Yeah they just closed my ticket with no useful response at all - honestly I start to move away from this being malicious and coming round to it be sheer incompetence across the board...

Some code monkey is mucking about but they don't maintain any kind of source control so they have no idea who did it and whether it was done for a reason or not....

The customer service people clearly have no way to actually pass out ticket stuff on to anyone who can listen or act...

The 3 community managers have posted a grand total of 30 times in the last 10 days according to the Dev tracker which seems low for people who's job is interacting with the community.

It's that old thing of never assuming some grand conspiracy when events can be equally well explained by sheer human stupidity... there is no tyrant just layer upon layer of stupid.

Which in some ways just makes it more frustrating because it will never be responded to , looked at or fixed and there is absolutely no way for us to contact anyone who will sort it out.

Illurian wrote: »

Danikat wrote: »

I just tried previewing the home and I'm seeing the same thing - all the windows have been replaced with wall texture.

I think it must be a bug, I can't see any reason they'd intentionally remove the windows, and if they did surely they'd remove the window frames as well.

It has to be a bug, right?

I can't imagine they'd do this on purpose.

Why do they keep changing houses that have already been bought?

I wouldn't put it past them doing it on purpose. These are the developers who randomly changed the redguard motif after all with no explanation, after all.

JamieAubrey wrote: »

From Windows, TO WALLS ♪♫

Great, now I'm imagining an awesome Elder Scrolls rap song by Lil' Cyrus. Straight outta Yokuda. With sexy altmer dancing in the background (don't judge me).

What ZoS is doing is awful, but your post made me smile.

supaskrub wrote: »

andreasranasen wrote: »

Content is different from an item. Stop making yourself look foolish.

I'l leave you with this and every lawyer will tell you the same:

Every "item" in the game is content, whether you paid for it with ingame gold or with hard $'s it is content that YOU DO NOT OWN, you have only paid for the right to use that content, it can be changed, modified or whatever at anytime by its rightful and intelectual owners (you know what a EULA is i suppose, heck you must do or you would never have gotten as far as to play the game) and you sir/madam are out on a limb with no recourse.

I'm sure you understand that those EULAS rarely hold up in court in a lot of countries. The EU for example almost always sides with the consumers. Of course the US courts tend to side with the company, but my point is that it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, and most of these companies don't want to make a different set of rules for every country. Usually, they change things across the board.

supaskrub wrote: »

andreasranasen wrote: »

Content is different from an item. Stop making yourself look foolish.

I'l leave you with this and every lawyer will tell you the same:

Every "item" in the game is content, whether you paid for it with ingame gold or with hard $'s it is content that YOU DO NOT OWN, you have only paid for the right to use that content, it can be changed, modified or whatever at anytime by its rightful and intelectual owners (you know what a EULA is i suppose, heck you must do or you would never have gotten as far as to play the game) and you sir/madam are out on a limb with no recourse.

Illurian wrote: »

I come from a family of Lawyers/Judges but I really don't care about going to court or suing anyone over something so trivial.

I just want an explanation or acknowledgement that it is a bug and being worked on. That's literally all I'm looking for, as a paying customer.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_BillE

Good luck getting them to answer you. It's really not in their best interest to do so.

I really hope someone from Zenimax responds to this thread. This is a widespread issue across multiple houses and we need an explanation.

Prof_Bawbag wrote: »

Also, you can bet your bottom dollar more houses have had changes, but as of yet no one has picked up on them. Find it hard to believe it's only 3 houses thus far.

With the Morrowind update they added two totem poles, that can't be moved, to Grand Topal Hideaway. Haven't found anything else...yet.

Pretty clear there's a significant bug going here. There's no reason why they'd do this, aside from sheer incompetence.

As far as the legal end is concerned in the US, please enjoy arbitration.

psychotrip wrote: »

olivesforge wrote: »

Pretty clear there's a significant bug going here. There's no reason why they'd do this, aside from sheer incompetence.

As far as the legal end is concerned in the US, please enjoy arbitration.

But...how? How did all these random things just conveniently happen over the course of...how long has it even been since people started reporting this stuff? Unless there's some catastrophic problems behind the coding of the entire housing system, and Zenimax is completely unable to deal with, then I really don't see how these can just be coincidental bugs.

You answered your own question. As with Group Finder and the Empty Dungeon bug, there are ... ahem ... "some catastrophic problems behind the coding of the entire housing system, and Zenimax is completely unable to deal with" them. Most relate to the post-Skyrim recode, and are progressively getting worked on (world departures are now exceedingly rare).

Ohhh that's why i have an new window in Palatial hunding house.

I am sorry they had to remove your windows to give me one


Joke aside : they indeed added a window in Palatial.

i have to redo a whole room because of that .... still waiting, not ready to spend hours on placing stuff again )

andreasranasen wrote: »

Changing it without saying anything is called scamming.

Never thought of it this way. You are absolutely correct.

psychotrip wrote: »

I'm sure you understand that those EULAS rarely hold up in court in a lot of countries. The EU for example almost always sides with the consumers. Of course the US courts tend to side with the company, but my point is that it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, and most of these companies don't want to make a different set of rules for every country. Usually, they change things across the board.

Lets just say that I am a man of the world and understand a lot more than you are giving me credit for. When anyone purchases Crown Coins they will see (at the point of purchase) a message that clearly states that because the virtual currency is instantly unlocked and added to your account you will waive your right to a cooling off period and the purchase is final.

There is infact a cooling off period which is fourteen days (you will struggle to find this information), however, in most cases you will never be made aware of this due to the fact that in most cases purchases are instant and you will have been given a warning as i mentioned above that by commiting to buy you waive the right to a cooling off period. It is highly unusual for a company that sells downloadable/virtual content to actually say " purchase this item now and in fourteen days it will be added to your account, during this fourteen days you have the right to cancel the purchase".

So the bottom line is: Instant purchase and you waive your right to a cooling off period and the sale is final. People bought virtual currency and that is all that applies, the virtual currency was not faulty or was not as described. This virtual currency was then used to purchase an ingame item (content that can be be altered at anytime by its owner/creator/developer as they deem fit, that is in the EULA).

The only chance of recovering money is to contact support directly and explain why you want a refund and hope they show goodwill and give a refund (it's their call whether they do or not).

supaskrub wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

I'm sure you understand that those EULAS rarely hold up in court in a lot of countries. The EU for example almost always sides with the consumers. Of course the US courts tend to side with the company, but my point is that it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, and most of these companies don't want to make a different set of rules for every country. Usually, they change things across the board.

Lets just say that I am a man of the world and understand a lot more than you are giving me credit for. When anyone purchases Crown Coins they will see (at the point of purchase) a message that clearly states that because the virtual currency is instantly unlocked and added to your account you will waive your right to a cooling off period and the purchase is final.

There is infact a cooling off period which is fourteen days (you will struggle to find this information), however, in most cases you will never be made aware of this due to the fact that in most cases purchases are instant and you will have been given a warning as i mentioned above that by commiting to buy you waive the right to a cooling off period. It is highly unusual for a company that sells downloadable/virtual content to actually say " purchase this item now and in fourteen days it will be added to your account, during this fourteen days you have the right to cancel the purchase".

So the bottom line is: Instant purchase and you waive your right to a cooling off period and the sale is final. People bought virtual currency and that is all that applies, the virtual currency was not faulty or was not as described. This virtual currency was then used to purchase an ingame item (content that can be be altered at anytime by its owner/creator/developer as they deem fit, that is in the EULA).

The only chance of recovering money is to contact support directly and explain why you want a refund and hope they show goodwill and give a refund (it's their call whether they do or not).

Dude you're missing the entire point of what I said. In a lot of countries, all those agreemenrs you listed don't hold up in court. They're just words with no legal basis and the courts will agree. The US isn't one of those countries, but the EU countries for example are. I'm explaining how it's not as simple (or cynical) as you're making it. The company is just as likely to completely lose any theoretical court case. It just depends on tbe country.

Tavore1138 wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

supaskrub wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

I'm sure you understand that those EULAS rarely hold up in court in a lot of countries. The EU for example almost always sides with the consumers. Of course the US courts tend to side with the company, but my point is that it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, and most of these companies don't want to make a different set of rules for every country. Usually, they change things across the board.

Lets just say that I am a man of the world and understand a lot more than you are giving me credit for. When anyone purchases Crown Coins they will see (at the point of purchase) a message that clearly states that because the virtual currency is instantly unlocked and added to your account you will waive your right to a cooling off period and the purchase is final.

There is infact a cooling off period which is fourteen days (you will struggle to find this information), however, in most cases you will never be made aware of this due to the fact that in most cases purchases are instant and you will have been given a warning as i mentioned above that by commiting to buy you waive the right to a cooling off period. It is highly unusual for a company that sells downloadable/virtual content to actually say " purchase this item now and in fourteen days it will be added to your account, during this fourteen days you have the right to cancel the purchase".

So the bottom line is: Instant purchase and you waive your right to a cooling off period and the sale is final. People bought virtual currency and that is all that applies, the virtual currency was not faulty or was not as described. This virtual currency was then used to purchase an ingame item (content that can be be altered at anytime by its owner/creator/developer as they deem fit, that is in the EULA).

The only chance of recovering money is to contact support directly and explain why you want a refund and hope they show goodwill and give a refund (it's their call whether they do or not).

Dude you're missing the entire point of what I said. In a lot of countries, all those agreemenrs you listed don't hold up in court. They're just words with no legal basis and the courts will agree. The US isn't one of those countries, but the EU countries for example are. I'm explaining how it's not as simple (or cynical) as you're making it. The company is just as likely to completely lose any theoretical court case. It just depends on tbe country.

This is very rue even in areas like employment where the law is more settled, my wife's firm was taken over by a US firm some years ago and they attempted to force new contracts on the existing staff. They essentially took legal advice and were told many of the clauses simply would be overturned by UK courts... the company backed down.

Even if you have ticked a checkbox agreeing to something that could well not hold up if a court devides the things you agreed on are not valid under the law - companies get away with a lot because people assume that anything they agree to is legally binding whereas the courts are perfectly able to deem some or all terms of such an agreement to be unlawful.

Of course the bigger barrier is that ZOS are a rich global corp and could hire BIS lawyers to overwhelm you however right you could be...

Somehow I doubt ZOS is bigger than whatever international company you wife worked for. If they backed off, then ZOS wouldn't stand much of a chance either.