Let's have an office pool...
How long do you all think it will take for the first loads of MS CPR v1
to hit the cut-out bins at Sam's, Price Club, etc.? Or become part of a
"Classic" bundle, along with "Al Unser, Jr. Arcade Racing" and "Andretti
Racing"?
I figure 5 weeks.
Bart Brown
I have a somewhat humerous story to share with you. I was up at our
Best Buy store. I was just standing around looking at software and
this young kid picked up CPR and I think he was going to buy it. He must
have been about 14 or 15. I told him he didnt want to do that. He said
why?? I told him about all the problems and everything else and he
asked about any open wheel type games that I knew were good. I told him
that I was primarily a NASCAR and Touring Car racer, but for the money
he should try CART from Papyrus for $29.99 minus a $10.00 rebate. Cant
go wrong for #20 bucks to try the game. I dont know enough about F1RS
etc to recommend the game or anything else, but I have played Indy Car
II (CART Racing) and know its a pretty good sim. He went up to pay for
it said thanks to me as he left and I continued to browse. The store
sales clerk or whatever they are called came over to me and said: "I
dont appreciate what you just did". I said excuse me... He said: "We
dont like individuals steering our customers away from a purchase." I
said... I didnt steer him away from a purchase.... I just pointed him to
a better product for the money. He then said... we are having enough
problems unloading that game as it is without some Anti-Microsoft person
telling our customers its no good. I said, first of all... you know
nothing about me being Anti-Microsoft... secondly, dont blame me because
Microsoft produced a piece of shit sim that nobody wants or are trying
to return as fast as they can. I was amazed that an employee would say
something like that to a customer. I then proceeded to tell him I was
in the market for some software, but I think Ill take my business
elsewhere. (I wasnt going to buy anything that day.... but he didnt
need to know that.) I would never buy software from best buy because of
their software return policies.
(There needs to be a system to try out software before you purchase it
or at least be able to return it easily). This "you bought it its
yours" philosophy among retailers sucks. Thats why I shop EBX for
software. May pay a buck or two more... but at least I can return it
within 10 days for a refund.
Scott
--
///////////////////////////////////////////
// //
// Scott B. Husted //
// //
// http://home.ptd.net/~sbhusted //
// //
// //
// //
///////////////////////////////////////////
Quoted text (10 lines)
> Let's have an office pool... > How long do you all think it will take for the first loads of MS CPR v1 > to hit the cut-out bins at Sam's, Price Club, etc.? Or become part of a > "Classic" bundle, along with "Al Unser, Jr. Arcade Racing" and "Andretti > Racing"? > I figure 5 weeks. > Bart BrownA very interesting story :-) This may sound very ironic. MS should put out
a Glide version of MS CART. But MS sticks to D3D. Can a company in the
software business for too long that it knows no other innovations?
--
Victor Chan
Great story, Scott! I wonder if MS even listens to the feedback from
their retailers? They obviously aren't listening to anyone else.
Bart Brown
I don't own CPR and I don't even have IE 4.0 (netscape here) so I'm not a MS
flunky, but the TR guys who coded the thing said they "did" do a Glide port.
For their game engine they saw no speed advantage. You can probably find the
thread at DejaNews.
dave henrie
> A very interesting story :-) This may sound very ironic. MS should put out
> a Glide version of MS CART. But MS sticks to D3D. Can a company in the
> software business for too long that it knows no other innovations?
> --
> Victor Chan
At this point I would have said ... well some things unprintable in a
family forum actually, but the gist would be, "YOU may be paid to lie
to your customers. I am not."
Agreed, that's totally despicable. I'd also have demanded to speak to
the manager for an empoyee having treated me is such a disrespectful
manner.
It should be illegal, as it is for almost all other goods. I'm sure it
will be eventually as software continues to become a more mainstream
consumer product.
Joe
Quoted text (7 lines)
> sales clerk or whatever they are called came over to me and said: "I > dont appreciate what you just did". I said excuse me... He said: "We > dont like individuals steering our customers away from a purchase." I > said... I didnt steer him away from a purchase.... I just pointed him to > a better product for the money. He then said... we are having enough > problems unloading that game as it is without some Anti-Microsoft person > telling our customers its no good.yours" philosophy among retailers sucks. <<
will be eventually as software continues to become a more mainstream
consumer product. <<
In Australia we have a consumer protection law that states that any retail
product or service must be fit for the purpose intended and be of
merchandisable quality. If you can demonstrate that something is not of
merchandisable quality then you have the right to a full refund. But this
law doesn't seem to ever get applied to software. Or even bad hardware for
that matter. Perhaps it'll have to wait 'til someone rich enough takes a
software company to court to test the point in this category. As you
suggest maybe as more people become more aware of computer products they'll
be less tolerant of being ripped of.
When most of your friends are computer aware, and you spend time with a
hobby like Gp2 and frequent newsgroups etc, you can get the false impression
that the community in general are quite computer aware. But this is not
really the case I believe. There are masses ATM who are totally at the
mersey of sales staff and supply companies. Maybe it'll take until the
current primary school generation grow into the age groups with the highest
disposable income before computer product suppliers will be forced to
smarten up their act.
But alas at the moment more often than not it seems to be a case of anything
goes. With no restaint or responsibility taken by many producers.
Bye
Phillip McNelley
Quoted text (7 lines)
>In Australia we have a consumer protection law that states that any retail >product or service must be fit for the purpose intended and be of >merchandisable quality. If you can demonstrate that something is not of >merchandisable quality then you have the right to a full refund. But this >law doesn't seem to ever get applied to software. Or even bad hardware for >that matter. Perhaps it'll have to wait 'til someone rich enough takes a >software company to court to test the point in this category.(snip)
....and be of merchandisable quality.
(unsnip)
And there's the rub!! That very wording makes it almost impossible for
a consumer to successfully prosecute a retailer/supplier without having
a *very* clever legal counsel and a *very* questionable product.
I'm involved with games retailing and the only reason that we refund (on
something as piss-poor as CPR) is to retain the customer as a happy
customer ....we would lose more by refusing the refund than not. We also
take into account the *reason* that the customer is requesting a refund.
Legally, and at first glance,we would have no requirement to refund on a
product such as this. However, if a very astute lawyer argued the case
properly on the basis of what was advertised as against what was
received in the box, then *some* games would be hauled from the shelves
for reasons of false advertising!
--
Bruce
(at work)
"Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get
tired."
(Jules Renard)
>I'm involved with games retailing and the only reason that we refund (on
>something as piss-poor as CPR) is to retain the customer as a happy
>customer ....we would lose more by refusing the refund than not. We also
>take into account the *reason* that the customer is requesting a refund.
I certainly agree that this is the wisest business decision. I'm sure,
for example, that EB's sales volume and loyal customer base more than
makes up for lost sales on returned product.
I wish there was a local store around here (Victoria, BC) bright
enough to realize that. There's about 5 computer game stores in town,
and if just one of them adopted a liberal return policy they would
clean up, they would quickly become the only place anyone would buy PC
games. They could even charge more if they wanted - I'd gladly pay an
extra five bucks for the sucurity of knowing I could return a product
I'm not happy with.
Joe
> I'm involved with games retailing and the only reason that we refund (on
> something as piss-poor as CPR) is to retain the customer as a happy
> customer ....we would lose more by refusing the refund than not. We also
> take into account the *reason* that the customer is requesting a refund.
So Mike, is CPR on the shelves in your shop?
> > I'm involved with games retailing and the only reason that we refund (on
> > something as piss-poor as CPR) is to retain the customer as a happy
> > customer ....we would lose more by refusing the refund than not. We also
> > take into account the *reason* that the customer is requesting a refund.
> So Mike, is CPR on the shelves in your shop?
Woops, that should be "So Bruce".
On Mon, 19 Jan 1998 11:06:52 +1100, Bruce Kennewell
>And there's the rub!! That very wording makes it almost impossible for
>a consumer to successfully prosecute a retailer/supplier without having
>a *very* clever legal counsel and a *very* questionable product.
Someone in the UK managed to successfully take action against Microsoft
for problems with Win95! I think it got settled out of court though :( A
high level test case which actually goes to court would be best so that
we can get a proper precedent set (assuming it is in our favour of course
<g>).
Cheers,
Richard
>Naturally there are the few occassions where NOTHING is offered because
>of the reason(s). "I don't like it" doesn't gain either a refund or an
>exchange, particularly when the purchaser has had the game for several
>days.
Here are what I think of as valid reasons for returning a game:
1) Poor frame-rate. This can utterly kill any game and make it totally
unplayable, and also there's no reason for it in this 3d-accelerated
age.
2) Major gameplay/AI flaws (see CPR). For example, I certainly would
have liked to return NHL98 for the same reasons.
3) The game simply does not work (and cannot be made to work) on my
hardware.
BTW, I buy enough games that simply being able to return a game for
store credit would be acceptable to me, I don't think a cash refund is
necessary. I think that any reasonable business should be able to
accomodate this (but it's not so, at least not around here).
Joe
Of course, Joe, it must be remembered that no retail outlet is a
charity. In a lot of cases there is a "returns policy" set by the
distributor from who we purchase out stock. In some cases (and it can
actually depend on who the initial publisher is) there is NO returns
policy........the local distributor buys his stock and the retailer buys
his required amount and that's it.
In these cases, the return of a game would require a very good reason
before a refund was given so in some of these situations and exchange is
preferable.
Naturally there are the few occassions where NOTHING is offered because
of the reason(s). "I don't like it" doesn't gain either a refund or an
exchange, particularly when the purchaser has had the game for several
days.
With the upsurge in consumers buying CD writers it is crucial to the
survival of the smaller retailer that refunds and exchanges are looked
at very, very closely.
--
Bruce.
(At home)
Joe....
The only reason (of the 3 you listed) that I would accept as
"legitimate" is #3........and the game would have to be tested first.
#1 is insufficient reason as "poor frame rate" is subjective. How many
posts have we read here over the past years where "acceptable" frame
rate has been discussed?! What is "poor" or "good" is in the eye of the
beholder.
Unless there is a guarantee printed on the box or included with the game
that it will run at 30 fps on a minimum of (specification of system)
then this reason gets thrown out the door.
#2 Can be contentious. Again we have seen those here who say that they
like CPR. Certainly, they appear to be in the minority, but again, it
is subjective. What is acceptable to one may be diabolical to another.
It is this area that causes the greatest amount of grief. Even the
Consumer Affairs department would have a difficult time assissing this
one.
--
Bruce
(at work)
"Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get
tired."
(Jules Renard)
>The only reason (of the 3 you listed) that I would accept as
>"legitimate" is #3........and the game would have to be tested first.
Well, obviously your store testing a game on my hardware is
impractical. So does that mean you just won't accept returns at all?
What this all boils down to is: are you going to treat your customer
like an honest person or like a crook? Are you going to presume they
are trying to steal from you? It's the exact same issue as with
software copy protection that used to be popular - it inconveniences
and insults legitimate customers. Fortunately the software industry
realized they drove off more business than they saved with such
customer-hostile approaches. I'm sure eventually more commercial
software stores will clue in (as EB has done).
Again, it all comes down to a matter of trust. The decision as to
whether a product is satisfactory or not has to be made by the
purchaser, not the seller - just like in almost all other industries.
Joe
