GTA IV

[DuckofTindalos]

If by "real chance", you mean "no chance at all", we agree...

[JudgeDredd]

Unfortunately, I think T is correct. Guess I'll have to bite the bullet and respond by holding back my money

[leastonh1]

I read things like this and think of the rip offs I and others I know have been subjected to by online sellers and it makes me even happier to spend my money with the likes of Matrix.

At least I'm safe in the knowledge that in the rare event of encountering a problem, I can speak to someone directly about it and get an individual response. No stock answers, bs or quoting T&C's just to dig in. It's good to know there still are organisations out there with decency, honesty and integrity.

[JudgeDredd]

Thinking about it, Regardless of the EULA, I did read their T&C, and so knew there was no refund...so I had the option to continue with my purchase or walk away. I guess that's what would stand up in court.
 
There again, I wasn't aware I was buying something that was broken....so I don't know.

[leastonh1]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Thinking about it, Regardless of the EULA, I did read their T&C, and so knew there was no refund...so I had the option to continue with my purchase or walk away. I guess that's what would stand up in court.

There again, I wasn't aware I was buying something that was broken....so I don't know.

Do they have to abide by distance selling regs or UK Sale of Goods Act? I suspect not, but if so, they've got no choice. Goods must be as advertised, work as described and be of merchantable quality. So, if they sell you software which doesn't work on your PC which DOES match their minimum specs and the PC can be shown to run other, similar software, they cannot argue the toss. Then again, I'm no solicitor and might be talking complete rubbish! Maybe I'm wrong and different rules do apply, but under UK law afaik you're entitled to a refund, exchange or credit note for goods which don't match these criteria. Your choice, not theirs.

[JudgeDredd]

Well, I just found this on the Trading Standards Institute - UK European Consumer Centre
 
 
[font=arial]***************[/font]
[font=arial]Sale of Goods Act 1979[/font]
[font=arial]Covers all contracts made by consumers when purchasing goods, consumers are given full rights under this Act in all circumstances, these rights cannot be restricted by the terms and conditions of the contract.[/font]
[font=arial]Consumers can expect that goods will be:[/font]
·         [font=arial]As described. Goods provided must conform to any description applied to them; this description can be made verbally or in writing. [/font]
·         [font=arial]Of a satisfactory quality.  Satisfactory quality means that the product should be of a quality that a reasonable person would expect from the goods taking into account any description, the intended purpose and the price that is paid. [/font]
·         [font=arial]Fit for the purpose made known. If a consumer intends to purchase goods to use for a specific purpose other than that which it is intended and this is made known to the seller, then the goods should be suitable for that purpose. [/font]
[font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial]Generally a consumer can claim a repair or replacement of the goods if they become faulty or do not conform to the contract, if this is not possible or not economical the consumer can look to claim a full or partial refund.  If the consumer notices the fault, misdescription or unsuitability quick enough after the purchase then they may be able to reject the goods for a full refund.[/font]
[font=arial][/font] 
[font=arial]If second-hand goods are being purchased the purchaser must take into account the age, condition and price of the product. Consumers get the same rights when purchasing second-hand goods unless a fault is related to reasonable wear and tear or they are made aware of any faults before purchase.[/font][font=arial]
***************
 
Again, it may well not be relevant, but I've responded quoting it anyway.[/font]

[PunkReaper]

Try ringing Citizen's Advice for a free way to find out your legal position.

[Arctic Blast]

I've always liked the idea of Steam as a distribution hub/DRM scheme. I have never USED Steam because of their rather awful customer support record and somewhat draconian Terms of Use.

Anyway, good luck JD...from, everything I've read, the GTA 4 PC version was broken, buggy, memory leaking 'quick buck' port.

[JudgeDredd]

Well, turns out I got it running tonight. Bugger it all to hell...defo no chance of a refund now! Oh well...a refund wasn't what I was after...working game is what I wanted and it's here now.
 
As for this from Steam...

... - please review Section 4 of the Steam Subscriber Agreement for more information...

after I wrote this to them...

I know you state no refunds...

I can do without that kind of support and will never again recommend them as a reseller, nor will I buy another of their products.
 
A little understanding goes a long way. I've bought 13 games from them and never needed tech support. The one time I need help, they throw their terms and conditions in my face....oh dear...how to waste a happy partnership. [8|]
 
I wonder if companies actually worry about how they treat their customers? I wonder if they really understand the damage they do to themselves? [:-]

[LarryP]

I bought several games through Steam a while back. In the spring of 2007 I wrote about my last experience with them on here. You must not have read it. It was about getting a Trojan through their network. Their answer was about the same as what you received Judge. I hate that company and will never buy anything from them ever again.

[Arctic Blast]

That's what has always worried me about Steam. They have a pretty crappy reputation for helping customers in need of any assistance, and their entire Terms of Use document basically reads as "If it works, yay for us. If it doesn't, too damn bad for you."

[LarryP]

Yep! I have read only bad about their customer support, or lack of I should say. And they are a huge company too that can afford to give support.

My wife bought me the Orange Box games a year ago and when I went to install it off of the DVD, it said it would run through Steam! That was one gaming present gone bad. [:(]

[DuckofTindalos]

A third finished with the game, and my patience is worn out. Rockstar and I are finished, now that I've uninstalled the oodles of garbage the damn thing left on my hard drive. Good Lord!

[JudgeDredd]

Yeah...finding it pretty under whelming I have to say. Big world, very open, but a lot seems to be locked down until you progress through the game....so not as open as one would think.
 
Oh well, we live and apparently, in my case, don't learn! [:D]

[leastonh1]

ORIGINAL: LarryP
My wife bought me the Orange Box games a year ago and when I went to install it off of the DVD, it said it would run through Steam! That was one gaming present gone bad. [:(]

Me too. I bought a new copy nice and cheap from Ebay over Xmas, thinking mistakenly that with the physical copy I'd not be forced to use Steam. Wrong!!! So, it was removed and is now gathering dust on my shelf. Valve don't have a lot going for them in my book.

[JudgeDredd]

Shame about the Orange Box...as much as I now have a beef with Steam, I couldn't stop using them for one simple fact...my life is intrinsicly tied to them with their excellent game Team Fortress 2!

[NefariousKoel]

How 'bout that wonderful DRM?

I'm quite surprised the one person who usually shows up to defend draconian, buggy DRM hasn't shown his face yet.  There's always at least one trying to defend this new wave of garbage.

[Arctic Blast]

I found Rockstar's insistence on having GTA 4 bought on Steam STILL installa nd use SecuROM...isn't that kind of redundant???

[ilovestrategy]

I have the 360 version. Sorry i can't help ya Judge. [:(]

[JudgeDredd]

Oh it's working now and I'm decidedly under-whelmed by it. Probably made all the worse by the amount of time it took me to get it working.
 
Not worth the money or the time I spent!