rips.
blitzcloud
Banned
What i've been saying for quite a bit of time. They rarely get pirates too, as they perfectly know how MS bans in these occasions. They can only catch the careless guys that go in like the guys that change their avatar profile, or say that they make COD lobbies for MSP
So the whole situation is unfortunate and pretty much a witch hunt.
gaming_noob
Member
Stinkles is well known on GAF and well-liked. He's always been professional, and this situation is really beyond his control. I'm not sure why you want to defame someone over this. The last thing we need is another industry insider leaving the forum.
Pretty much this. Stinkles went above and beyond and did this gaffer a favor. No need to ridicule him. I still think there is part of the story were missing, and maybe that information cannot be divulged.
Photolysis
Banned
This situation isn't acceptable; customers are not bound by release dates, and it is perfectly legal for you to be sold the game early. As usual I'm amazed by what some are willing to defend.
I think turning this around on Frankie isn't cool though. He can forward a request on to the relevant department, but he doesn't have the ability to unban anyone himself. It isn't a ban from Halo 4 specifically.
I think turning this around on Frankie isn't cool though. He can forward a request on to the relevant department, but he doesn't have the ability to unban anyone himself. It isn't a ban from Halo 4 specifically.
The Elite
BOSS
I'm worried this sensible post will be lost in the shuffle because you don't have an avatar.
I absolutely agree with you. 100%.
I've been floored at the amount of people defending MS's actions in this thread. I couldn't imagine ever penalizing a paying customer for buying one of my products. Even if they did get it before the date I wanted it made available to the public.
Bumblebeetuna
Gold Member
Wow Microsoft. How stupid.
That particular case stopped being interesting when the OP bought a new console.
But the fact alone that MS admits having banned serveral players who played the game before the street date but after the game has been shipped to stores is the real scandal here. Nobody should treat their customers like that when there is no proof or clear indication that someone is playing a pirated copy.
What are they thinking? How could treating their paying customers like pirates help them in any way?
I get almost every game a fews days before steet date. If they ever pull a stunt like that with me, I will never spend another cent for anything videogame related from MS. Even a quick unbanning couldn't fix such a loss of trust.
robotzombie
Member
Hahaha you try to call me out for saying peoples' posts are ridiculous and then proceed to post something ridiculous. Also, no need for a rebuttal when you are making up a scenario that has nothing to do with anything. The more important thing to point out is how you falsely accused me of condoning or specifically suggesting a small mom and pop store SHOULD break street dates as opposed to simply mentioning the fact that it is an advantage they have because they are small and under the radar and it is something MANY of those stores do in order to compete, because otherwise they do not have many options. I've already pointed out the risks they take in doing that, but it is their choice and it is one of not many available to them. Good work on your ridiculous post though! Haha you really got me with that one
Well he said he talked his friend into doing it so lets not pretend its some crusade by small business owners to buck the system.
Ah yes, I figured this was the case with the OP. Thank you for all the info, LExi.
I imagine the OP's scenario is not rare for MS, and they have procedures in place to take care of it.
We all know how GAF leans, so ignore the nonsense about you deserving ban & such. YOu tried to do a good thing here. Shame it couldn't work out, but that's life.
Uno Venova
Banned
What pitchforking have I done to stinkles?
Gemüsepizza
Member
Have you seen his pictures? He has an original copy of the game. What has happened here is amazing. First they ban the OP when he did nothing wrong - he simply bought a game before release; then they blackmail him into revealing the name of the store - and you think that's ok? Because that's clearly what they want, they want the name of the store to bring them down, because they dared to sell a copy early. They don't care about a proof of his purchase, they want the name. And this store clearly commited a monstrous crime here, and deserves to be hit hard and maybe even put out of business, if it's a small store.
That would be really alarming.
"how GAF leans"? Yeah, GAF is really full of entitled customers!
d00d3n
Member
The meme idea was a joke ofc, but I have a hard time seeing Stinkles as the wronged party here. Whatever his intentions were, the end result was a delayed response to this gross and offensive wrongdoing by Microsoft. Now that we are past the prime time of the Halo 4 release window, this "issue" grows colder by the minute. Hoping for any kind of viral spread of the story or media attention seems optimistic. So Microsoft don't care, Stinkles is apparently immune from criticism, and the big losers are consumers everywhere and the thread creator in particular.
onlyindreams
Banned
polyh3dron
Banned
this.
no matter how he got the game, it is a retail copy, not pirated. the receipt is fucking irrelevant here. he never should've been banned for playing a copy that was manufactured by microsoft.