Should gamers be able to get a refund if a game is broken at launch such as Unity and Halo: MCC?

[VanceIX]

aLkaLiNE said:

VanceIX said:

You have completely misunderstood what I'm trying to say. I said that you need to give the game a week for people to find said game breaking bugs, and then make a decision on it. People who pre-order have what's coming to them, especially since most "incentives" are pure garbage (a mission or some armor? OK). Gamers need to take both critic and user feedback in to account before making a purchase. Anything else is on them. It's been this way since the industry first took off, and it is the way with all the industries in the world. 

You have no one to blame but yourself if you feel the need to pre-order and then get dejected when the game doesn't live up to expectations for the first month. Consumers need to do research and be patient, that's the only way these companies will be taught a lesson. If a game is broken, don't buy it until it's fixed, or don't buy it at all even. 

If for some reason refunds were possible, I doubt anything would change. For one, the refund period would need to be absurdly short (a week at most, and that's really pushing it), since people can beat a game within a couple of days and then return it with some BS excuse on a game-breaking bug to buy a new one. Secondly, how many people who actually do want to return it will have the time? Tons of games are bought and not even played in the first few days. Most people don't even frequent game sites, so they wouldn't know about most of the issues. A lot wouldn't even care. Companies would lose almost no money, since the refunds would still be a miniscule amount compared to those that just kept the game. And I'm not even going to go in to the tax payer money that would be wasted on an agency to determine what exactly makes a game broken.

No, it's better for everyone to be better consumers and be smarter about it. That way, there will be no need for bad/limiting return policies, and pre-order bonsues will disappear. 

So basically your solution to this is at other players expense? Or am I misunderstanding the bolded. That's not a very good solution if you ask me.  7.3/10. Too much water.

What I'm merely suggesting is that devs put in the extra polish time to ensure that there are no gameplay breaking bugs.  It should be mandatory that the product you've acquired a license to distribute and sell is clearly advertised.  If you want to sell your non-functional game that's cool but at least slap a warning sticker on the thing.

Now truthfully I agree with your last few words - People should educate themselves more on what they're purchasing no matter what medium. But this is not a one sided issue.  Developers need to be taking on far more responsibility for these kinds of mess ups. There's also the caveat that most people can't invest the kind of time it takes to inspect every element of a product.  That seems unrealistic and unfair; As a professional in any field, a certain quality of work is expected that comes with the title.  

Oh I agree that devs need to take time and polish their producs. What happened with games like Unity and MCC is unacceptable, no matter how you see it.

What I meant though is that there are always going to be people (like fans of the series or normal people that just wnat to see what the game is like) that will buy the game day 1, and post their thoughts on it. There is no reason of an uninvested consumer to pre-order anyhting, as it just encourages companies to make bad decisions. Listen to what people who absolutely want the game regardless of what it could be like have to say, and then make a decision. Also, there are plenty of professional critics that will now wait until the game has been out a few days to give a review, if you know who they are you can usually trust their opinion.

I'm not against a refun per se, it's just a policy that is very abusable, especially when you consider that almost every game comes out with some kind of bug these days, and that most are beatable in less than 24 hours. What stops someone from beating the game and returning it claiming it doesn't work? That's why I'm opposed to the idea.