Personally, I don't need freebies.

I just need to be treated with respect and not feel like I'm being milked dry.

Offer me something of value for my money. Don't introduce artificial restrictions and complications just so that you can milk more money out of me. Don't assume that everyone is middle class or above.

Household that have dependents and only one income earner earning minimum wage or barely above minimum wage tend to barely scrape by and have to tighten the belt on basic necessities, nevermind games.

This is especially true if the employment situation of the income earner is tenuous.

Been there. Done that. As I said, even if it takes years of saving or bargain hunting, anyone can get to the point at which a long-term loyalty bonus would be applicable.

I love my Mastercard points, got a DS and a Kindle last xmas with them, I also love my Tesco vouchers, I get about €150 worth every year.

It rewards loyalty and instils it in the customer too.

What kind of loyalty scheme a store uses is entirely up to it.

That being said, it's obvious that stores prefer rich customers to poor ones, since they're not, after all, in the business of giving charity.
From the point of view of the store, it makes perfect sense to reward repeat customers who buy a lot, since it wants to keep them as repeat customers.

If your friend wants free games so badly, a store is not really the place to get them. Frankly, he just sounds ignorant and envious to me, and trying to rationalize that with a "theory" he has no business having in the first place is pretty stupid.

"unfair" , lol.

A lot of stores here have loyalty promos. You either gather some points for additional discounts, or you get coupons for free / discounted food , etc etc.

It's a good practice. Relying on returning customers is very important on competitive markets. Wrong. On competitive market customer is likely to choose a place with lower prices, better customer treatment, better discounts, etc etc. "Loyalty programmes" help establishing... loyalty towards the brand.

On the other hand, if you rely on massive customer quantity, you should probably reward new customers over old ones.

Frankly, you haven't a clue about my life. But I'll say that when I was growing up, my parents were struggling. Neither I, nor my siblings, received an allowance for many years. Nor did we get a lot of toys or games during that same period. We only got our first computer because we were lent it when the owner went away on holiday and didn't want to leave it in his house unattended.

Even now, I earn significantly less than I should. And with ever increasing taxes, that's just going further down, not to mention that we also have to pay for the children's education as that ain't free here.

Yet despite that, I have been able to build up a games library for myself and my family, through taking advantage of sales and second hand purchases, it's taken a good 10 years to do that, and I still don't own anywhere near 300 games on console. I only own more than that on the PC due to taking advantage of very good prices.

But all this is moot. Games are a luxury plain and simple. When I couldn't afford them, I didn't buy them (and there was a good 6 year period in which I couldn't).

I usually get my issues resolved, sometimes it takes a while tho.

Also, numerous times they've gone beyond the call of duty on the forum.

Most of the time it's the GOG community that solves any issues with a game.

Really? This discussion again? I'm sure people would have different minds about something if they weren't on the other side of the box, but since they are not, and have no intention of making an effort to get there, putting forward notions about fairness is about the only thing they can do, irrelevant to the fact that it is not the model itself that has flaws, but it is their perception of what "programs for everyone" are and what "private closed circuit programs" are. A store is financially dependant on customers, if they reward either those that buy more or those that have bought little is entirely their decision, and is based on their policy that ultimately keeps them afloat. So, again, why should their preference of giving away freebies impact your notion of fairness when it is their way of making business and surviving in the tough world of (internet) retail.

The fact that you're even talking about the possibility of an allowance or owning a computer leads me to believe you weren't that bad off.

I never had an allowance and didn't expect one.

Should they be?

Do you think it normal that some people struggle so much in our society (that throws more than it's fair share of food away which anyone who ever worked in a supermarket will attest) that they can barely eat or afford entertainment at all?

I mean, with the avent of digital distribution, the main cost associated with games is human labor.

Imo, owning a car should be considered a luxury, not owning games.

We got our priorities all wrong.

I don't like "loyalty" programs because I see them as nothing more than the attempt to get you to spend more than you normally would in order to reach some predetermined level to "get something." Personally I'd rather see better pricing.

I agree with your friend.