DeepEnigma
Gold Member
So, how would EB test these things? Do they create a profile right there and connect to the internet? Judging by past experiences, they do not seem the most equipped for the technology evolving.
-
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.
Sony Permanently Banning PS4 Console
- Thread starter GVA1987
- Start date
.
No shop/store/marketplace should be accepting bricked consoles, they should be checking as they trade them
cheesesic666
Neo Member
seems reasonable if the console has been reported stolen.
I'd say GS is more in the wrong here. I could understand if it was a private seller trying to grift away a borked PS4, but Gamestop should be aware this is a possibility with the systems they take back, and test for it. A huge retail chain selling their customers unusable products is inexcusable.
LukasTaves
Member
The weird part for me is the completely unintuitive error.
"You may have a temp or permanent ban, on either the console or the account"
Gee, that's helpful.
"You may have a temp or permanent ban, on either the console or the account"
Gee, that's helpful.
Theonik
Member
Because preventing users from abusing chargebacks is pretty important. For all you know that person might have basically taken hundreds of dollars worth of games. If they could make a new account and start again it would be quite bad.
Also this is done so the original owner can't profit from this or lie to support. They need to be hard in cases such as this. It is EB Games responsibility to check systems for things like this, and ultimately the previous owner is quite shitty for trying to pass the system on too.
e: Mind as these systems become more complex, it is quite difficult to fully test used systems for faults especially if it's an online issue. That's why used system warranty exists for major retail.
Also this is done so the original owner can't profit from this or lie to support. They need to be hard in cases such as this. It is EB Games responsibility to check systems for things like this, and ultimately the previous owner is quite shitty for trying to pass the system on too.
e: Mind as these systems become more complex, it is quite difficult to fully test used systems for faults especially if it's an online issue. That's why used system warranty exists for major retail.
Not all the time
PanicFreak
Member
Really? You don't think Sony should care about the royalty income that it earns? Or the 30 percent cut it gets on digital sales? Or the PS+ membership?
Verizon shouldn't care about the 90 dollar plan you pay for each month?
hikarutilmitt
Member
As much as it would be nice to have specific info, things like this most companies leave it nebulous specifically to prevent circumventing it (even though there's usually a way to do it easily anyway). Spam blockers don't generally tell you how they work to prevent this, for example.
Also, I'm somewhat amused everyone keeps saying the console is bricked when it's not. It's still usable, just severely hampered. Frankly, whoever gets it next could probably call Sony and get it unbanned.
Still sucks, though. I only ever saw banned 360s when they were modified. I've never heard of Sony outright banning a console and it makes me wonder if that's really what it was or if it's something else.
BibiMaghoo
Member
As has been mentioned this is to prevent the most serious offenders from just making a new account. A few years back I was victim to the same issue, buying a used 360 for my son in law, only to find out it was perma banned from Live and couldn't be returned. It's a shitty move that actually results in people having to buy new consoles, because that is what the banned person will do, it won't stop them from playing.
lukeskymac
Member
It's hilarious that people are trying to pin the blame on Sony instead of EB or the original owner, or suggest that this policy was made mainly to avoid second-hand purchases. You guys are a sad bunch.
CosmicQueso
Member
But EB swapped out the console for a different one no problem.
So sure, EB should have done more rigorous testing, but they took care of the issue.
Back to the blame on the original owner for doing something nefarious enough to get the system blocked.
Demoskinos
Member
Wait they actually brick the console as in rendering it fully unusable? I thought they just banned consoles from connecting to PSN.
No it's just banned from PSN and the op is calling it bricked because he can't put a profile on it. However I am pretty sure you can create a guest account that can save games even without the network and I am pretty sure you can pull software and hardware updates still.
Yea OP downloaded a system update which is how the banned was noticed so updates still work just no online access to games and PSN
Duxxy3
Member
I have a pre-owned PS4 and have spent a few hundred just on digital games. If I bought a pre-owned system and it was banned, I would have returned it and never bought a PS4 again.
That just seems crazy to me. If I buy anything used from any retailer and it doesn't work I'm going to be pissed at the retailer for selling me something that they clearly didn't test.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
That is the logical way to look at it, lol.
Breakfast at Noon
Member
just take it back.
This pretty much.
The truth is that there isn't any way for them to verify that you aren't the same person(or a friend) just getting their console unbanned. Banning the console is meant to stop the original user from getting anything out of it. That includes not being able to sell it. EB should have checked it before selling it. If they only banned the account, the user could have just created another. Unfortunately, they were able to sell it for gain.
That's not really what happened here. A person sold their already banned PS4 to EB. EB didn't check if it was banned. OP baught already banned console and can't use it because it was banned. They didn't take anything away fro OP. He/She just had to take it back and get one that wasnt banned and enter their account on that.
Backlogger
Member
That's pretty extreme but I guess if issues are rampant enough it could be justified. Might be another reason though to not buy a used PS4 from someone you don't know and trust or that you can simply return it too.
FunkyLounge
Member
How does a person owe money to Sony? Not another company to Sony, just an ordinary person. How would you even achieve that?
Iorv3th
Member
Could it have even been something other than chargebacks. Like account fraud (stealing other users login information and setting that console as primary to download their stuff) or tampering with the system?
I know Microsoft would ban 360 consoles that had been tampered with or the ones they sold where you paid monthly, if you didn't pay the console would be banned from xbox live with no way to unlock it.
I know Microsoft would ban 360 consoles that had been tampered with or the ones they sold where you paid monthly, if you didn't pay the console would be banned from xbox live with no way to unlock it.
joecanada
Member
logic: "If I bought a dodge off of a used lot who never checked any credentials and it turned out to be stolen, I'd return it and never buy a dodge again. fuck Dodge".
Usually they at least boot consoles up and try a game on them, right? Surely they would have fucking worked this out before re-sale???
Theonik
Member
Buy a bunch of games off PSN then charge back.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Won't a game still work though on the console, in which they do test on trade ins?
For this, they would have to essentially connect these things to the internet every time, update them (if needed), and test with creating a profile, etc., all during the trade in process.
A lot of time/energy involved. Especially for a seemingly ultra rare instance. The original owner was blatantly wrong, EB was unintentionally wrong, it was swapped. End of story?
joecanada
Member
as someone else pointed out, you could easily have bought stolen goods or have just "sold" it to a friend .... they clearly want that particular console off the network and the user to not be able to use it. if that user sells it as is, "broken" then he is basically defrauding whoever he sold it to.
the goal is for sony to recoup some money if this person wants another console they would have to buy it. (or its outright stolen and should therefore be useless except to the original owner).
It really should have never happened. EB needs to check their preowned items.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Despite the hacking stuff, there is in particular this:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1241575
Places use to make you provide ID when re-selling so they could report you if stolen or find you if broken.
yeah. i dont understand the drama. just check the things you buy
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
They no longer do this?
(I truly do not know. I have not traded things into EB in over a decade, and have not shopped there in 4 years.)
Hint
Sony
I honestly haven't been to a Game store in at least 3 years. One would hope so.
I mean, I get it. If you buy something, you want it to work. And most people don't think of the logistics of things so it just seems like a no-brainer to them.
I find it fascinating that I've read through the thread up to now, with so many people indicating that this isn't on Sony, and that the blame lies partially with EB for not testing, and not a single person has suggested that the console may not in fact have been banned at the time they bought it.
One of the reasons a console ban is a bad idea in this situation, is that it can easily be premeditated. Someone can decide to get rid of their PS4, realise that they've recently made a few hundred dollars of digital purchases they can't sell, and so issue a charge back AFTER selling the console. EB is screwed, next buyer is screwed, and the fraudulent original owner is in the clear.
Accounts issuing fraudulent chargebacks should certainly be banned, but I don't agree that banning the console is worth the potential side effects. It's really not much of a deterrent.
One of the reasons a console ban is a bad idea in this situation, is that it can easily be premeditated. Someone can decide to get rid of their PS4, realise that they've recently made a few hundred dollars of digital purchases they can't sell, and so issue a charge back AFTER selling the console. EB is screwed, next buyer is screwed, and the fraudulent original owner is in the clear.
Accounts issuing fraudulent chargebacks should certainly be banned, but I don't agree that banning the console is worth the potential side effects. It's really not much of a deterrent.
joecanada
Member
if the person was actually a gamer, they would likely buy another console and perhaps another (see RROD 360). This is actually a secondary way to get your money back. this person may buy multiple consoles and games multiple times, although they may just as be likely to cheat on a new one again or defraud the system.
EB could still check that the system was factory reset or not tied to an account couldn't they? or maybe that would be impossible to actually verify the serial numbers and whatnot...
gioGAF
Member
It's not shitty. It makes perfect sense. The last owner did something fraudulent. He/She probably used stolen funds to buy things from the store. The way I see it, Sony HAS to brick the console, otherwise the criminal gets to keep and use everything that was illegally bought on the console.
The store should have checked the console before buying it, but that is usually too time consuming for them. Better to replace it and toss it than to dedicate the resources to doing an in-depth check I guess...
The store should have checked the console before buying it, but that is usually too time consuming for them. Better to replace it and toss it than to dedicate the resources to doing an in-depth check I guess...
There's absolutely nothing EB could check that would protect them from chargebacks applied directly after the console is sold to them. If I was going to sell any of my consoles, I'd certainly factory reset them first...
Plus, if we're talking about a gamer that wants to continue playing within that ecosystem, the cheapest way for them to get back in would be the purchase of another used console. There wouldn't be any gain for Sony in this case, and the guilty party only pays the difference between the trade in value and the price of a used console. It's a poor deterrent in nearly any case, and does more harm than good. Voiding and not accepting the used method of payment should be enough would be the bigger inconvenience, as it couldn't be done with the main account, for risk of losing all previous purchases, and you couldn't realistically pull chargebacks infinitely for the same vendor, whereas replacing the console can be done as many times as needed.
Astral Dog
Member
Disgusting, from both the previous owner and Sony.
Edit: wait how can you be in debt from your PS4, what kind of system they use?
Edit: wait how can you be in debt from your PS4, what kind of system they use?
Saintruski
Unconfirmed Member
Maybe Sony should work with EB, game stop, other verified resellers somehow via means of some code or online process to unlock sold consoles so they can resell them at least. Is there a chance the infringer could rebuy that EXACT same console somehow? I suppose, but it also is likely at that point that they are trying to buy a new/used unlocked ps4 anyways.
Megatron
Member
They should unban it when a bill of sale is shown showing them the console has a new owner.
Every single person they ban is just going to sell the console, so they are just screwing over future ps4 owners.
andythinkpad
Member
If the previous owner report the PS4 mail order was lost or the console was stolen off a delivery truck then I don't see any problem of banning it.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It could be a stolen console for all the OP knows. Which would not constitute an un-ban, regardless of receipt. Apple does this as well with their devices.
And your next scenario will not be the case, because it was returned to EB, and now EB will be in contact with Sony on said console.
Megatron
Member
So what? People love to say that pirating isnt stealing because nothing was lost, so the same is true here. Sony lost nothing. Sony should ban only the account and accept no future charges from the offending credit cards. If they have to put up with a few repeat offenders hitting them with chargebacks, thats better than future customers buying these systems and returning them for xb1/NX's.
RichiRamjag
Member
They made it right, so I don't see why you wouldn't.
Similar threads
- Poll