Why I think GT6 was liked by reviewers, but hated by (some) fans

[Mr P510]

And the "GT7 Saga" hasn't even officially started yet......Oh God..

 

[PR3D4TOR]

Are you actually counting from the announce date as though that has any bearing on how complete the game is? A game should be finished or damn near it at release, or it should be sold very clearly labelled as Early Access.

Both games were terrible misjudgments. GT5 was far too ambitious for it's own good, and so they half-assed bits of it to get it out the door. GT6 was far too ambitious for it's own good, so they simply cut bits of it to be promised for later.

The correct thing is to cut the bits of the design that won't make it to release and simply sell the game as is. Don't BS customers that the game is going to become something that it's not. If the game isn't going to sell well based on what's there at the release date, then perhaps think about delaying until it's a worthy purchase instead of selling snake oil.

Im pretty clear in my post but I will reiterate.

GT5 took 5 years to finish & during that 5 year period we got GT5P to play with. People including myself were very frustrated at how limited GT5P was and wished we could get the game as it was with GT5P but with more tracks and a few more options etc getting very tired of the waiting. At that time the delays and wait was the HUGE issue being complained about.

GT6 instead of taking 5 years to complete took 6 months from being announced, and its very much a complete game only missing a few features PD said would not be in at release because they are improving them. So we have a complete game minus a few additional features that are still planned, more features that we were not expecting a new game mode and new cars real and VGT on top of a 2 tracks and a few new layouts to some old tracks.

It is "darn near finished" the only missing features while some find very important other have no use for them at all and neither are a part of the CORE of GT games, PD is working to improve them and make them more than they were or better than they were lets reserve judgement for when we get them and judge then if the wait was worth it or not.

Both games are ambitious, and that to me is a good thing, if PD had no ambition then GT would not be nearly as good as it is and more at the level of other racing games on the PS3. PDs ambition has lead them to pushing the PS3 beyond what was though possible with it I have no doubt they will do the same with the PS4 but that remains to be seen, I do have high expectations.

Maybe Course Marker is too ambitious for GT6 but Course Maker is not GT6, its a small feature of GT6, and Im thankful to have GT6 while PD tries to figure outCourse Maker, as a year and a half ago I had not played GT for over a year upset with the GT4 physics. Ive been playing GT for the last year thanks to GT6. So if you dont think GT6 was ready for you, keep playing GT5 until you think it is, because you would of had to for the last year if not for GT6, and IMO GT5 was terrible. All the features and content dont mean nothing if the Physics went backwards from GT5P to GT4 level. If not for GT6 It would be 2 and a half years since I stopped playing GT5. Thank you PD for GT6, got me back into the series. It could be that PD realized guys like me were putting down GT5 and they released GT6 specifically for us, because it worked.

They have done JUST what you said they should. They have Cut CM and B-Spec until they have them good enough to be in GT6 and I dont think they have BS'ed anybody as they said it wont be in the release edition, if they say that expect to wait at least a year or two, either way we have the same product in hand while we wait on the feature or wait on nothing new to come. I don't understand why you think the prospect of more features coming is worse than being certain nothing new is going to come...

Its all in your head. I see the prospect of improved features coming is much better than, being certain NOTHING will get added. Hmmmm on one hand more features and content as the game grows continuously adding to what is there or on the other hand what was ready a year ago and nothing more ever, maybe a paid DLC pack at the year 1 or 2 mark just with a few cars, nothing else. They couldnt predict the exact day any of it will be ready so, nothing will get added, and we have maybe 5 years to wait on GT7.

It sounds to me like your too focused on the wait, like your checking the news daily for the announcements and expecting to see it in every update. I could of told you from the start that's just going to lead to you pulling out your hair and getting all kinds of frustrated and upset and make the wait seem a thousand times longer than it actually is.

 

[Imari]

They have done JUST what you said they should.

No, they haven't. They sold me a game on the understanding that Course Maker and B Spec were to be included, and they strongly implied that Course Maker was to be in the very near future (see the comments from Kaz about not being sure whether CM would be in at release or just after).

Had they sold me a game that didn't advertise those features as being included in the price and added afterwards, I would be happier.

And I wouldn't have bought the game, either. I'd have used the money to buy something else, probably Game Stock Car.

I don't understand why you think the prospect of more features coming is worse than being certain nothing new is going to come...

See above. I wouldn't have bought the game had I known that Course Maker would take 13+ months. It's been a waste of money.

I was happy enough to buy the game and fiddle around with it for a few months while they finished up what they needed to. I would not have made the same decision had I known how long the wait would be. I find it impossible to believe that PD had no idea of this when they went to release.

Its all in your head. I see the prospect of improved features coming is much better than, being certain NOTHING will get added.

Except that it invites mis-valuation of the game.

Say I'm selling my game, Pudge Racer. Which maximises my sales?

1. Telling the public that there will be no post-release support.
2. Telling the public that there may be post-release support.
3. Telling the public that there will be post release support.

None of this has anything to do with whether I actually provide said support, the sales are done and gone before that ever becomes an issue.

That's a problem if you go for number three and don't actually follow through. It smells a bit of the snake oil salesman to me.

Hmmmm on one hand more features and content as the game grows continuously adding to what is there or on the other hand what was ready a year ago and nothing more ever, maybe a paid DLC pack at the year 1 or 2 mark just with a few cars, nothing else. They couldnt predict the exact day any of it will be ready so, nothing will get added, and we have maybe 5 years to wait on GT7.

That's how I think they should have done it. It's honest.

GT6 should have been sold on it's own merits at release if they weren't sure that they could deliver the showcase updates. No promises. If it's as good a game as you make out, it would have made little difference, but I think that both you and I know that it wouldn't have sold as well without some of the promises PD made. I'm probably not the only person who would have revised their purchasing decision.

GT7 and PD's release schedules are their own problems, and have nothing to do with GT6. If they want to turn GT7 into another 5 year project, then GT6 does nothing to help that.

It sounds to me like your too focused on the wait, like your checking the news daily for the announcements and expecting to see it in every update. I could of told you from the start that's just going to lead to you pulling out your hair and getting all kinds of frustrated and upset and make the wait seem a thousand times longer than it actually is.

Given that the wait has cost me $40 already, sure. I could have just played GT5 instead and bought GT6 when it was $20, or probably less by the time CM comes out.

I get irritated when people mislead me. I get irritated when I'm sold something that doesn't perform as advertised. And yet more irritated when it doesn't perform as advertised but I have to wait a year to find that out. If it hadn't worked out of the box, I'd take it back to the store and get a refund.

A year later, it's impossible. I've tried.

 

[Jbaffoh]

Im pretty clear in my post but I will reiterate.

GT5 took 5 years to finish & during that 5 year period we got GT5P to play with. People including myself were very frustrated at how limited GT5P was and wished we could get the game as it was with GT5P but with more tracks and a few more options etc getting very tired of the waiting. At that time the delays and wait was the HUGE issue being complained about.

GT6 instead of taking 5 years to complete took 6 months from being announced, and its very much a complete game only missing a few features PD said would not be in at release because they are improving them. So we have a complete game minus a few additional features that are still planned, more features that we were not expecting a new game mode and new cars real and VGT on top of a 2 tracks and a few new layouts to some old tracks.

It is "darn near finished" the only missing features while some find very important other have no use for them at all and neither are a part of the CORE of GT games, PD is working to improve them and make them more than they were or better than they were lets reserve judgement for when we get them and judge then if the wait was worth it or not.

Both games are ambitious, and that to me is a good thing, if PD had no ambition then GT would not be nearly as good as it is and more at the level of other racing games on the PS3. PDs ambition has lead them to pushing the PS3 beyond what was though possible with it I have no doubt they will do the same with the PS4 but that remains to be seen, I do have high expectations.

Maybe Course Marker is too ambitious for GT6 but Course Maker is not GT6, its a small feature of GT6, and Im thankful to have GT6 while PD tries to figure outCourse Maker, as a year and a half ago I had not played GT for over a year upset with the GT4 physics. Ive been playing GT for the last year thanks to GT6. So if you dont think GT6 was ready for you, keep playing GT5 until you think it is, because you would of had to for the last year if not for GT6, and IMO GT5 was terrible. All the features and content dont mean nothing if the Physics went backwards from GT5P to GT4 level. If not for GT6 It would be 2 and a half years since I stopped playing GT5. Thank you PD for GT6, got me back into the series. It could be that PD realized guys like me were putting down GT5 and they released GT6 specifically for us, because it worked.

They have done JUST what you said they should. They have Cut CM and B-Spec until they have them good enough to be in GT6 and I dont think they have BS'ed anybody as they said it wont be in the release edition, if they say that expect to wait at least a year or two, either way we have the same product in hand while we wait on the feature or wait on nothing new to come. I don't understand why you think the prospect of more features coming is worse than being certain nothing new is going to come...

Its all in your head. I see the prospect of improved features coming is much better than, being certain NOTHING will get added. Hmmmm on one hand more features and content as the game grows continuously adding to what is there or on the other hand what was ready a year ago and nothing more ever, maybe a paid DLC pack at the year 1 or 2 mark just with a few cars, nothing else. They couldnt predict the exact day any of it will be ready so, nothing will get added, and we have maybe 5 years to wait on GT7.

It sounds to me like your too focused on the wait, like your checking the news daily for the announcements and expecting to see it in every update. I could of told you from the start that's just going to lead to you pulling out your hair and getting all kinds of frustrated and upset and make the wait seem a thousand times longer than it actually is.

What world do you live in?

At presale time, all the features we're missing today were ADVERTISED to be in the box on 12/06/13. They were not advertised as features that would be added later.

They promised, we paid, we STILL have not gotten what we paid for.

As a lawyer, I can assure you that's a very bad thing.

PD: "For sale, 426 Hemi Cuda, 0 mileage, trunk full of gold bricks, and a season pass to Disneyland"

Open the package: 340 six pack, w/ 230,000 miles and rust holes, a can of oil, and a free pine tree air freshener to hang from thr mirror.

 

[jimipitbull]

A year later, it's impossible. I've tried.

You tried to return a game after 12 months?



The staff at that shop are probably still laughing

 

[PR3D4TOR]

What world do you live in?

At presale time, all the features we're missing today were ADVERTISED to be in the box on 12/06/13. They were not advertised as features that would be added later.

They promised, we paid, we STILL have not gotten what we paid for.

As a lawyer, I can assure you that's a very bad thing.

PD: "For sale, 426 Hemi Cuda, 0 mileage, trunk full of gold bricks, and a season pass to Disneyland"

Open the package: 340 six pack, w/ 230,000 miles and rust holes, a can of oil, and a free pine tree air freshener to hang from thr mirror.

Did you read the box? The only feature on the box advertised on the box but not in the game at launch was the Community Features, but they have been added and a disclaimer saying they can add and remove features as they please has them covered . Course Maker And B-Spec the only 2 remaining features were not promised to be in the game at release and not on the package, as a Lawyer you should know better...

 

[Imari]

You tried to return a game after 12 months?



The staff at that shop are probably still laughing

No. That would be foolish.

I contacted Sony. They said they couldn't help. I contacted Consumer Affairs, and they said that the chances of me getting anywhere were slim to none. As I expected, but it was worth a shot.

 

[PR3D4TOR]

How do you read a box when you preorder? There is no box to read--only advertisements.

Stop and think before you type.

Stop and think before you buy.

That's a risk you take when Pre-ordering now isn't it.

A Smart consumer would not have Pre-Orderred unless they don't care how long CM Bspec or anything else will take, they want whatever it is at release and they want the extra stuff that comes with the pre order.

A Lawyer would know you don't have a case.

 

[Jbaffoh]

Stop and think before you buy.

That's a risk you take when Pre-ordering now isn't it.

A Smart consumer would not have Pre-Orderred unless they don't care how long CM Bspec or anything else will take, they want whatever it is at release and they want the extra stuff that comes with the pre order.

Excuse me, but they were promised at release, according to the ads. We're entitled to rely on those promises. That's the law.

---EDITED BY MODERATOR---👎

 

[Imari]

Its my understanding that Course Maker and B-Spec are both still on the way, you may have read it as strongly implied that it would be the near future, but that's just your opinion, they didn't give a date as much as you think they somehow have missed it. However your comment says they should of just never promised you it and left it out of the game. Well, its not in the game, your only dwelling on the lack of features as you seem to feel like they wronged you somehow but the reality is that is just not true as much as you and many would like to believe it is. If they promised it or not you have the same game and NOT based on the merit of the game your either upset with it or content, but in the end you still have the same thing.

At what point do I get to say that they've failed to deliver? When they release GT7?

Serves you right, take that as a consumer lesson, and tuition was the price of the game.

I love it when someone's argument boils down to "Yeah, PD :censored:ed you. Smarten up next time."

Nice.

Of course I'm not going to buy a GT game on PD's bollocks promises again.

Since PD makes both GT6 and GT7 they have everything to do with each other and if you dont see how GT6 was put out to buy them time for building GT7 I am truly surprised to be the one to tell you.

So each game is just buying time for the next? Or is this a special case with GT6 and GT7?

For me, each game is put out because it's a game worth selling. Or it should be. Otherwise, why sell it?

...had you not eyeballed every last word...

So wait, you're telling me I'm stupid for not being a smart consumer, and then telling me that I shouldn't have read their marketing material?

How exactly is one to judge the value of the product then? Telepathy?

I get irritated when somebody makes a mistake and blames everybody else.

I get irritated when people blame assault victims for getting in the way of people's fists. You can look at the problem whatever way you want. Really, it's a bit of both.

I could have saved myself some hassle by assuming that Polyphony were terrible at their jobs, and incapable of judging roughly when features would be added to their game.
Polyphony could have saved me some hassle by not telling me what ended up being complete fabrications.

Of course I bear some blame for believing their BS. I don't deny that. I do claim that PD are not blameless either in the way that they handled their advertising, pre-and post-release information management. At best, they were misleading. Advertising should not depend on a consumer picking every sentence apart logically, it should be written in such a way that the common interpretation is what is meant.

If I sell you a house and tell you that I'll get the garden fixed up because it's a bit of a mess, that's not an invitation for me to take a year to do it. Depending on what the item is, there's a reasonable length of time for fulfillment that an ordinary person will assume. If it's going to be outside that, then the seller needs to make a statement to that effect.

I don't see how 13+ months is reasonable for the Course Maker or B Spec, not without communication. I can see how it may have been intended to be shorter and blew out, and that's the point at which PD/Sony need to say "sorry guys, we really hoped to get it to you by June but X, Y, and Z have gone totally wrong. We're shooting for December and we'll keep you updated as we get closer".

Is that irrational? It's how every other company I can think of deals with long term projects and delays.

 

[ironman44321]

Excuse me, but they were promised at release, according to the ads. We're entitled to rely on those promises. That's the law.

You're obviously a douchebag, and I'm willing to take my GTP punishment for speaking truth to you, child.

So where in these adds did it say when the features were coming? As far as I'm aware we were never given a date for the CM or B-spec...Just, "In a future update" which could still happen...sort of shoots down any sort of legal standing doesn't it?

Oh, and wow...thank god you've managed to handle talking to somebody on a forum as an adult...

 

[Jbaffoh]

So where in these adds did it say when the features were coming? As far as I'm aware we were never given a date for the CM or B-spec...Just, "In a future update" which could still happen...sort of shoots down any sort of legal standing doesn't it?

Oh, and wow...thank god you've managed to handle talking to somebody on a forum as an adult...

They were promosed to be there at release--not in the future. You'll only find the "future" stuff in interviews with Kaz, which most consumers didn't follow. Google, and you'll find the fraudulent inducements to preorder.

It was only after the preorder deadlines that we were aware we'd been duped.

Go, read.

I still find the game entertaining, but as a lawyer and businessman, I'm appalled by their tactics, and by the clueless apologists.

 

[jimipitbull]

No. That would be foolish.

I contacted Sony. They said they couldn't help. I contacted Consumer Affairs, and they said that the chances of me getting anywhere were slim to none. As I expected, but it was worth a shot.

Did Sony say they couldn't help because you haven't approached the retailer?

Did consumer affairs also say they couldn't help because you haven't approached the retailer?

After all, the contract of sale was between you and the retailer....

 

[ironman44321]

They were promosed to be there at release--not in the future. You'll only find the "future" stuff in interviews with Kaz, which most consumers didn't follow. Google, and you'll find the fraudulent inducements to preorder.

It was only after the preorder deadlines that we were aware we'd been duped.

Go, read.

I still find the game entertaining, but as a lawyer and businessman, I'm appalled by their tactics, and by the clueless apologists.

I'm sorry?

https://www.gtplanet.net/gt6-course-maker-gps-data/

“This feature, available at a later stage through an update, will allow you to create your own custom tracks that can be driven in the game."

That wasn't hard to find...It was a key part of the largest chunk of news we received about the game, and I'm sorry but even if what you said about it only being in interviews was true. If the information was available, even if just in interviews (which were on the GTP main page, might I add) that more than fulfills PDs obligation to inform the buying public. They are not to blame if the consumer doesn't inform themselves.

Don't get me wrong, the CM was easily my most wanted GT6 feature and I'm more than a little unhappy that we haven't even gotten word about it since June. But, to suggest that it's somehow a legal issue is naive.

You obviously don't find it THAT entertaining, as you couldn't keep cool enough to conduct yourself in a respectful, civilized. manner.

 

[JerseyDriverSS]

Wow. I can't believe this got this far. The game sucks with or without b-spec and coursee maker.

 

[cwis667]

Imari said
At what point do I get to say that they've failed to deliver? When they release GT7?

Technically? Yeah.


not quite maybe . they where still supporting gt5 after gt6 come out

 

[NLxAROSA]

Wow. I can't believe this got this far. The game sucks with or without b-spec and coursee maker.

Despite the borked physics/settings, I still think it's a decent game, especially with the added content. It's just not great and IMO it's not a good sim at all, but still enjoyable for a quick spin with your mates. This game could be great/epic if PD got their act together and focus on what's important.

 

[Imari]

not quite maybe . they where still supporting gt5 after gt6 come out

So what point is it for you? GT8? Never?

 

[Jbaffoh]

I'm sorry?

https://www.gtplanet.net/gt6-course-maker-gps-data/

“This feature, available at a later stage through an update, will allow you to create your own custom tracks that can be driven in the game."

That wasn't hard to find...It was a key part of the largest chunk of news we received about the game, and I'm sorry but even if what you said about it only being in interviews was true. If the information was available, even if just in interviews (which were on the GTP main page, might I add) that more than fulfills PDs obligation to inform the buying public. They are not to blame if the consumer doesn't inform themselves.

Don't get me wrong, the CM was easily my most wanted GT6 feature and I'm more than a little unhappy that we haven't even gotten word about it since June. But, to suggest that it's somehow a legal issue is naive.

You obviously don't find it THAT entertaining, as you couldn't keep cool enough to conduct yourself in a respectful, civilized. manner.

You're referencing one of several advertised features. Check the promises they provided to Amazon and gamestop, etc. when they were soliciting preorders. Quotes from GTP are not what most consumers, particularly non-members, rely upon when ordering products.

As for legal naiveté? That's a good one. After 28 years of law practice, and years of watching class action suits against Apple, etc., there's no naivete at this end.

Was I respectful? No. Was I civil? I suppose that depends on your culture. But where I'm from, respect is earned. It's notautomatically lavished on people who persist in expressing opinions that are based neither in fact, nor common sense.

I apologize to any delicate flowers who may have been offended. Next time I will refrain from posting while drinking at a pub.

 

[ScottPuss20]

If a game is delayed so it can be finished, people complain. If a game is released on time but with missing content, people complain. In all seriousness, most of you should be feeling happy that PD has released something on time. For a so-called "unfinished" game, GT6 feels more complete than GT5. B-Spec and Course Maker are the last things I think about.

 

[jimipitbull]

If a game is delayed so it can be finished, people complain. If a game is released on time but with missing content, people complain. In all seriousness, most of you should be feeling happy that PD has released something on time. For a so-called "unfinished" game, GT6 feels more complete than GT5. B-Spec and Course Maker are the last things I think about.

Indeed. With Bathurst, it feels more complete than any previous GT title.
Compare content to Forza 5, and GT6 feels twice as complete. The sales figures confirm this - GT6 has sold twice as many as FM5

 

[Imari]

For a so-called "unfinished" game, GT6 feels more complete than GT5.

Not to me, it doesn't.

Indeed. With Bathurst, it feels more complete than any previous GT title.
Compare content to Forza 5, and GT6 feels twice as complete. The sales figures confirm this - GT6 has sold twice as many as FM5

You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[jimipitbull]

Not to me, it doesn't.



You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

If you can achieve 100% completion, that would satisfy the definition of complete.

If one game has twice as many tracks to utilise towards that 100% completion, it would feel twice as complete.

What do you think it means?

 

[Imari]

If you can achieve 100% completion, that would satisfy the definition of complete.

If one game has twice as many tracks to utilise towards that 100% completion, it would feel twice as complete.

What do you think it means?

It means that there's no such thing as twice as complete. A game is complete, or it's not.

Adding Bathurst does not make it more complete. Being a small game does not make it less complete.

Complete: containing all the necessary parts.

In the case of a game, that means that all the parts of the game are there.

FM5 is complete, all that it said would be there is there, even though it's a lot less than many people (including me) would like.
GT6 is not complete, all that it said would be there is not there, even though what it has already is lot more than a lot of other games.

Being a bigger game, or a more engaging game, or a better game has absolutely nothing to do with how complete it is. If you want to describe those things then describe them, but they don't make a game any more or less complete.

Using words correctly is important.

 

[Johnnypenso]

If a game is delayed so it can be finished, people complain. If a game is released on time but with missing content, people complain. In all seriousness, most of you should be feeling happy that PD has released something on time. For a so-called "unfinished" game, GT6 feels more complete than GT5. B-Spec and Course Maker are the last things I think about.

Nope. Project Cars was delayed and at least on GTP where I'm following it, the overwhelming sentiment is disappointment followed by, "I wish it wasn't so but I'd rather they took the time to finish it and get it right than release it early with a lot of bugs". And it hasn't spilled over into any other threads either.

People will wait patiently if they have faith in the dev team they are waiting for. That I believe is the issue with PD, some people have lost faith in their ability to do either thing and get it right. Of course if SMS releases PCars in March and it's buggy as heck, that faith will also be lost

 

[jimipitbull]

Using words correctly is important.

Taking into account alternate definitions is also important. Using the first definition you find on a google search does not form a complete argument.

Here are some alternate definitions that you chose to ignore.

Complete: (often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree

Complete: having (something) as an additional part or feature.

Regardless, would you like 'contract of sale' defined further so you could seek a refund from the correct place?
Or would you prefer to forget that string of posts?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Taking into account alternate definitions is also important. Using the first definition you find on a google search does not form a complete argument.

Here are some alternate definitions that you chose to ignore.

Complete: (often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree

Complete: having (something) as an additional part or feature.

Regardless, would you like 'contract of sale' defined further so you could seek a refund from the correct place?
Or would you prefer to forget that string of posts?

Selective quoting once again. Perhaps the full quote will shed a different light.

Your first definition:

Complete: (often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree

The actual quote:

(often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree; total.
"a complete ban on smoking"
synonyms: absolute, out-and-out, utter, total, real, downright, thoroughgoing,veritable, prize, perfect, unqualified, unmitigated, sheer, arrant, full-out
"a complete fool"

Bold is my emphasis.


Source

The second was a little harder to find. Your selective quote:

Complete: having (something) as an additional part or feature.

That actual quote:

Heading:

Definition of complete in English:
ADJECTIVE
Having all the necessary or appropriate parts:a complete list of courses offered by the universityno woman’s wardrobe is complete without this pretty top

[Subsection] 1.2 (complete with) Having (something) as an additional part or feature:the house comes complete with gas central heating and double glazing

It's amazing how one easy it is to twist the meanings of things through selective quoting don't you agree?

Emphasis mine again.

Source

 

[Imari]

Regardless, would you like 'contract of sale' defined further so you could seek a refund from the correct place?
Or would you prefer to forget that string of posts?

Because there are no cases in which the consumer may seek restitution with the manufacturer directly rather than the seller?

When my first PS3 broke after 12 and a half months, I didn't take it back to the store. I called Sony, and they organised it to be repaired at their cost. The store hasn't done anything wrong in this situation, my complaint is with the manufacturer. Why not go directly to them?

 

[jimipitbull]

Selective quoting once again. Perhaps the full quote will shed a different light.

Your first definition:

Complete: (often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree

The actual quote:

(often used for emphasis) to the greatest extent or degree; total.
"a complete ban on smoking"
synonyms: absolute, out-and-out, utter, total, real, downright, thoroughgoing,veritable, prize, perfect, unqualified, unmitigated, sheer, arrant, full-out
"a complete fool"

Bold is my emphasis.


Source

The second was a little harder to find. Your selective quote:

Complete: having (something) as an additional part or feature.

That actual quote:

Heading:

Definition of complete in English:
ADJECTIVE
Having all the necessary or appropriate parts:a complete list of courses offered by the universityno woman’s wardrobe is complete without this pretty top

[Subsection] 1.2 (complete with) Having (something) as an additional part or feature:the house comes complete with gas central heating and double glazing

It's amazing how one easy it is to twist the meanings of things through selective quoting don't you agree?

Emphasis mine again.

Source

Cool story Johnny. You are certainly the complete google warrior.

Because there are no cases in which the consumer may seek restitution with the manufacturer directly rather than the seller?

When my first PS3 broke after 12 and a half months, I didn't take it back to the store. I called Sony, and they organised it to be repaired at their cost. The store hasn't done anything wrong in this situation, my complaint is with the manufacturer. Why not go directly to them?

An extended warranty repair is quite different to seeking a refund.

Consumer affairs, if you actually spoke with them, would advise you to approach the retailer in the first instance. Unless of course you were seeking compensation for damages or loss, as opposed to refund?

 

[Imari]

Consumer affairs, if you actually spoke with them, would advise you to approach the retailer in the first instance. Unless of course you were seeking compensation for damages or loss, as opposed to refund?

I simply described the situation to them and asked them if there was anything I could do. They said no. I don't know what my options are so I asked. I'm not bent on any one outcome, I simply wanted to know if there was anything I could do.

Why am I being mocked for attempting to gain extra knowledge of my rights as a consumer? Isn't that what people are supposed to do when they're unsure? That's what Consumer Affairs exists for, last time I checked.

Hell, at least I tried. I know one more thing now than I did before, whereas you're still busy being an ass to people for actually taking matters into their own hands instead of simply sitting and complaining, the one thing that you endlessly rip on people for.

I should really know better than to reply to your antagonistic bollocks. So I shan't.