Official Discussion Thread for "Greymoor Console Launch Date Update"

ACamaroGuy

ACamaroGuy wrote: »

ACamaroGuy wrote: »

I have submitted two refund requests, one for my son and one for myself. Once my wife gets home, she will also submit a refund request. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post the refund ticket number or not. I'll let you know what lame excuse I get when they inform me a refund is not allowed.

ESO support finally responded to my ticket, very quickly in fact. They told me they are unable to refund me for the update because I use a console. I was informed I must contact Xbox support instead for my refund. I hope this information helps others out as well. Good luck.

Xbox support said I should get my money back for those three purchases I made within 72 hours. Counting the time.

CassandraGemini

ArchMikem wrote: »

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

I'm not taking sides, but that incedent happened 13 years ago. He served his time and made every attempt to turn his life around.

One bad choice doesn't make someone bad for life. He did not deserve what happened to him.

[Quoted post was removed]

I think you and the others who try to make this about George Floyd as a person are missing the point here. It is not about him personally and the kind of man he was. This could just as well have happened to any other person (of course more likely to someone of color) who would have been unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and confronted with the wrong police officers. This is not the first case of extreme police brutality in the US and yet it still happens again and again. Police officers thinking themselves either above the law and trying to take matters into their own hands (which is called vigilantism and absolutely illegal) or acting out their own frustrations on others whom they have a perceived power over. This is not right and should not ever happen, no matter to whom! That's what this is about.

Alphawolf01A

The original course of this discussion was about ZOS delaying the content release for some players in order to make a statement, while others are able to continue to play the content without being affected by this political statement.

Thannazzar

Irrespective of people's thoughts on the situation in general (and I'm with Candace Owens on this), for game companies there is a lot of virtue signalling going on.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Thannazzar wrote: »

Irrespective of people's thoughts on the situation in general (and I'm with Candace Owens on this), for game companies there is a lot of virtue signalling going on.

Care to develop what signals / companies you're referring to ?
(Genuine question, no trap intended, I'm just not into gaming - besides ESO - so I'm not informed as to how gaming companies position themselves. I hear the tech industry and the Silicon Valley in general are usually progressive and say it loud, but I'm curious how gaming industries think and communicate in general, on the political side of things, and how things are evolving - IF they are).

robwolf666

ACamaroGuy wrote: »

I just want a refund if this don't launch on the 9th.

That's actually a good idea, and a way for Console gamers to make a statement about ZOS' statement.
Just cancelled my order too...

Thannazzar

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Thannazzar wrote: »

Irrespective of people's thoughts on the situation in general (and I'm with Candace Owens on this), for game companies there is a lot of virtue signalling going on.

Care to develop what signals / companies you're referring to ?
(Genuine question, no trap intended, I'm just not into gaming - besides ESO - so I'm not informed as to how gaming companies position themselves. I hear the tech industry and the Silicon Valley in general are usually progressive and say it loud, but I'm curious how gaming industries think and communicate in general, on the political side of things, and how things are evolving - IF they are).

Mentioning other games or providers is (i understand) frowned upon by the forums mods, however if you think of an online game that involves stealing cars that will give you one of the easiest examples.

In essence we have a situation where in a US election year an incident has occurred where it appears an officer has used excessive force on a suspect resulting in their death. That is a matter that should and i expect will be investigated by the relevant authorities and the officer should face appropriate penalties for his transgression.

The use of force and violations of this nature can and should be investigated and prosecuted, and any companies issuing statements supporting the prompt and full investigation of such incidents and the prosecution of those involved would be welcomed, As would a statement deploring or condemning racism in all its forms.

However that's not what we have received, ZOS has delayed a launch of a fantasy game on consoles based on the date of an individuals funeral. The game and its contents are entirely unconnected with the incident or individuals concerned, either in subject matter or environment.

The virtue signalling in this case is a meaningless delay of a product due to the funeral of an individual who's arrest record and autopsy toxicology are available for those who wish to navigate past the twitter level of journalism to locate. Whilst a mans life has been lost, and that is tragic, the difficulty with signalling support for the individual, rather than the real underlying issues or the potential solutions simply dilutes the message and risks real change for african americans failing because the inherent links with a single case and the arguments rising or falling on the character of that individual.

*edited because on a reread my grammar sucked :P

Alphawolf01A

Making a statement to support a cause is fine.

Making a statement to support an individual that some may find "controversial" (trying to be PC about it) is a bad idea.

Forcing that statement to affect only part of your playerbase, while others are unaffected by that decision was poorly thought out, to say the least.

They could have easily just made a statement, supporting the cause, and left it at that and not forced their choice on a specific portion of the players.

While ZOS's statement was about discrimination. They have actually done the exact opposite and discriminated against console players.

From Wikipedia:
Discrimination occurs when individuals or groups are treated "in a way which is worse than the way people are usually treated," based on their actual or perceived membership in certain groups or social categories. It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group's leader or the group,

I like this last part:

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

NavalOffisah

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Making a statement to support a cause is fine.

Making a statement to support an individual that some may find "controversial" (trying to be PC about it) is a bad idea.

Forcing that statement to affect only part of your playerbase, while others are unaffected by that decision was poorly thought out, to say the least.

They could have easily just made a statement, supporting the cause, and left it at that and not forced their choice on a specific portion of the players.

While ZOS's statement was about discrimination. They have actually done the exact opposite and discriminated against console players.

From Wikipedia:
Discrimination occurs when individuals or groups are treated "in a way which is worse than the way people are usually treated," based on their actual or perceived membership in certain groups or social categories. It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group's leader or the group,

I like this last part:

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

🙄 you aren't being discriminated against because Greymoor has been delayed by a day

Alphawolf01A

Are PC players having access to Greymoor turned off for the day to take part in this statement.
No. So how is that fair to console players?
That is discrimination.

Elsonso

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Are PC players having access to Greymoor turned off for the day to take part in this statement.
No. So how is that fair to console players?
That is discrimination.

No, it is not. The megaservers are up and running until they do console maintenance, which still starts on June 9, just later in the day, and finishes early the next morning, June 10, instead of late morning or afternoon on June 9.

Alphawolf01A

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

xWarbrain

Damn it. Hopefully the extra day helps with a smoother console launch.

This is like a bonus feature just for having a monthly video game subscription. Thanks, Zos, for helping me be aware of social injustice in the real world by delaying the release of a new version of the made up world I pretend to run around in as a ******* wizard. Couldn't do it without ya.

Alphawolf01A

LOL!!

CassandraGemini

NavalOffisah wrote: »

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Making a statement to support a cause is fine.

Making a statement to support an individual that some may find "controversial" (trying to be PC about it) is a bad idea.

Forcing that statement to affect only part of your playerbase, while others are unaffected by that decision was poorly thought out, to say the least.

They could have easily just made a statement, supporting the cause, and left it at that and not forced their choice on a specific portion of the players.

While ZOS's statement was about discrimination. They have actually done the exact opposite and discriminated against console players.

From Wikipedia:
Discrimination occurs when individuals or groups are treated "in a way which is worse than the way people are usually treated," based on their actual or perceived membership in certain groups or social categories. It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group's leader or the group,

I like this last part:

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

🙄 you aren't being discriminated against because Greymoor has been delayed by a day

You are absolutely right. I honestly am a bit shocked at how lightly the term "discrimination" is being used here, when - in my opinion - it should be reserved for serious matters such as racial or gender discrimination. Nobody is being discriminated against just because a chapter is released one day later for consoles. And even though I am by no means a White Knigt and have done my fair share of criticizing when it comes to ZOS before (especially where the whole console vs. PC situation is concerned), I'm very sure they would have done the exact same thing if it were the other way around and console already had the chapter while PC did not.

robwolf666

CassandraGemini wrote: »

And even though I am by no means a White Knigt and have done my fair share of criticizing when it comes to ZOS before (especially where the whole console vs. PC situation is concerned), I'm very sure they would have done the exact same thing if it were the other way around and console already had the chapter while PC did not.

A theory that can never be tested, since nothing ever comes out on console first.

vestahls

CassandraGemini wrote: »

NavalOffisah wrote: »

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Making a statement to support a cause is fine.

Making a statement to support an individual that some may find "controversial" (trying to be PC about it) is a bad idea.

Forcing that statement to affect only part of your playerbase, while others are unaffected by that decision was poorly thought out, to say the least.

They could have easily just made a statement, supporting the cause, and left it at that and not forced their choice on a specific portion of the players.

While ZOS's statement was about discrimination. They have actually done the exact opposite and discriminated against console players.

From Wikipedia:
Discrimination occurs when individuals or groups are treated "in a way which is worse than the way people are usually treated," based on their actual or perceived membership in certain groups or social categories. It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group's leader or the group,

I like this last part:

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

🙄 you aren't being discriminated against because Greymoor has been delayed by a day

You are absolutely right. I honestly am a bit shocked at how lightly the term "discrimination" is being used here, when - in my opinion - it should be reserved for serious matters such as racial or gender discrimination. Nobody is being discriminated against just because a chapter is released one day later for consoles. And even though I am by no means a White Knigt and have done my fair share of criticizing when it comes to ZOS before (especially where the whole console vs. PC situation is concerned), I'm very sure they would have done the exact same thing if it were the other way around and console already had the chapter while PC did not.

Other people's feelings are not less important than yours. If someone feels discriminated against, it isn't your place to tell them "actually, you don't feel that". If some console players dislike ZOS's decision to delay the product they paid for for non-game related reasons, is it really your place to push back against your fellow players?

Also remember everyone is paying the same price for this product. Nobody's concerns are "lesser" in value. Hence the open discussion where players can express themselves about their purchase, and interact with the company they purchased from.

Alphawolf01A

So how are PC players being forced to participate in this political statement on the 9th?

I wonder how many of the people who say "it's not discrimination" are on PC?

Will you not be playing Greymoor to show your support of ZOS and the console community?

CassandraGemini

vestahls wrote: »

CassandraGemini wrote: »

NavalOffisah wrote: »

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Making a statement to support a cause is fine.

Making a statement to support an individual that some may find "controversial" (trying to be PC about it) is a bad idea.

Forcing that statement to affect only part of your playerbase, while others are unaffected by that decision was poorly thought out, to say the least.

They could have easily just made a statement, supporting the cause, and left it at that and not forced their choice on a specific portion of the players.

While ZOS's statement was about discrimination. They have actually done the exact opposite and discriminated against console players.

From Wikipedia:
Discrimination occurs when individuals or groups are treated "in a way which is worse than the way people are usually treated," based on their actual or perceived membership in certain groups or social categories. It involves the group's initial reaction or interaction going on to influence the individual's actual behavior towards the group's leader or the group,

I like this last part:

restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to members of another group, leading to the exclusion of the individual or entities based on illogical or irrational decision making

🙄 you aren't being discriminated against because Greymoor has been delayed by a day

You are absolutely right. I honestly am a bit shocked at how lightly the term "discrimination" is being used here, when - in my opinion - it should be reserved for serious matters such as racial or gender discrimination. Nobody is being discriminated against just because a chapter is released one day later for consoles. And even though I am by no means a White Knigt and have done my fair share of criticizing when it comes to ZOS before (especially where the whole console vs. PC situation is concerned), I'm very sure they would have done the exact same thing if it were the other way around and console already had the chapter while PC did not.

Other people's feelings are not less important than yours. If someone feels discriminated against, it isn't your place to tell them "actually, you don't feel that". If some console players dislike ZOS's decision to delay the product they paid for for non-game related reasons, is it really your place to push back against your fellow players?

That is not what I was saying - that my "feelings" are more important than anyone else's. The thing is just that certain words have certain meanings and even though you can of course twist something to fit this meaning if you really want to, that doesn't mean that you should do it just to drive a point home. Discrimination is a strong term and (again, in my opinion, which is what i said before as well) it's far from the word that I would use. "Being treated unfairly" seems like a closer match to me.

@robwolf666 *lol* Yeah, you have a point there.

Alphawolf01A

"Being treated unfairly" is literally a definition of "discrimination".

To what degree or time frame is irrelevant.

CassandraGemini

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

"Being treated unfairly" is literally a definition of "discrimination".

To what degree or time frame is irrelevant.

No, it is not. "Being treated unfairly" is much more general. If you're being bullied you're being treated unfairly, but it has nothing to do with discrimination. Discrimination is a much more specific term.

Alphawolf01A

Agree to disagree.

CassandraGemini

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

Agree to disagree.

Alright. And I really mean that, I have made my point and it's okay to have different opinions. I don't share yours but I respect it. No need to take this any further, it doesn't have to get out of hand.

Alphawolf01A

Agreed. All good.

Alphawolf01A

Still waiting on answers to my previous questions though.

Alphawolf01A wrote: »

So how are PC players being forced to participate in this political statement on the 9th?

I wonder how many of the people who say "it's not discrimination" are on PC?

Will you not be playing Greymoor to show your support of ZOS and the console community?

So if you are playing Greymoor on the 9th. I guess you aren't supporting ZOSs political statment, which would make their whole reason for delaying the game moot.

valeriiya

Are we getting the update with the issues PC had or are we getting it with the fixes?

Alphawolf01A

valeriiya wrote: »

Are we getting the update with the issues PC had or are we getting it with the fixes?

Would be interested to know that as well.

ACamaroGuy

valeriiya wrote: »

Are we getting the update with the issues PC had or are we getting it with the fixes?

No, console users will be getting their own unique dysfunctional version of the update.

valeriiya

I doubt there will be a response but, @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_RichLambert can you confirm what version we're getting please?

Alphawolf01A

valeriiya wrote: »

I doubt there will be a response but, @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_RichLambert can you confirm what version we're getting please?

Yes please.