lunalitetempler wrote: »

lmao, quick call Ally Mcbeal! this is the kind of case she would win ^^

drake88131 wrote: »

Please note that this post represents my personal opinion only, but I do understand that it opens a door as it asks a question that may be controversial to this community. As I know this community can get quite toxic (and is the reason I have refrained from ANY comment for over a Year since I’ve been playing) I will only be posting this question once and dipping. I am not meaning to insult anyone personally at all and I apologize for not responding. I am ok with anyone attacking my post as it is very much giving me exposure, and I understand that. I simply do not want to enhance or feed that exposure for no real purpose. With regards to ESO’s rules allowing for censorship (which I disagree with), please note that I am speculating and I have no personal knowledge whatsoever about ESO’s intent, and I do not mean to state that I know for any fact that this is what they meant to do. I just personally believe that I have a good faith basis for my thoughts given the timeline and the facts available to me.

Moving on to the matter at hand:

With regards to this recent patch, ESO has decided not just to release a new class, but simultaneously destroy all other classes and give this class (behind a pay wall btw) most of those former classes abilities. People that have been building their other characters for YEARS are understandably upset by this and at least one man (Deltia, who I have found to be an honorable and decent man from watching his videos) has decided the company has engaged in underhanded, deceitful, and unforgivable tactics and walked. For me, it's hard to argue with his logic. Though many have been trying on the forums to support the new changes (which I personally think are mostly paid trolls or dev alt accounts. Especially in light of the closing of discussions that disagree with the patch notes, but the prevalence of those that like them).

Prior to ESO releasing these notes, ESO engaged in actions intended to increase revenue. Mainly, ESO had a limited time reduced crown sale for their in-game crown store. In addition, ESO allowed for a “free play week” designed to draw new players to their game. ESO did this knowing full well that immediately following this free play week and the crown sale, they would be releasing patch notes that would take away from the classes completely that were available during the crown sale and during the free play week. However, immediately following this event, they dropped the patch notes, which took away most of the former classes completely and give the abilities to the pay to win warden class. Their intent possible intent was, thus, to drive up revenue as much as possible for people knowing that they would believe that their characters would remain foundationally sound, but knowing that they were only getting as much money as possible before many would leave. As evidence of their possible true intent of forcing consumers to pay to win by buying this new class, they attempted to hid their possible true intent by couching the language of the patch notes as a “buff” when, in reality, almost everyone agrees that it is a nerf. The attempts by the devs to “explain” this in their “spoiler” sections are also nonsensical and ludicrously unreasonable by most people’s analysis. So, I believe a good conclusion is that the Devs materially misrepresented what their game would be during the “free play week” to get players to buy crowns that they could only use in store and/or get subscriptions from people before the patch notes went live.

So what? So many states, such as Illinois, where ESO does business, and, thus, would be subject to jurisdiction, have laws against consumer fraud and deceptive business practices. If a company has engaged in unfair or deceptive practices defined as using deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or concealment, suppression, or omission of a material fact, with intent of others to rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of material fact in their business, and damaged people, then they have violated this civil law.

We would possibly meet these elements by: 1. Being consumers, 2. Being subject to misrepresentations, concealment, suppression or omission of a material fact, that we 3. Relied upon, that 4. Caused us financial and emotional damages. This would also 5. Offend public policy for them to do this and, thus, their contract trying to limit this damage in the TOS might also not be a defense(extreme example, but, let’s say you had a contract to shoot someone…such a contract is not valid because it offends public policy).

I am not making a decision or stating that ESO has done this, but, I would like to hear the communities thoughts (even if it is completely toxic) about whether or not you believe ESO’s patch notes are not only bad, but, rather, could give us all rights in a lawsuit?

STEVIL wrote: »

lunalitetempler wrote: »

lmao, quick call Ally Mcbeal! this is the kind of case she would win ^^

matlock!

or maybe...

yeah...

Call... you know you want to...

Danny Crane!!!