Buyer Beware on Epic Games

[Saracen999]

Why does any of this entitle someone to a refund, when they are clearly outside the set period specified in the well defined T&Cs of the contract?
For fear of reputation loss?
I think not, for that is exactly how Ebay runs business and there are plenty of people here ready to kick off about that!

When a customer wants to throw every legal entitlement at a retailer to demand a refund, they get applause, but when a retailer elects to use its own legal protections to draw a line that is reasonable and legal, they're the bad guys for it?

Moreover, this sort of thing has happened before with heavily bugged games, and generally it's the game company that gets [censored] over it, not the retail platform.

It doesn't, but nor do contract terms necessarily end the issue. I regularly hear cases on consumer affairs programs where retailers deny liability "because T&C's" only to have it pointed out that :-

- consumer law always trumps T&C's, and
- just because a contract includes a term doesn't necessarily make it enforceable.

In the case of entitlement to a refund, if contract says no, and consumer law says yes, consumer law wins.

But I wasn't really referring to entitlement but to when good customer service can make sense even if, or perhaps especially, when no legal liability exists, and that bad customer service (especially where a legal liability does exist, but is being denied) can cost customers and that doing that unnecessarily is often not a good long-strategy.

But I am certainly not suggesting that customers are always right. Quite often, they're cheeky beggars merely trying it on.

[Ttaskmaster]

- consumer law always trumps T&C's, and
- just because a contract includes a term doesn't necessarily make it enforceable.

Often they will include something suggesting that, by downloading and installing/running their content, you waive certain/any rights afforded you by consumer law in favour of their contract. It depends and is probably buried somewhere in that EULA that everyone skips.

Digital content must be:

1/. Of satisfactory quality
2/. Fit for a particular purpose
3/. As described by the seller

In the case of 1, the quality is not really a factor here. It's the function that is the concern.

In the case of 2, it would need to be shown that the game was not fit. Because it's on PC, this would mean it needs to be tested against various PC setups (including the OP's specific one, vs the developer's intended specs), as the issue might be a software conflict and not even the fault of the Dev. It might be your internet had a hiccup and the game files didn't download properly (I've had several Steam games that needed to go through their File Validation feature) or you haven't updated certain drivers. Any number of things.

Apparently lots of people across different platforms are having issues... but plenty of other people are not. That suggests the game is working in some cases, and it may just be that it requires some setting, addon, feature, update or one o' them that Microsoft .NET Framework things - I can't say myself as I'm not familiar with the game, but it could be argued that the game itself is not faulty in that case. "I couldn't figure out how to make it work" does not necessarily mean the same as "It is unfit for purpose".
However, I see a number of forums and Reddits where Ashen Devs have released a patch or two and the issue has been fixed for many players. I also note a lot of Steam players being refused refunds on the game just like Epic, again because of the 2-hour playtime limit, and presumably because they cannot verify whether you were actually engaged on an in-game quest and thus actually 'playing' the game, or just standing around wondering where your co-op buddy is... while others on both platforms have had their requests granted.

But either way, many hardware retailers cannot provide expert services to confirm whether a motherboard of GPU is indeed faulty, so it has to go back to the manufacturer. So too would a game retailer not have the technical ability to check and validate every individual instal/config/system suitability for every single game they sell in order to verify where the fault lies, so really they'd have to refer back to the Devs in such cases in order to validate any such entitlement.

In the case of 3, I would question who the seller is. Devs often talk about selling their game on Steam, so does that make them the seller, or Steam, or what?
T&Cs suggest that in most cases it is the platform, but it's not always... Would need to read the applicable blurb specific to this game, as it could be a factor.


As is, I expect EpicSteam will wait until enough people demand refunds before they decide it's 1 or 2 and then reclaim their costs off the Devs, before issuing refunds to those who have requested one.


Regarding good customer service, Steam and Epic (and indeed most other places) have pretty much the same T&Cs, whereby it comes down to that 2-hour limit. They do also say they'll consider applications outside of their terms, which they quite kindly have done in this case and it's just that their judgement call was not in favour of the consumer in this instance.

Good faith is likely something that's been abused ever since the day they went live with Refunds, so I'm not surprised they're a bit lacking in faith these days.

I suppose you could wave the law at them, report them to Trading Standards, hire solicitors, take them to court and (potentially) triumph over their evil empires, but most people can't afford that, especially over a £30 game and if it's not ruled in your favour you lose a lot more.

Failing that, from such a weak post-2 hour gameplay position, the better option is to assemble a structured argument explaining exactly what is broken, why it exempts you from the 2-hour limit, and take it higher up the chain of EpicSteam customer service command. That, or never buy anything from anyone ever again, since they all have pretty similar policies these days.

[Jonj1611]

I believe both Steam and Epic actually go beyond the law.

I am not an expert and maybe wrong but I believe you have 14 days to withdraw from your purchase UNLESS you have downloaded the game :

You also enjoy the right of withdrawal within 14 days from concluding the contract for online digital content. However, once you start downloading or streaming the content you may no longer withdraw from the purchase, provided that the trader has complied with his obligations.

They give you 2 hours when they don't by law need to

[Saracen999]

Often they will include something suggesting that, by downloading and installing/running their content, you waive certain/any rights afforded you by consumer law in favour of their contract. It depends and is probably buried somewhere in that EULA that everyone skips.

Digital content must be:

1/. Of satisfactory quality
2/. Fit for a particular purpose
3/. As described by the seller

In the case of 1, the quality is not really a factor here. It's the function that is the concern.

In the case of 2, it would need to be shown that the game was not fit. Because it's on PC, this would mean it needs to be tested against various PC setups (including the OP's specific one, vs the developer's ....
.
.

I can't say I've ever seen a contract try to suggest that it supercedes consumer statutes like that. Normally, they're very careful to stipulate they aren't trying to do that but they also seek to minimise the extent of any damage caused to their rights if anything they do if deemed to have restricted consumer rights, for fear of getting larger chunks of their contract than necessary voided.

The thing is, at least in the UK, they cannot get the consumer to waive statutory rights, even if the consumer agrees to it, because the statute explicitly prevents any such attempt. Such terms would, in the word of the act, "not be binding".

That provision goes back at least as far as the '79 Sale of Goods Act, and I still there for the 2015 Consumer Rights Act. Sections 31 (goods), 47 (digital content) and 57 (services) with enforcement procedures (via regulators) in schedule 3.

Essentially, at least in UK law, for any trader trying to dodge consumer rights with any such provision, law-makers saw them coming, and invalidated such attempts. I think EU law (directives establishing common cross-border provisions) held a similar provision but it's been a while since I looked. US law? I don't remember. And that would be sure to be an issue if the contract was governed by US law.

This is what I meant about contract terms not necessarily ending the matter, because whatever they try to assert, statute specifically invalidates any such attempt, and no contract does or can supercede or override a specific statute bar.

[Ttaskmaster]

The thing is, at least in the UK, they cannot get the consumer to waive statutory rights, even if the consumer agrees to it, because the statute explicitly prevents any such attempt. Such terms would, in the word of the act, "not be binding".

In the case of the sale of digital goods, as well as some other situations for which I'd have to consult an acquaintance for precise details, European Law does specifically allow consumers to waive their rights.

Edit - For example: https://law.stackexchange.com/questi...atutory-rights

I am not an expert and maybe wrong but I believe you have 14 days to withdraw from your purchase UNLESS you have downloaded the game :
They give you 2 hours when they don't by law need to

Indeed, you're not wrong.
However, the above three points do still apply, but whether the situation meets the criteria is not, ultimately, decided by the buyer themselves.

[Saracen999]

I think two situations are getting mixed up here, those being 'distance selling', where consumers can just change their mind about buying. Even in the UK, and with the old DSR, rights for goods and services varied, especially once a 'service' had commenced. The other, with fitness for purpose, relates to SoGA/CPR faulty goods, etc, long after DSR-type provisions have expired.

[Jonj1611]

I think the definition of faulty will be hard to prove, it took me 30 seconds to do a google search of people with this issue and the workarounds, co op does work maybe just not as intended.

But again thats the developers issue not epic's, they didn't make the game and again not sure what help they are supposed to give apart from the contacting the developer which they have done.

One to chalk down to experience I imagine, don't use epic in future, try your luck with steam. If you can find the game you want may have better luck with gog as their refund policy is better but prepare to jump through some hoops

[Ttaskmaster]

I think two situations are getting mixed up here, those being 'distance selling', where consumers can just change their mind about buying. Even in the UK, and with the old DSR, rights for goods and services varied, especially once a 'service' had commenced. The other, with fitness for purpose, relates to SoGA/CPR faulty goods, etc, long after DSR-type provisions have expired.

Consumer Rights Act applies to digital products too.
https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rig...gital-download

"If you want to download something within 14 days of buying it, you will have to give your consent to waive the 14-day cooling-off period".
"This is to prevent you from changing your mind after you have downloaded the content".

[Galant]

Apologies for the delay it's been a busy end of the week.

Just to clarify some points.

Jonj1611- Finding supposed work arounds is easy. I'm not that inept with Google. The trouble is that none of it worked. At all. If you have had the issue, found a work around, and had success, then please let me know. I'd be happy to have it working. Or even if you haven't tried it, send it along, I'll give it a shot. However, believe me when I say I've spent ages reading such things, watching videos and looking for any way to make it work. That includes the official developer guide to making it work (link).

Another point that might be worth making is that although the game appears on multiple platforms there are apparently coding/connection variations between the platforms to such an extent that one might be able to consider Ashen on Epic as a unique thing. For example, this comment can be found in the official guide to making coop work: "Additionally, for multiplayer on PC, ensure that you launch Ashen via the Epic Games Store/Launcher - our matchmaking is tightly coupled with their server tech." I'm not a programmer so I don't know exactly what goes into making a game connect with Epic's client and how that would affect multiplayer but it sounds like there are specific differences between Ashen on Epic and other platforms. Perhaps each one is unique, but it doesn't seem a stretch to imagine that had I bought this game on Xbox or on Steam I might not have had these issues at all. As such, it might not be true that Epic have nothing to do with this game and they're just resellers.

To the nature of the problem not just being an individual being inept and in fact a wider problem one need only turn to the numerous comments, articles, videos and chats all over various websites and social media. There is definitely an issue here on a wider scale.

Here's how the game is described on Epic's client as of the time of this posting:

"Ashen is an open world co-op action RPG about a wanderer in search of a place to call home."
"Tags - Action Co-op RPG"

"Ashen

Ashen is an open world co-op action RPG about a wanderer in search of a place to call home.
Passive Co-Op Multiplayer
As you adventure through Ashen, you'll occasionally encounter other players in a massive open world, akin to the passive multiplayer of Journey. It's up to you to decide how to deal with them - fight together against evil, invite them into your party or simply ignore them."

"PC Exclusive on Epic Games store through December 2019"

So the game was launched on PC as an Epic exclusive. Maybe that means nothing legally but they at least had a specific relationship with the developers for releasing the game and distributing it for one year. In addition the game is clearly and repeatedly marketed as a co-op game. They literally state that players will encounter other players with a choice to play with or ignore them. It's not some minor part of the game.

So for one year they were the proud sole distributors of a game heavily marketed as a coop experience and which, according to the developers, is in some way uniquely and essentially tied to the Epic client software.

Now, here I come as a buyer purchasing this game to play on their environment and I find out that the game, for whatever reason, is not at all a coop experience as described. I've referred to official developer information on making it work. I've spent time checking settings, coordinating with my friend to make sure we're exactly at the same point in the main story of the game in order to fulfill these requirements from the guide:

"For two players to connect, you’ll need to be at roughly the same part of the main story. A good indication for this, is the bosses you’ve defeated. For example, a player who has defeated the first boss, can't connect with a player who hasn't defeated the first boss. You also need to be in the same area as another player to run into each other."

"Generally, outside dungeon doors and near ritual stones are great places to connect to other players. However, if you interact with and sit down at a ritual stone, you’ll reset the world and disconnect with anyone you were playing with."

"Multiplayer match-making in Ashen is region based, so it'll match you with players based in your region for random encounters. If you're using a filter code though, it'll ignore the regions."

I've reached out to developer support by email and had bounce-backs, I've reached out via Discord and had these responses from the only active member of their team on there:

"Hi @Galant, I'll do my best to help. Regretfully, as the game uses only passive multiplayer, there's no way to guarantee success. There are some tips though that aren't directly touched on in the guides if memory serves:

When I played that particular mission, I had to meet with my brother (we played via Xbox) at the campfire directly across from it. Meeting at the front of the cave never worked.

I also remember something about initializing the game via PC: you both have to launch the game through the EpicGames launcher (similar to how you'd do it in the library screen of steam). Any external launchers (or other means of launching the game) can cause an error with the connection."

"No worries @Galant, for what it's worth, I'm sorry that it is not working as intended."

"This is only my understanding, but here's the best explanation I have for PC: each storefront has its own servers or coded differentiation (Steam, EpicGames, etc) which help connect players to others on the same platform or storefront.

It also involves which ports are open to allow communication between each user and/or the server, but I'm not sure how that works. Some have reportedly had success by opening certain ports, but I don't understand the particulars."

"It might also help to speak to EpicGames' support to see if they can look into potential issues on their end, but as an Xbox player, I regretfully cannot recommend much else."

And in replying to another user
User: "ah well, doesnt sound like regular coop will be a thing then i guess"
Volunteer: "From what they've said, that seems to be the case regretfully. I'm sorry that I don't have better news."

And most recently, he's stated there's been a statement that there won't be any chance of further updates until after their next project, and maybe not even then.


So... having been through all that, and it being clear there's a wider issue, and the fact that there is something particular about the game on Epic, here's what I would have liked:

First to have some sort of longer response acknowledging the issue particularly since the game is marketed as coop.
Second, some fuller explanation about why my request was denied. Hopefully it would be beyond just the idea of an arbitrary two hour limit. A more human and intelligent approach to this is what I would like and which I believe is one of the hallmarks of good customer service anywhere. If the request still has to be denied it would be nice to have at least an acknowledgement of the time factor and the reason why it was denied.
Third, why not offer a refund in the form of store credit? That would allow the benefit of the doubt in the case of genuine issues yet retain the initial amount paid.

The bottom line here, is that when dealing with any store a good will recognition of the buying/selling relationship is important in my view. Regardless of terms the idea that something is advertised as one thing and yet doesn't live up to that promise is very significant. Some sort of approach to understanding that, if not resolving the issue, is essential.

Epic don't seem to care, or don't have the policies or training in place to do that. As such I made this post just to inform other potential buyers - you could buy something on Epic and have a genuine issue with it down the road a bit, and based on my experience have no recourse. If you're going to buy a game, consider doing so via Steam or directly etc.

[Jonj1611]

Ah I see, good customer service, well that's always going to be a moot point, look at the threads on here regarding Scan and returns for example, one persons idea of a good service is not someone else's. Steam is no different to Epic and think you got lucky if you returned something and got a refund outside the 2 hour game period, I have tried to return a game after 4 hours play on Steam and got refused, however I still use them.

I do sympathise with the issues you have had, being of a certain age I remember a lot of the failings of co op as it was going through its infancy and many games that were co-op where you couldn't choose who you played with just that you could play with another random player. I am guessing it's how they worded it, co-op or co-op with your friends but I don't know enough about the game to comment on that. But I still don't think you can single out Epic as being a place to avoid, as I said I have had the same experience on Steam, but Steam are not technical support. For that they would need to contact the company who made the game which according to you they did.

I would say if anything your refund was refused due to the amount of time, 8 hours is way way past the 2 hour limit, maybe if it was 3 you could swing it but 8 hours. As I said before you can complete major AAA games in 5 hours, can you imagine the amount of people that would play the game and return it in that situation.

A store credit would be beneficial but someone still needs to be paid with real money somewhere down the line I suppose.

As I said before if you have had a bad experience of epic just buy elsewhere, steam or gog or similar

[badass]

Consumer Rights Act applies to digital products too.
https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rig...gital-download

"If you want to download something within 14 days of buying it, you will have to give your consent to waive the 14-day cooling-off period".
"This is to prevent you from changing your mind after you have downloaded the content".

Your understanding is a little off. That example you gave there absolutely complies with the law. That is not a case on T's&C's superseding the law but them enforcing their rights within the law. The law cited has a provision whereby rights to return are waived when the digital product is used. They are just making it clear in their T's&C's that is their policy as well.

There is no case ever where T'S and C's override law*. Where T's and C's appear to be able to, that is where the law allows parts of it to be overridden when certain criteria are met.

In the case with the OP's problem they probably have legal recourse from Epic since it was Epic they paid. However it's probably not a large enough amount of money to bother pursuing Epic for. The fact someone else developed the game is irrelevant since the contract was between the OP and Epic. Companies try this stuff all the time. It never stands up in court.

As with any rule there are exceptions. Some acts of parliament can be found to be "bad" by the legal system. However if the act is "bad" then it never was "law

[Jonj1611]

The fact someone else developed the game is irrelevant since the contract was between the OP and Epic. Companies try this stuff all the time. It never stands up in court.

I agree with this entirely, my point was what could Epic do about it from a technical side, ie fault finding etc. As you mentioned it never stands up in court do you have any examples of court cases where games that were bought digitally being returned because they were faulty? Would be interesting to have a read of that and might help me understand the situation better ie returns

[Galant]

A store credit would be beneficial but someone still needs to be paid with real money somewhere down the line I suppose.

As I said before if you have had a bad experience of epic just buy elsewhere, steam or gog or similar

I'm your experience with Steam hasn't been great, but I'm happy to say mine has been better and I'll continue with them. My OP was just to share my experience with others in case thy find it of benefit.

As for someone getting paid somewhere I think that's exactly the point. If I go to a high-street retail and purchase something (the production of which they had nothing to do with, nor can they support), they're still responsible for handling any issues with the purchase and if a product is found to be defective or problematic then they are responsible to handle the situation with the buyer and then they can settle any repair, replacement or reimbursement issues with the supplier. And if that supplier or product is found to be the cause of multiple issues then they can consider pulling the item or supplier's items from their store and not doing business with the supplier.

I don't know where digital differs from physical products, but for me, the fact that Epic haven't wanted to engage in any sort of conversation or responsibility in this issue makes them a company that I don't want to deal with since they don't seem to care about that relationship.

My point of view and people can take the FWIW.

[Jonj1611]

Everyone will have their own experiences and its good to share, lets face it just look at the amount of scan threads.

[Ttaskmaster]

There is no case ever where T'S and C's override law*. Where T's and C's appear to be able to, that is where the law allows parts of it to be overridden when certain criteria are met.

Such as when, by accepting the T&Cs of a contract, you waive certain legal rights.... which is exactly what I said above.

In the case with the OP's problem they probably have legal recourse from Epic since it was Epic they paid.

Possibly... but it would be an argument over different peoples' interpretations of what the exact purpose of the game was according to the description given by Epic and, if they reach a consensus on that purpose as described, whether the game actually meets that.

The fact someone else developed the game is irrelevant since the contract was between the OP and Epic. Companies try this stuff all the time. It never stands up in court.

Not irrelevant, as there are cases when you'd want to bypass the retailer, particularly if the manufacturer (or developer in this case) has provided a guarantee or warranty.
Also, with some services (which, it is sometimes argued, Steam and Epic games, especially online ones, are), you can either bypass the retailer and go after the service supplier, or even have a crack at both.
For example - We supply water services. You may pay a retailer for it and your contract may be with them alone, but you can still take us to court if we fail to supply that service.
I'd argue that the defect was a service issue on the Developers' server and they failed to provide a service. Epic would likely argue that you merely paid them for access to the service, which you'd clearly have gotten if you were on it for eight hours.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'm your experience with Steam hasn't been great, but I'm happy to say mine has been better and I'll continue with them. My OP was just to share my experience with others in case thy find it of benefit.

As for someone getting paid somewhere I think that's exactly the point. If I go to a high-street retail and purchase something (the production of which they had nothing to do with, nor can they support), they're still responsible for handling any issues with the purchase and if a product is found to be defective or problematic then they are responsible to handle the situation with the buyer and then they can settle any repair, replacement or reimbursement issues with the supplier. And if that supplier or product is found to be the cause of multiple issues then they can consider pulling the item or supplier's items from their store and not doing business with the supplier.

I don't know where digital differs from physical products, but for me, the fact that Epic haven't wanted to engage in any sort of conversation or responsibility in this issue makes them a company that I don't want to deal with since they don't seem to care about that relationship.

My point of view and people can take the FWIW.

I have heard from some other people I know Epic customer service is hit and miss. Also people have had some issues with security too,so when people have had accounts compromised,they can take ages to try and sort anything out. Steam does seem noticeably better,despite not being perfect themselves,so it's not even a high bar to improve on!