Greenmangaming Apologizes to Witcher 3 Pre-Purchasers with Discount Coupon
Popular digital retailer, Greenmangaming, has issued an apology to pre-purchasers of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, but is sorry really enough to get their customers trust back?
Digital game retailer Greenmangaming (GMG) is offering a sizable discount coupon to apologize for inconveniencing pre-purchasers of Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.
The hubub began on May 6, when CD Projekt Red, the games developer, alleged that GMG was selling keys which they hadn’t authorized. This led to fans from each side defending their respective groups, until it all died down--that is, until release day rolled around.
Greenmangaming failed to deliver their keys to customers, and actually sent out several hundred, if not thousand, emails with blank key slots. The result was a large forum post of angry customers demanding their keys, or their refunds. Since then, keys have all been released to their buyers, however, there are still reports of some keys being invalid. As a make-good, GMG has sent out an email to everyone who pre-ordered The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. This coupon entitles the customer to 40% off their next purchase with the site, but only applies to those who didn't already ask for a refund.
If you're looking for more Witcher 3 content, feel free to check out our playthrough diaries, or if you find yourself in need of help, we have a complete side quest guide for the game's prologue area, White Orchard.
-
Shacknews
replyJosh Hawkins posted a new article, Greenmangaming Apologizes to Witcher 3 Pre-Purchasers with Discount Coupon
-
-
Not right at this moment, no. They've screwed up. It happens, but now they have to pay the price for their mistakes, and that means losing customers, and having to regain the trust of others.
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Yeah the CD Projekt press releases about this have been a little weird. I guess they're feeling that they have to be super-aggressive to promote GOG now that they are committed to making Galaxy a Steam competitor.
-
-
-
That's almost certainly not true. I would be incredibly surprised if CD Projekt didn't make a distinction between keys sold for resale and keys sold to end users.
-
-
-
I buy a TON of stuff from GMG, but I didn't buy The Witcher 3 from them and would not based on CD Projekt's stance.
That said, I would still buy a ton of shit from GMG. -
I had 0 problems with GMG up until this point. Having been a trusted retailer of mine, I preordered the game a while back, before all the problems came around. People make mistakes, they'll pay big time for this one, but it by no means insists that they should be trusted at all. Will I be buying something from them right away? Doubt it. But it doesn't mean they should be thrust into the fiery pits of hell to burn for all eternity. In the end of it all, some shady stuff happened, and that isn't good. They've got to work to regain my trust, and the trust of others, and that's the consequence of their actions.
-
shouldn't* (I've been doing a LOT of writing today, gimme a break) .
-
[deleted]
-
The definition of shady is "of doubtful honesty or legality." GMG would not advise publicly who their source was, therefore their actions are called into question concerning legality. If they bought from an authorized seller, the law was broken, as those keys were not meant to be resold more than once (and they were resold twice, when GMG bought them, and then we the customer bought it). I'm not saying GMG should be burned to the ground. I didn't say they were IN THE WRONG, and SO BAD, or any of that. I simply said things were looked at as shady, and they were, they are, and they will be for a while. It's just the way things are when something like this happens.
Simply put, we can't see everything behind the scenes, therefore it is considered "shady".-
[deleted]
-
Clearly you aren't understanding where I'm coming from. I preordered the game from GMG. I didn't cancel my preorder from GMG when I heard about the accusations CDPR was making. Therefore I trusted GMG to get the job done. Their actions were shady, whether you agree with it or not.
They were told by CDPR they wouldn't be able to buy keys for the game from THEM the OFFICIAL SOURCE where Valve, and Origin, and every other retailer who is AUTHORIZED to sell them by CDPR got the keys from. This is official news. This is the truth. They did not get their keys from CDPR, which means they went behind the developer's back to get the job done. That is the direct definition of shady. I don't care where they got their keys from. Mine worked, I have the game, I'm happy with my purchase. But that doesn't change that what GMG did, what they REALLY did, was a bit shady.
I'm not perpetuating anything. I'm simply stating the facts. I'm not trying to get people to stop buying GMG. I defended GMG when all this happened, and they let me down by colossally screwing up their key release for The Witcher 3. I sat with a customer service report with zero answers for over 16 hours after release, when I was told that I would receive my key in time to preload the game. I apologize if you don't see the issue with that, but that's the hard facts.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
I never said I thought it was shady, or that GMG was the bad guy. But people do think it is shady. Where did the GMG keys come from? Were they Nvidia keys that were meant to be free to new GPU purchasers? Were they bought from another site? There are questions that aren't answered, and sure, it's GMG's right to not divulge their source. I have no problem with that. Doesn't change that many out there think that their actions are shady. That is a fact. I'm not making it up to make them look bad. I will still buy games from them, just not right now.
-
This is a terrible attempt at walking back your previous statement while still not supporting it or stepping away from it at all.
You said it was shady. Trying to say 'I never thought it was shady" while still justifying it is just pathetic - do you actually think anyone finds that convincing?
There are plenty of solid reasons why GMG wouldn't divulge the source, none of which imply wrongdoing - having their supplier avoid reprisals by CD Projeckt being the most obvious. The idea that a major hardware manufacturer would risk developer relations for a relative pittance is far less likely.
The only shady thing here is baseless suggestions of wrongdoing. That's the worst kind of rumor mongering, and I'm disappointed to see it here.-
You're right on one point. My comment does say that it was "shady", true. Did I not make my point as well as I should have? Another resounding yes.
Apparently what was meant to be a comment of "GMG isn't a bad guy, but that doesn't changed they messed up" came out wrong, and that's my fault for writing in my current state. So apologies for that. As for me rumor mongering? Not in the slightest. I see that my comment has been misinterpreted, I see that this issue was caused by my lack of clarification, and I tried to fix that. Apparently this has caused less clarification and more confusion, so I'm moving on from the entire issue at hand.
-
Right in the above post you write "Where did the GMG keys come from? Were they Nvidia keys that were meant to be free to new GPU purchasers?"
That's a leading question if ever there was one. You can deny rumor mongering all you want, call this a misinterpretation, but you're the one that keeps doing this.-
It's just a question man. You're taking it of context. It was an example of a question that people could be asking, nothing more.
-
Any time someone says "It's just a question" it's basically never just a question. You're a reporter; you ask that and you begin framing the discussion.
If you don't have evidence to back something up or you're not asking it as the first step to refuting it, you should refrain from posting it. -
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Entirely possible it violates all sorts of laws. For example CD Projeckt might have in their key agreement that keys can only be sold to end users . Which would mean GMG themselves wouldn't necessarily be in the wrong but the people that sold the keys to them were.
That's just an example though not what this situation necessarily is.-
-
Which you would think CDPR would have stated in their whole whining about GMG. "They didn't get their keys from us, and the people we sold keys shouldn't be selling keys to them" Had they stated something like that it would have looked less whiny.
-
[deleted]
-
-
Would you buy from sites like G2A, Fast2Play, and CDkeys.com?
-
-
-
Right. I don't disagree. I'm not saying that I think they were being shady, or that I think GMG was in the wrong. But to some people this is considered shady activity. They don't see where the keys came from (are they Nvidia keys? Keys bought from another seller, so on so on), thus issues like this arise. I personally won't be purchasing anything from GMG for a bit, not because of CDPR's accusations, but because of how long it took them to deliver the product I pre-ordered. Yes, mistakes happen, shit hits the fan, all that jazz. Doesn't change the fact they let me down, and thus have to suffer the unharmful effect of me not buying new games from them for a few months.
I never said that GMG was bad. Never made them out to be some bad guy, breaking laws and shattering kneecaps. I just simply said that their actions are viewed as shady. Are they actually shady? Well that's something that is up to everyone else, and their own opinions on the matter. I didn't comment here to butt heads. Merely commented to share my experience in all of this. That clearly spiraled out of control, but there's not anything I can do about that now.-
[deleted]
-
But some shady stuff happened. Just because you and I don't look at it as shady doesn't mean it isn't that way, or isn't looked at that way by others. It's a clear matter of opinion dude. Your opinion is yours, mine is mine, and every other Tom, Dick, and Harry get to have theirs as well.
-
Man, you're dancing a little too hard. :-)
-
Not sure I follow your drift.
Is it wrong of me to not like someone telling me that my opinion is wrong, and that I'm stupid for thinking that way?
-
-
[deleted]
-
I think what he is trying to point out is that it looks like you realized you had dug yourself into a hole by labeling them, then several post later try to use a clarification stating you didn't make that assertion in the first place.
Personally I find that the whole scenario raises questions. Questions we will likely never have answers to.
Is this the common story of the overzealous publisher asserting market control that they were never entitled to? Is this the story of a resourceful digital retailer using a grey market avenue to skirt an anomalous fee? Is it neither?
I wouldn't go as far as to assume either party's actions as 'shady,' inferring a nefarious and/or greedy market move made by skirting legality. Certainly there are questions.-
I didn't dig myself into a hole. Even if I thought that their actions had been shady, I'd still be in the right. We have no solid proof that they were or were not shady. There are too many questions left unanswered for it to be a unanimous vote of "NOT GUILTY". Either way, he has his opinion, I have mine. I don't care either way.
My problem is someone passively aggressively calling me stupid, or telling me I'm wrong because my opinion might vary different from his.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
I apologize if I came across with a tone bordering accusation. I used a qualifier to assure that my meaning wasn't interpreted as such. I attempted to relay how your statements could be interpreted from this thread. Nothing more.
I don't even have a pony in this dog show, as I bought my key from GOG. But I do find the discussion interesting.
Is GMG a trusted retailer after this? Have their recent missteps landed them in the infamous grey market pool of digital storefronts? I guess I'll decide at the next sale.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Hasn't GMG had that same issue recently in another game? A case where they ran out of keys and were sending blank emails to consumers?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Playing the game or maybe eating out with all the money they saved?
-
-
[deleted]
-
Places that offer a discount "on your next purchase" when they fuck up are sort of missing the point.
-
[deleted]
-
Why would I buy from some place next time? I'd prefer a discount on the purchase they fucked up.
-
[deleted]
-
It's not like this is some far out concept JohnnyRey.
-
[deleted]
-
Yeah, you're still missing the point. I was speaking in general terms that I'd far prefer a discount on a current purchase than a future one.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
It's not dumb.
If a restaurant fucked up your dinner, and then handed you a coupon that could only be used at your next visit, would you like that?-
[deleted]
-
I wouldn't. I don't like the false equivalency test tried on me. Come back again with a chance of reduced risk, on us! We promise not to spit in your food over the hassle of entering your coupon into this point-of-sale machine!
As a consumer I'd rather they take their 10 coin and buy a storefront app that doesn't accept orders they don't have the stock to sell. Pure speculation? Sure. Certainly it could be seen as a viable hypothesis.
If nothing else, it's additional hassle. Hassle on my part being forced to contacting support to get what I was entitled too. Hassle on the part of the retailer, as they have to sell to me some unspecified product at a loss at my next purchase. Hassle on the part of the public as now they have another factor to add to the risk assessment of who's who of the trusted digital distributor market.
It's a divide by zero sum game.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Less so than those that fuck up and don't offer shit.
-
True. Happened to me with a service that hauled away my old couch. Offered me a 25% discount for next time. I'll just use someone else next time.
-
-
-
If anything this whole thing makes me think less of CDPR.
-
Why, exactly? Greenman Gaming has always been a tad shady. Many banks automatically flag them as a fraudulent transaction. You don't have that problem if you have your shit together.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This isn't news. There was a running joke about JohnnyRey hating Notch for a long time. All that said he often has a point feisty or not.
-
-
Better? This led to fans from each side defending their respective groups. It all died down--that is, until release day rolled around.
-
-
[deleted]
-
I didn't realize this story blew up here on the shack, but seriously, I bought tons of games
from GMG and I had zero problems. I understand being pissed about not getting your game day 1, but
mistakes happen and from I can tell, gmg is trying to rectify these issues.
heck, I wasn't planning on buying the damn game (haven't finished the first two) but at this discount I'm thinking about it.
-
-
Just purchased Witcher 3 from GMG with a 30% off code in my email, GOG accepted the code no issue.
-
CDPR shafted GMG by not playing ball- GMG tries to recover but gets shafted for "not delivering" to customers.
Gotta love capitalism.
-
The first sentence in the 3rd paragraph appears to be missing the word "Initially", otherwise it's misleading. "Initially, Greenmangaming failed to deliver their keys to customers" is factual and informative. "Greenmangaming failed to deliver their keys to customers," is not factual, as indicated two sentences later, and is misleading.
-
Well just got a key from them went to activate it on GOG and it's invalid.
-
SHADY
-
-
