Is Zenimax trampling our basic Consumer Rights?
-
Faugaun✭✭✭✭✭danno816_ESO wrote: »Now for the rest of you: do you like eating crap, or would you like things to change?
I am all for fairness, and for people not getting ripped off, or fooled. But I also hate silly litigation, bluster and overstating ones injuries, or equating hurt feelings to grave injustices.
I simply do not see the switch to F2P as anything other than disappointing. Not the basis for refunds, litigation or any other "I've been wronged" arguments.
Like I said earlier, the only people who maybe should get a refund are those whose subscription extends past the March 17 rollout. And even then only for the amount of time after March
You don't like the service? Stop paying for it. You have a legal obligation to mitigate your own "damages".
This is subjective from person to person. If you spent thousands of hours playing the game, you're going to feel vastly different than a person who played only say, 200 hours.
Saying "oh, just stop paying then" isn't going to stop things like these from happening in the future, with this game or another games.
There will come time when content frequency slows down even more, time when they add even more enticing things to the cash shop.
More people will complain, but nothing will change.
This vicious cycle repeats one game after another.
I beg to differ if enough people suddenly voted with their wallet then it would set a precedent to companies and investors...if they made no money from f2p or b2p then they wouldn't have money for new business ideas eventually.
In capitalism consumers can vote with their wallet, and guess what money does speak. If business cannot make money from f2p and b2p from whales etc...then they will abandon that model, but as long as the potential profits are greater than the potential risks business will continue as usual.My new startup social network for Theorycrafting
Champion Point Calculators
Sharable samples:
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Warrior.htm?ba=5&bl=&e=12&ha=10&he=&l=&m=&n=5&q=20&r=15&s=15&t=18
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Thief.htm?a=5&b=22&d=2&e=18&h=8&ma=0&mo=5&sh=9&sp=19&te=12&tu=13&w=1
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Mage.htm?bla=5&ble=1&bo=6&ele=2&elf=3&h=7&m=9&pi=10&pr=20&sp=4&st=8&t=400 -
kevlarto_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Zeni is a private company, they are not a government agency, they make the rules as they see fit. The only thing we can hope for is fair and balanced ethics toward their customers, and that will always be a matter of many different opinions.1 -
nerevarine1138✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.----
Murray?2 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.
Wow, you just cant accept you're wrong can you? You must be one of those internet geniuses who are never wrong.
I will just ignore you & leave you to purchase all the $$$ boosts you want.
There's nothing my words can do that would make you smart enough to understand things.0 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭danno816_ESO wrote: »Now for the rest of you: do you like eating crap, or would you like things to change?
I am all for fairness, and for people not getting ripped off, or fooled. But I also hate silly litigation, bluster and overstating ones injuries, or equating hurt feelings to grave injustices.
I simply do not see the switch to F2P as anything other than disappointing. Not the basis for refunds, litigation or any other "I've been wronged" arguments.
Like I said earlier, the only people who maybe should get a refund are those whose subscription extends past the March 17 rollout. And even then only for the amount of time after March
You don't like the service? Stop paying for it. You have a legal obligation to mitigate your own "damages".
This is subjective from person to person. If you spent thousands of hours playing the game, you're going to feel vastly different than a person who played only say, 200 hours.
Saying "oh, just stop paying then" isn't going to stop things like these from happening in the future, with this game or another games.
There will come time when content frequency slows down even more, time when they add even more enticing things to the cash shop.
More people will complain, but nothing will change.
This vicious cycle repeats one game after another.
I beg to differ if enough people suddenly voted with their wallet then it would set a precedent to companies and investors...if they made no money from f2p or b2p then they wouldn't have money for new business ideas eventually.
In capitalism consumers can vote with their wallet, and guess what money does speak. If business cannot make money from f2p and b2p from whales etc...then they will abandon that model, but as long as the potential profits are greater than the potential risks business will continue as usual.
If that truly worked, then there wouldn't be F2P/B2P cash grabs.
The fact is that majority of people are stupid and buy into these things. They usually just simply don't know better and fall into these "traps" made by money hungry companies with no one to watch & regulate them.
Just like any other scam out there.
How many advertisements have you seen that claim you can make 10k/hour if you click a link & subscribe to a newsletter?
People are still stupid enough to click on those, else they wouldn't exist.Edited by DDuke on January 24, 2015 6:02PM2 -
Korah_Eaglecry✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.
Wow, you just cant accept you're wrong can you? You must be one of those internet geniuses who are never wrong.
I will just ignore you & leave you to purchase all the $$$ boosts you want.
There's nothing my words can do that would make you smart enough to understand things.
The old 'You cant agree with me so Ill pretend as if youre an idiot' maneuver. Good one DDuke. Youre starting to show your true colors here.Penniless Sellsword CompanyCaptain Paramount - Jorrhaq VhentKorith Eaglecry * Enrerion Aedihle * Laerinel Rhaev * Caius Berilius * Seylina Ithvala * H'Vak the GrimjawlTenarei Rhaev * Dazsh Ro Khar * Yynril Rothvani * Bathes-In-Coin * Anaelle Faerniil * Azjani Ma'LesAban Shahid Bakr * Kheshna gra-Gharbuk * Gallisten Bondurant * Etain Maquier * Atsu Kalame * Faulpia SeverinusWhat is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil nature through great effort? - Paarthurnax4 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.
Wow, you just cant accept you're wrong can you? You must be one of those internet geniuses who are never wrong.
I will just ignore you & leave you to purchase all the $$$ boosts you want.
There's nothing my words can do that would make you smart enough to understand things.
The old 'You cant agree with me so Ill pretend as if youre an idiot' maneuver. Good one DDuke. Youre starting to show your true colors here.
No, there's just simply some (read: a lot) stupid people out there who just keep repeating same bs with zero thought going into their arguments.
I accept when I'm wrong, but there are a lot of people who are incapable of doing that, despite being logically proven wrong, and those frustrate me.
If you look at this person's posts, they are all made from the perspective of someone who enjoys purchasing F2P/B2P games & purchasing cash boosts, without acknowledging there's a different portion of the player base that is vehemently against them due to multitude of reasons.Edited by DDuke on January 24, 2015 6:12PM2 -
Roechacca✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭The more I read this thread the less I learn about the law . In fact this is the worst interpretational law thread ever . Just go to court if you feel justified in doing so .0 -
nerevarine1138✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.
Wow, you just cant accept you're wrong can you? You must be one of those internet geniuses who are never wrong.
I will just ignore you & leave you to purchase all the $$$ boosts you want.
There's nothing my words can do that would make you smart enough to understand things.
The old 'You cant agree with me so Ill pretend as if youre an idiot' maneuver. Good one DDuke. Youre starting to show your true colors here.
No, there's just simply some (read: a lot) stupid people out there who just keep repeating same bs with zero thought going into their arguments.
I accept when I'm wrong, but there are a lot of people who are incapable of doing that, despite being logically proven wrong, and those frustrate me.
If you look at this person's posts, they are all made from the perspective of someone who enjoys purchasing F2P/B2P games & purchasing cash boosts, without acknowledging there's a different portion of the player base that is vehemently against them due to multitude of reasons.
Because I just feel compelled to explain, yet again...
I'm not commenting on whether the new system is good or bad. I'm holding off on judgment until I've seen it in action for a bit. And I know that lots of people are vehemently for or against the change.
That has nothing to do with your rights as a consumer, but you're right, it's frustrating when people refuse to actually argue in logical terms.----
Murray?1 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭The more I read this thread the less I learn about the law . In fact this is the worst interpretational law thread ever . Just go to court if you feel justified in doing so .
It's not a law thread. I thought I made it pretty clear on the op.
It's about what is considered ethical & morally right (laws are based on those).0 -
Morshire✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Nocturnalis wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »nerevarine1138 wrote: »Just a note: I'm fully aware of the ToS and am not expecting a refund (because it is impossible due to before mentioned).
I'm simply stating that what they are doing goes against the basic consumer rights (nullified by ToS) and what is generally considered fair practice.
I will add this to my original post, since some people seem not to understand it.
And to add: while what they are doing is not illegal, I have a firm opinion that it should be.
I think you should probably ask a lawyer about this. They could use a laugh.
To be fair, you're clearly just another armchair internet lawyer, so don't presume to know what does and does not have legal merit in the real world.
The OP has no merit, but if you'd like to cite some relevant case law to contradict that, feel free.
I'll be waiting with bated breath.
I'm not saying that the OP has any merit. I'm saying that neither you nor the OP have any idea what you're talking about. I don't need "relevant case law" to know that neither you nor the OP are lawyers. Go ahead and take a guess at how I know that for a fact.
New forum posting requirement: a J.D.
Ironically the J.D.s are usually the guys not discussing the law on the internet.
The fact is the issues at play in this hypothetical lawsuit are actually quite complex. So complex, in fact, that most lawyers would need to do a lot of research to even begin discussing the issues intelligently.
The only rational advice given in this thread so far has been: "If you feel strongly, consult an attorney."
That's it. Everything else is noise.
And any attorney who has half a brain would offer the rational advice of, "Save your time and effort."
Unfortunately, you lack both the education and the credentials to make that determination. That's why OP should consult a real lawyer--not a pretend internet lawyer--for real advice.
Unfortunately, you lack both knowledge of my credentials and a valid opinion on the OP, who is making wildly incorrect claims about consumer law. Any attorney would tell him to not waste his time.
Unless you'd like to offer him some different legal advice? Isn't that what you're hinting you have the ability to do?
Please educate me, oh enlightened one.
How is any of my points actually incorrect?
Others have already explained, but here you go, tiger:
1. Your right to be heard is the right to be heard, not the right to be listened to.
2. Your right to be informed was not infringed on. You've received enough notification of the upcoming payment plan to cancel your subscription, if that's your choice. Your right to be informed does not extend to being informed of how a company spends its money. You paid for a subscription and received one.
3. Right to a healthy environment does not refer to how happy you feel playing a game or whether you feel that others are able to play a game with perks that you don't get. Capitalism allows people to purchase luxury items if they choose to spend money on it.
4. You have not lost your right to consumer redress. For starters, there's no redress needed, as you have no financial grievance. You can cancel your subscription if you don't want to continue paying one. But customer service is not required to change the game in order for you to have redress. That's not how it works.
But please, follow the other advice given and consult a lawyer. There's nothing people enjoy more than a good, long laugh.
1. Only right I had was to be ignored. Same can be said of the majority of population. How many of the consumers actually wanted this change? Polls show majority against them, and it's not like ZO$ cared enough to make an official one & ask us.
2. No information came through about our subscriptions being used to create Cash Shop content & DLCs, instead of content for the current game. You do not determine how much we should know or not.
3. Healthy environment is a fair environment. An environment where other people get advantage for $$$ can be argued to be unhealthy. In real life, achieving more power & special benefits amounts to corruption, which is illegal in most countries (and I would certainly not call it "healthy").
4. I have financial grievance, I spent lots of money in a product that didn't end up like it was envisioned.
How is this different to listening to an architect who wants to build you a house, you pay for the construction & it all breaks down? Instead of even apologizing, the architect tells you to live in the rubbles.
1. Doesn't matter. The right to be heard does not mean that the company needs to listen to you or make any kind of poll. You're being heard right now, on their official forum no less (that's also not part of your right to be heard).
2. Your subscription fee paid for your subscription. How a company spends your money is not something that you, as a consumer, are entitled to know. As an analogy, if you buy a burger from McDonald's, you don't get a refund because they don't spend the profits the way you'd like them to.
3. In real life, people getting special benefits for spending more money is called capitalism.
4. You spent lots of money on a product that was exactly as advertised when you spent that money on your access to it. If you weren't satisfied with your subscription, you had the right to cancel it before. You didn't, so you clearly were satisfied with the product. Not being satisfied about the future of the product doesn't entitle you to restitution for something you already asked for and received.
1. You seem to be missing the whole point of being heard. Being heard means they actually see our posts & opinions and respond to them, because else there can be no assurance this right has been fulfilled.
It means they ask us if we'd like to see a change in business model (and any other trivial thing), and do what the consumers want (just like any other business out there). "Customer is always right", and if majority of customers demand a certain thing, that thing should then be provided unless it is impossible (and explained to the customers).
2. Your analogies still suck. What you are describing is purchasing a finished product, not a service. And again, I'm not looking at things from legal perspective.
3. In sports, video games, politics & multiple other fields, purchasing special benefits for $$$ is corruption (again, illegal). Whether you purchase a pony guar in game or a sports car in real life, I don't care. That sports car isn't going to make you play in a better football team and that pony guar isn't making you a better player.
4. The product I purchased was supposed to release Imperial City somewhere last fall, Thieves Guild/Dark Brotherhood was supposed to be in game "few months after launch" among multiple other things. I kept paying, because I wanted to support the game & see it get better (not worse). I'm not sure how my personal experience has anything to do with the topic though.
1. You've been heard. That right does not include the right to have the company respond in any way. More importantly, it certainly doesn't include the right to have a business change their policies or products to fit your needs. If you don't like their policies or products, you are not required to buy them.
2. Again, you're referencing legal rights, and you received what you paid for. The subscription paid for your access to the game. You received that access. End of story.
3. You're just wrong here, but there's no point in trying to explain the difference between a politician taking a bribe and a consumer purchasing a luxury item to you. You've clearly determined that you're going to see this as somehow equivalent. Regardless, it has nothing to do with a healthy environment, as defined by the consumer rights you reference.
4. The product you purchased never promised any of those specific updates in those specific time frames. And you still never lost your right to redress. Your right to redress doesn't mean that you're guaranteed redress under all circumstances. It just means you have the right to seek redress, and no one is stopping you from doing so.
Wow, you just cant accept you're wrong can you? You must be one of those internet geniuses who are never wrong.
I will just ignore you & leave you to purchase all the $$$ boosts you want.
There's nothing my words can do that would make you smart enough to understand things.
The old 'You cant agree with me so Ill pretend as if youre an idiot' maneuver. Good one DDuke. Youre starting to show your true colors here.
No, there's just simply some (read: a lot) stupid people out there who just keep repeating same bs with zero thought going into their arguments.
I accept when I'm wrong, but there are a lot of people who are incapable of doing that, despite being logically proven wrong, and those frustrate me.
If you look at this person's posts, they are all made from the perspective of someone who enjoys purchasing F2P/B2P games & purchasing cash boosts, without acknowledging there's a different portion of the player base that is vehemently against them due to multitude of reasons.
Because I just feel compelled to explain, yet again...
I'm not commenting on whether the new system is good or bad. I'm holding off on judgment until I've seen it in action for a bit. And I know that lots of people are vehemently for or against the change.
That has nothing to do with your rights as a consumer, but you're right, it's frustrating when people refuse to actually argue in logical terms.
What is frustrating is that I am trying to follow the thread, but all these 5 mile quotes make it a labor. Can't you just put the persona name? Seriously, whatever you are quoting is lost anyway. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time...ThanksFollow me if I advance, Kill me if I retreat, Avenge me if I die.
When this immediate evil power has been defeated, we shall not yet have won the long battle with the elemental barbarities. Another evil, it may be an invisible adversary, will attempt, again, and yet again, to destroy our frail civilization. Is it true, I wonder, that the only way to escape a war is to be in it?
If I die, you are forgiven, If I live, I will kill you.0 -
Faugaun✭✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »As a lawyer, I find these recent threads about consumer law hilarious
I'm a trained lawyer under Portuguese law. I took consumer law in college and worked in a consumer conflicts meditation centre. As a lawyer I've advised on B2C issues, including in the field of e-commerce.
In my opinion, ZOS may have lied when they previously stated that they would never go B2P, but that doesn't do much for you as a consumer.
Firstly, as many have pointed out, this game isn't a mere product but rather a service, subject to the ToS you should have read and agreed to before you started playing. It's a long stretch to consider the clause under which ZOS may change the subscription model contrary to consumer protection laws.
Secondly, ESO being a service, our subscriptions ensured continued access to it. Good luck trying to get your subscription fees back when you already got the benefit for which you paid.
Thirdly, regarding the initial game cost, good luck proving that you would never ever have bought it if you knew that it would possibly, at some time in the future, go B2P. And even if you manage to prove that, good luck getting a refund if you've been using the service as it was advertised (i.e. subscription-based) until now.
In short, I'm against the change to B2P and encourage everyone to vote with your wallets and walk away if you're unhappy. I know I will if I ever get the feeling they're pushing me into spending (more) money in the crown store. But in the end, I don't think there's a case against ZOS under Portuguese and EU consumer laws, and I doubt US or Australian laws are any more protective of consumers.
Needless to say, this has been the expression of my personal opinion as a lawyer under Portuguese law and should not be regarded or relied upon in any way as legal advice or a statement of any rights or remedies you may have under any laws. This opinion carries no warranties, whether express or implied.
Yes, and yet again I'm not looking at things from legal perspective, but moral/ethical one.
I'm asking people whether this kind of behaviour should be condoned, when it's simply wrong (but not legally), and whether the MMO industry could use regulations or laws to make sure things like this do not happen again.
You're citing consumer rights that were enacted in to law, so you're making a legal argument.
And you're wrong on the moral/ethical front too, which is what the post you quoted explained. You received what you paid for. There is no moral issue here. Companies hurting your feelings is not unethical.
I would disagree. While I've stated that I don't think there's a legal case against ZOS, the moral one swings the other way. The most effective way to force companies to defend consumers is to vote with your wallet. If you're absolutely against the change, please stop playing the game. If you keep playing, you're sending the wrong signal. I'm not up to the point of quitting (yet) but I won't think twice to leave if and when I feel I've had enough.
Voting with your wallet never works, because every day there are more and more stupid people who buy into these kind of cash grabs, encouraging more of them to happen.
This has likely to do with human intelligence being on decline in general, as proven by multiple studies.
It's the very definition of a scam, something that seems good & irresistable to fools, but in the end is just aimed towards drying your wallet.
Which is the exact reason more regulations & laws should apply to not only MMOs, but gaming in general (day-1 DLC, pre-order bonuses etc).
Something needs to govern people & companies, so they don't cause harm to themselves & others.
Can you cite any of the 'studies' I am curious
Also have you tallied the studies that oppose cited studies? I know a study that shows that Asians are the most intelligent race followed by Caucasian and finally by African....so your statement would lead me to believe that Black Americans are getting scammed the hardest from the mmo industry and Asians the least....I would love to see demographics on before and after breakdowns of player base in MMOs when transitioning from p2p to some other model. My guess is that it would be identical ....but hey maybe not.
Oh and something does govern people and companies ...its called the government....guess what in my country (and hopefully yours) you can vote for new elected officials...or even run to become an elected official yourself if you choose. These same elected officials have the power to change the laws...raging on the internet has very little power.My new startup social network for Theorycrafting
Champion Point Calculators
Sharable samples:
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Warrior.htm?ba=5&bl=&e=12&ha=10&he=&l=&m=&n=5&q=20&r=15&s=15&t=18
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Thief.htm?a=5&b=22&d=2&e=18&h=8&ma=0&mo=5&sh=9&sp=19&te=12&tu=13&w=1
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Mage.htm?bla=5&ble=1&bo=6&ele=2&elf=3&h=7&m=9&pi=10&pr=20&sp=4&st=8&t=401 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭But it's becoming clear now that my desperate attempt at raising player awareness to the moral/ethical issues is doomed to fail.
I cannot change how people think, I cannot make them smarter or see how things should be in an ideal world.
They will keep buying into cash grabs, and they will keep feeding these B2P/F2P scams.
I believe the only way to protect people from themselves (and from others who buy into these scams), would be to have a regulatory body & additional laws set to the whole gaming industry, and this is too big a task for me.1 -
nerevarine1138✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
What is frustrating is that I am trying to follow the thread, but all these 5 mile quotes make it a labor. Can't you just put the persona name? Seriously, whatever you are quoting is lost anyway. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time...Thanks
I edited this post, but you may want to try using a different browser. This forum makes sure that only the last post in a quote thread is visible.----
Murray?0 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »As a lawyer, I find these recent threads about consumer law hilarious
I'm a trained lawyer under Portuguese law. I took consumer law in college and worked in a consumer conflicts meditation centre. As a lawyer I've advised on B2C issues, including in the field of e-commerce.
In my opinion, ZOS may have lied when they previously stated that they would never go B2P, but that doesn't do much for you as a consumer.
Firstly, as many have pointed out, this game isn't a mere product but rather a service, subject to the ToS you should have read and agreed to before you started playing. It's a long stretch to consider the clause under which ZOS may change the subscription model contrary to consumer protection laws.
Secondly, ESO being a service, our subscriptions ensured continued access to it. Good luck trying to get your subscription fees back when you already got the benefit for which you paid.
Thirdly, regarding the initial game cost, good luck proving that you would never ever have bought it if you knew that it would possibly, at some time in the future, go B2P. And even if you manage to prove that, good luck getting a refund if you've been using the service as it was advertised (i.e. subscription-based) until now.
In short, I'm against the change to B2P and encourage everyone to vote with your wallets and walk away if you're unhappy. I know I will if I ever get the feeling they're pushing me into spending (more) money in the crown store. But in the end, I don't think there's a case against ZOS under Portuguese and EU consumer laws, and I doubt US or Australian laws are any more protective of consumers.
Needless to say, this has been the expression of my personal opinion as a lawyer under Portuguese law and should not be regarded or relied upon in any way as legal advice or a statement of any rights or remedies you may have under any laws. This opinion carries no warranties, whether express or implied.
Yes, and yet again I'm not looking at things from legal perspective, but moral/ethical one.
I'm asking people whether this kind of behaviour should be condoned, when it's simply wrong (but not legally), and whether the MMO industry could use regulations or laws to make sure things like this do not happen again.
You're citing consumer rights that were enacted in to law, so you're making a legal argument.
And you're wrong on the moral/ethical front too, which is what the post you quoted explained. You received what you paid for. There is no moral issue here. Companies hurting your feelings is not unethical.
I would disagree. While I've stated that I don't think there's a legal case against ZOS, the moral one swings the other way. The most effective way to force companies to defend consumers is to vote with your wallet. If you're absolutely against the change, please stop playing the game. If you keep playing, you're sending the wrong signal. I'm not up to the point of quitting (yet) but I won't think twice to leave if and when I feel I've had enough.
Voting with your wallet never works, because every day there are more and more stupid people who buy into these kind of cash grabs, encouraging more of them to happen.
This has likely to do with human intelligence being on decline in general, as proven by multiple studies.
It's the very definition of a scam, something that seems good & irresistable to fools, but in the end is just aimed towards drying your wallet.
Which is the exact reason more regulations & laws should apply to not only MMOs, but gaming in general (day-1 DLC, pre-order bonuses etc).
Something needs to govern people & companies, so they don't cause harm to themselves & others.
Can you cite any of the 'studies' I am curious Also have you tallied the studies that oppose cited studies? I know a study that shows that Asians are the most intelligent race followed by Caucasian and finally by African....so your statement would lead me to believe that Black Americans are getting scammed the hardest from the mmo industry and Asians the least....I would love to see demographics on before and after breakdowns of player base in MMOs when transitioning from p2p to some other model. My guess is that it would be identical ....but hey maybe not.
Oh and something does govern people and companies ...its called the government....guess what in my country (and hopefully yours) you can vote for new elected officials...or even run to become an elected official yourself if you choose. These same elected officials have the power to change the laws...raging on the internet has very little power.
http://rt.com/usa/intelligence-stanford-years-fragile-531/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/people-getting-dumber-human-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846.html
http://naturalsociety.com/leading-geneticist-human-intelligence-slowly-declining/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2730791/Are-STUPID-Britons-people-IQ-decline.html
http://www.undergroundhealth.com/human-intelligence-declining/
You can see this in the world all around you... more & more people listening to Justin Bieber, more & more people watching stupid reality shows about plastic surgeries & what not, more & more violence, beheadings, overall stupidity.
And yes, scams like F2P & B2P becoming more & more prevalent and video games dumbing down in general.
But yeah, I wish government(s) would take more active stance on regulating video games, and take a closer look at how fair practices the companies take part in, instead of banning GTAs & waving their finger at violence (funny how they ignore movies entirely then).0 -
Faugaun✭✭✭✭✭danno816_ESO wrote: »Now for the rest of you: do you like eating crap, or would you like things to change?
I am all for fairness, and for people not getting ripped off, or fooled. But I also hate silly litigation, bluster and overstating ones injuries, or equating hurt feelings to grave injustices.
I simply do not see the switch to F2P as anything other than disappointing. Not the basis for refunds, litigation or any other "I've been wronged" arguments.
Like I said earlier, the only people who maybe should get a refund are those whose subscription extends past the March 17 rollout. And even then only for the amount of time after March
You don't like the service? Stop paying for it. You have a legal obligation to mitigate your own "damages".
This is subjective from person to person. If you spent thousands of hours playing the game, you're going to feel vastly different than a person who played only say, 200 hours.
Saying "oh, just stop paying then" isn't going to stop things like these from happening in the future, with this game or another games.
There will come time when content frequency slows down even more, time when they add even more enticing things to the cash shop.
More people will complain, but nothing will change.
This vicious cycle repeats one game after another.
I beg to differ if enough people suddenly voted with their wallet then it would set a precedent to companies and investors...if they made no money from f2p or b2p then they wouldn't have money for new business ideas eventually.
In capitalism consumers can vote with their wallet, and guess what money does speak. If business cannot make money from f2p and b2p from whales etc...then they will abandon that model, but as long as the potential profits are greater than the potential risks business will continue as usual.
If that truly worked, then there wouldn't be F2P/B2P cash grabs.
The fact is that majority of people are stupid and buy into these things. They usually just simply don't know better and fall into these "traps" made by money hungry companies with no one to watch & regulate them.
Just like any other scam out there.
How many advertisements have you seen that claim you can make 10k/hour if you click a link & subscribe to a newsletter?
People are still stupid enough to click on those, else they wouldn't exist.
I guess I fail to see how a game can go ftp for multiple years after conversion and sell products (given they are digital) for money where both the consumer and the seller are aware of what is being exchanged for what.
Where is the cash grab you mention?
Let's not compare legitimate business, (I am assuming Zos has the appropriate business licensees and reports appropriately to the IRS), to e-mail scammers, that is apples and orangesMy new startup social network for Theorycrafting
Champion Point Calculators
Sharable samples:
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Warrior.htm?ba=5&bl=&e=12&ha=10&he=&l=&m=&n=5&q=20&r=15&s=15&t=18
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Thief.htm?a=5&b=22&d=2&e=18&h=8&ma=0&mo=5&sh=9&sp=19&te=12&tu=13&w=1
http://asolutionaday.com/test/Mage.htm?bla=5&ble=1&bo=6&ele=2&elf=3&h=7&m=9&pi=10&pr=20&sp=4&st=8&t=401 -
cesmode✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
1 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
So, someone thinking those ISIS folks are wonderful & beneficial to society would be a smart person? That's an opinion as well
Opinions always require thought, and your level of thought determines your intelligence.
If it makes you feel better, we're all stupid.0 -
Morshire✭✭✭✭Never mind....Edited by Morshire on January 24, 2015 6:34PMFollow me if I advance, Kill me if I retreat, Avenge me if I die.
When this immediate evil power has been defeated, we shall not yet have won the long battle with the elemental barbarities. Another evil, it may be an invisible adversary, will attempt, again, and yet again, to destroy our frail civilization. Is it true, I wonder, that the only way to escape a war is to be in it?
If I die, you are forgiven, If I live, I will kill you.0 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
Am I crazy, calling for fairness & games made for gamers in mind first (not $$$)?
I've been crazy a long time then, this is not the first game I witness cashing out and going to ***, all for $$$.
There's a point where you have to start fighting back, or accept that your primary hobby in life will forever be dumbed down & ruined.1 -
Fissh✭✭✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
You equate nonsense to basic rights. Self-entitlement at its finest. Goodbye.
<X-Raided>1 -
Xjcon✭✭✭✭✭Those pesky creators of a game, how dare they run it the way they want....we are mad and we want it our way now.....oh and let's not forget... anyone who doesn't share the same view as us is dumb....Briza Do'urdenx V16 Dunmer DK
Jcon V16 Orc DK
Vierna Do'urdenx V16 Bosmer NB
Jarlaxle Baenrex V16 Dunmer NB1 -
cesmode✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
Am I crazy, calling for fairness & games made for gamers in mind first (not $$$)?
I've been crazy a long time then, this is not the first game I witness cashing out and going to ***, all for $$$.
There's a point where you have to start fighting back, or accept that your primary hobby in life will forever be dumbed down & ruined.
Dude, its going to be the same game tomorrow, next week, in march, and in june. Your options have been enhanced. You get the CHOICE of paying 15$ in a given money, or not. Is an XP potion going to ruin your day? Really? Then you have bigger problems.
The fact that they are given you and all of the other complainers a choice to either pay monthly or pay per DLC is an enhancement to the game and the environment. Why do people see this as a negative? Provided that they don't screw up the cash shop with Pay 2 win(and XP potion boosts are NOT P2W), there is nothing but benefit here.
1 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
Am I crazy, calling for fairness & games made for gamers in mind first (not $$$)?
I've been crazy a long time then, this is not the first game I witness cashing out and going to ***, all for $$$.
There's a point where you have to start fighting back, or accept that your primary hobby in life will forever be dumbed down & ruined.
Dude, its going to be the same game tomorrow, next week, in march, and in june. Your options have been enhanced. You get the CHOICE of paying 15$ in a given money, or not. Is an XP potion going to ruin your day? Really? Then you have bigger problems.
The fact that they are given you and all of the other complainers a choice to either pay monthly or pay per DLC is an enhancement to the game and the environment. Why do people see this as a negative? Provided that they don't screw up the cash shop with Pay 2 win(and XP potion boosts are NOT P2W), there is nothing but benefit here.
It's going to stop getting updates for almost a year, because dedicated PC player base means crap to them.
Future updates will be "Skyrim with friends" casual adventures that scale with your level, geared towards console players (they'll start releasing only after console peasants are done leveling).
An XP Potion is making someone more efficient than me, without that person deserving it. Yes, it's going to ruin my day, it lessens my experience if someone is better than me, without being more skilled/dedicated than me. It's corruption.
None of these changes are something the player base asked for.
I fail to see how you can find any positives on this.Edited by DDuke on January 24, 2015 6:49PM0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
So, someone thinking those ISIS folks are wonderful & beneficial to society would be a smart person? That's an opinion as well
Opinions always require thought, and your level of thought determines your intelligence.
If it makes you feel better, we're all stupid.
I said, just because someone does not share your opinion does not mean he is less smart than you.
I did not say that everyone is smart no matter what their opinion is.
I am sure you can see the difference.1 -
cesmode✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
Am I crazy, calling for fairness & games made for gamers in mind first (not $$$)?
I've been crazy a long time then, this is not the first game I witness cashing out and going to ***, all for $$$.
There's a point where you have to start fighting back, or accept that your primary hobby in life will forever be dumbed down & ruined.
Dude, its going to be the same game tomorrow, next week, in march, and in june. Your options have been enhanced. You get the CHOICE of paying 15$ in a given money, or not. Is an XP potion going to ruin your day? Really? Then you have bigger problems.
The fact that they are given you and all of the other complainers a choice to either pay monthly or pay per DLC is an enhancement to the game and the environment. Why do people see this as a negative? Provided that they don't screw up the cash shop with Pay 2 win(and XP potion boosts are NOT P2W), there is nothing but benefit here.
It's going to stop getting updates for almost a year, because dedicated PC player base means crap to them.
Future updates will be "Skyrim with friends" casual adventures that scale with your level, geared towards console players (they'll start releasing only after console peasants are done leveling).
An XP Potion is making someone more efficient than me, without that person deserving it. Yes, it's going to ruin my day, it lessens my experience if someone is better than me, without being more skilled/dedicated than me. It's corruption.
None of these changes are something the player base asked for.
I fail to see how you can find any positives on this.
Skyrim with friends? Level scaling is one of the best things an MMO can do. It allows more people to play together than ever before. Aside from WoW, what traditional MMO is making heaps of money sticking to what worked 10 years ago for an MMO? One of the more successful new MMOs to release in the last decade is GW2 and they have grasped this concept of level scaling from day one. It works. It takes down a silly barrier of level so that friends and guildmates can play new content together.
.1 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
So, someone thinking those ISIS folks are wonderful & beneficial to society would be a smart person? That's an opinion as well
Opinions always require thought, and your level of thought determines your intelligence.
If it makes you feel better, we're all stupid.
I said, just because someone does not share your opinion does not mean he is less smart than you.
I did not say that everyone is smart no matter what their opinion is.
I am sure you can see the difference.
I can, and if I come to logical conclusion that a particular opinion is either extremely naive or stupid, I can move forward and form a general opinion on the person itself.
Sometimes I'm proven wrong (at which point I apologize), but usually I hit the nail on the head 1 -
DDuke✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Well, I'm so glad you people could elaborate on where I went wrong
Good to see there are still intelligent people around /sarcasm
But hey, atleast I know the community is no longer worth staying for in this game, so something positive came out of this post.
Good. Thanks.
Can you unsub and leave now?
Your thread was pointless.
How are you getting off quoting Kennedy and citing laws and what not? Come on...really? They changed their business model. 9/10 MMOs do that these days. Youre crazy.
Am I crazy, calling for fairness & games made for gamers in mind first (not $$$)?
I've been crazy a long time then, this is not the first game I witness cashing out and going to ***, all for $$$.
There's a point where you have to start fighting back, or accept that your primary hobby in life will forever be dumbed down & ruined.
Dude, its going to be the same game tomorrow, next week, in march, and in june. Your options have been enhanced. You get the CHOICE of paying 15$ in a given money, or not. Is an XP potion going to ruin your day? Really? Then you have bigger problems.
The fact that they are given you and all of the other complainers a choice to either pay monthly or pay per DLC is an enhancement to the game and the environment. Why do people see this as a negative? Provided that they don't screw up the cash shop with Pay 2 win(and XP potion boosts are NOT P2W), there is nothing but benefit here.
It's going to stop getting updates for almost a year, because dedicated PC player base means crap to them.
Future updates will be "Skyrim with friends" casual adventures that scale with your level, geared towards console players (they'll start releasing only after console peasants are done leveling).
An XP Potion is making someone more efficient than me, without that person deserving it. Yes, it's going to ruin my day, it lessens my experience if someone is better than me, without being more skilled/dedicated than me. It's corruption.
None of these changes are something the player base asked for.
I fail to see how you can find any positives on this.
Skyrim with friends? Level scaling is one of the best things an MMO can do. It allows more people to play together than ever before. Aside from WoW, what traditional MMO is making heaps of money sticking to what worked 10 years ago for an MMO? One of the more successful new MMOs to release in the last decade is GW2 and they have grasped this concept of level scaling from day one. It works. It takes down a silly barrier of level so that friends and guildmates can play new content together.
.
And people like you are exactly what is wrong with the industry these days.
Simplified & dumbed down =/= good
Sigh, people should play older games like Morrowind, which still required some brains & attention to play.
I'm not saying you're stupid or anything, you simply just might not have been gaming for a long, or never tried those older games before they started dumbing down.
GW2 is considered by most of the more dedicated gamers (to whom it's more than a random hobby) a disaster of a game.
Non-existent end game, bland & small content updates, intrusive cash shop that requires you to spend hundreds of $ to unlock full bank/inventory/storage space & crafting professions etcEdited by DDuke on January 24, 2015 6:59PM2
This discussion has been closed.