What happened to my windows? (Mathiisen Manor)

KingYogi415 · June 2017

People wanted the inside winows to line up with the outside ones. This is our "fix" I guess...

psychotrip · June 2017

KingYogi415 wrote: »

People wanted the inside winows to line up with the outside ones. This is our "fix" I guess...

Okay, if that's the explanation, then that's just cruel haha.

Skjoldur · June 2017

Guess they are going to sell windows separately at the crown store... next week it's doors...

DarcyMardin · June 2017

If you had one window, it's a buff; but if you had more than one, it's a nerf.

psychotrip · June 2017

DarcyMardin wrote: »

If you had one window, it's a buff; but if you had more than one, it's a nerf.

Can't have people having too many windows! Balance, I say!

Stormshaper · June 2017

My Diet Opinion (has all the taste but with zero legal calories):

1. Pictures before and after are going to likely be the deciding factor on requests for refunds. They're going to want proof, the burden of which is yours albeit not necessarily in the strictest legal sense. Even if they are aware of any changes that were made AND (especially) even if they do not ask for pictures after you submit your request. In fact, they probably will not ask if you have pictures so you'll want to state this, or provide evidence that they exist from the very start of the request.

2. It is very unlikely that you will see a post where they admit that these changes were made, even if they believe or even have direct knowledge that any alleged changes were warranted and/or needed. In other words, even if Gina et al. wanted to post something on this, legal is going to say no to it. An admission or even acknowledgement that these changes were made, if posted, would only start a cavalcade of refund requests. And once an admission or acknowledgement is made, they're going to have less footing regarding a legal stance to deny, delay or even close a refund request. It is also very unlikely that these changes will ever be rescinded.

3. One would do very well to future-proof a potential ticket on this matter. Take copious amounts of pictures, but consider video capture as well, and with sound enabled. What if they suddenly mute the ocean noise at Hundings Beach b/c they're getting ready to sell 'sound paks'? Or what if they add the noise of a jackhammer b/c they're doing some construction nearby or want to sell sound-proof upgrade windows in the future? Silly yes, but you understand my point.

4. Do not to use someone else's pictures or video, even if it shows the same problem as the one you report. If found, not only will your request be refused but you could be looking at some type of ban. Worse, the pictures you posted lasted week were already used by another request that beat yours when submitting.

5. Stay calm, and document document document everything.

psychotrip · June 2017

Stormshaper wrote: »

My Diet Opinion (has all the taste but with zero legal calories):

1. Pictures before and after are going to likely be the deciding factor on requests for refunds. They're going to want proof, the burden of which is yours albeit not necessarily in the strictest legal sense. Even if they are aware of any changes that were made AND (especially) even if they do not ask for pictures after you submit your request. In fact, they probably will not ask if you have pictures so you'll want to state this, or provide evidence that they exist from the very start of the request.

2. It is very unlikely that you will see a post where they admit that these changes were made, even if they believe or even have direct knowledge that any alleged changes were warranted and/or needed. In other words, even if Gina et al. wanted to post something on this, legal is going to say no to it. An admission or even acknowledgement that these changes were made, if posted, would only start a cavalcade of refund requests. And once an admission or acknowledgement is made, they're going to have less footing regarding a legal stance to deny, delay or even close a refund request. It is also very unlikely that these changes will ever be rescinded.

3. One would do very well to future-proof a potential ticket on this matter. Take copious amounts of pictures, but consider video capture as well, and with sound enabled. What if they suddenly mute the ocean noise at Hundings Beach b/c they're getting ready to sell 'sound paks'? Or what if they add the noise of a jackhammer b/c they're doing some construction nearby or want to sell sound-proof upgrade windows in the future? Silly yes, but you understand my point.

4. Do not to use someone else's pictures or video, even if it shows the same problem as the one you report. If found, not only will your request be refused but you could be looking at some type of ban. Worse, the pictures you posted lasted week were already used by another request that beat yours when submitting.

5. Stay calm, and document document document everything.

In regards to number 4, what exactly is the problem wit this as long as you're open about it? If you don't have pictures of your home from before, I would say go to Youtube. There are walkthroughs of every house in the game. It doesn't matter if yours is decorated differently, the base of the house is still the same. If the windows are missing in your house, and everyone was given the same version of the house, then it doesn't matter.

reiverx · June 2017

Prof_Bawbag wrote: »

Sent a ticket in and asked if they can provide a reason why these windows have been removed. I'm not up on the ins and outs of UK consumer law and not going to pretend that I am. However, if these changes are intended, I consider the product no longer as described when I made my purchase.

Last time I had issues with ZoS, I got a full refund for the entire subbing duration as I was covered by UK consumer laws. Because their products are located on a UK marketplace or selling a product within the UK market (digital or otherwise), they have to adhere to UK law. I'll let you guys know. Hopefully it's just a bug, but like the last time I refuse to be ignored. The very least we're owed is an explanation. After all, it's us that help pay their wages. Goodwill and all that ***.

EU laws are very consumer friendly. I'm not sure how you'll fare after Brexit

bunnytrix · June 2017

These are not bugs. They changed them on purpose because they saw something that they can monetize.

They will probably sell windows for Mathiisen and other places like that. A seashore pack for Hundings. Whatever...not bugs.

It's nothing to ZOS to change things people have paid real cash for, they have been doing it for ages. Player satisfaction/ happiness is the absolute bottom of the list of ZO$ priorities. $$$ is everything.

Gina's responses in the Earthtear Cavern thread are the usual damage control lies.
No response since then. Just another issue swept under the carpet in the hope it will go away.
Ask for refunds.
Losing $$$ is the only thing that will make ZO$$$ respond.

Tavore1138 · June 2017

reiverx wrote: »

Prof_Bawbag wrote: »

Sent a ticket in and asked if they can provide a reason why these windows have been removed. I'm not up on the ins and outs of UK consumer law and not going to pretend that I am. However, if these changes are intended, I consider the product no longer as described when I made my purchase.

Last time I had issues with ZoS, I got a full refund for the entire subbing duration as I was covered by UK consumer laws. Because their products are located on a UK marketplace or selling a product within the UK market (digital or otherwise), they have to adhere to UK law. I'll let you guys know. Hopefully it's just a bug, but like the last time I refuse to be ignored. The very least we're owed is an explanation. After all, it's us that help pay their wages. Goodwill and all that ***.

EU laws are very consumer friendly. I'm not sure how you'll fare after Brexit

Surely even ZOS can't string it out until March 2019????

Stormshaper · June 2017

psychotrip wrote: »

In regards to number 4, what exactly is the problem wit this as long as you're open about it?

It shouldn't matter, you are correct. The problem as I see it, is only in regards to the person who controls the decision over the outcome of a refund claim. To clarify, I'm expressing extreme caution in using a source that isn't technically yours. I'm ONLY expressing this caution because it could null/void your claim, based on merits that we may not even know about. In other words, they may close your ticket w/o refund based on pictures that were not yours. We don't know the basis (merits) of their approving or denying any such refund claims, so if you can avoid this do so at all costs. Your request may be denied, and you may never know that the reason was lack of evidence. The term 'lack of evidence' may be used in claims where sources were not the claimants, and the claimant may not ever be aware or entitled to know (all) the reasons behind a refund requests denial.

Stormshaper · June 2017

bunnytrix wrote: »

Gina's responses in the Earthtear Cavern thread are <snip>

Snipped by me. But I just wanted to add that I read those responses you refer to and unless they were changed or added to, were the actual basis for my statement earlier that these (housing) changes will not be acknowledged or admitted to...unless they start to see a lot of refund claims that cannot be refused due to the claimants evidence.

psychotrip · June 2017

Stormshaper wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

In regards to number 4, what exactly is the problem wit this as long as you're open about it?

It shouldn't matter, you are correct. The problem as I see it, is only in regards to the person who controls the decision over the outcome of a refund claim. To clarify, I'm expressing extreme caution in using a source that isn't technically yours. I'm ONLY expressing this caution because it could null/void your claim, based on merits that we may not even know about. In other words, they may close your ticket w/o refund based on pictures that were not yours. We don't know the basis (merits) of their approving or denying any such refund claims, so if you can avoid this do so at all costs. Your request may be denied, and you may never know that the reason was lack of evidence. The term 'lack of evidence' may be used in claims where sources were not the claimants, and the claimant may not ever be aware or entitled to know (all) the reasons behind a refund requests denial.

But, will that excuse hold up in any way? If it's obvious to even a non-gamer that you're given the same basic house, it should be obvious that you can use an example from another instance of the same house.

At the very least, if you dont have a before photo, show them the after photo and tell them you
can provide evidence of what it looked like before based on videos and images from others, or even Zenimax's own official images.

purple-magicb16_ESO · June 2017

Osteos wrote: »

Arciris wrote: »

People didn't care when it happened to the very expensive Crown exclusive Cavern (they added huge stones when there were none before). Except the home owners.
People didn't care when it happened to Hunding's (they removed seashells and kelp from the beach). Except the home owners.
People will not care now that it is happening to Mathiisen. Except the home owners.
This thread will be buried in the Bug report section, like Hunding's thread was, although there is no bug involved at all - this is intended.

All home owners, even the cheapest ones, should unite to demand ZOS to not make any changes to their homes - except to fix obvious bugs.

Personally, I'm not spending one more cent in housing until we get a good explanation on why they are making those unasked for alterations.

I never even saw the Hunding's thread.

I saw the Craglorn cavern thread but I thought from reading Gina's posts that it was being looked into.

I will not be buying another house or any furniture until we hear something. I agree everyone who has purchased a house either through gold or crowns should stand together on this.

Illurian · June 2017

I logged in today hoping that they ninja fixed it in the patch.

They didn't.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_BillE @ZOS_RichLambert
Anyone able to comment on this?

Stormshaper · June 2017

psychotrip wrote: »

But, will that excuse hold up in any way? If it's obvious to even a non-gamer that you're given the same basic house, it should be obvious that you can use an example from another instance of the same house.

Your point is completely fair. Like you said, if you were to tell them in the initial claim, 'look, I don't have a picture of MY home, but here is a picture of an identical home, and it shows the EXACT same problem that I'm referring to in this claim'. That SHOULD do it for you. There should NOT be a denial based on this, it seems perfectly logical, and reasonable.

And if you have no choice, i.e. no before pics of your own, then I would say to obtain the evidence from their very own videos only. And do so before they take them down or change them. At least you are then using a source that is known to them and should in no way be a cause for denial.

My caution in this regard was to anyone who could prevent this in cases where changes have yet to be made. Insurance, essentially. But your point is quite valid, it shouldn't matter at all if the evidence remains accurate and undeniable. But, in the interest of you the consumer, I would be upset if any claims were denied based on something that could have been otherwise prevented. I was 'covering all the bases', so to say yes?

psychotrip · June 2017

Stormshaper wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

But, will that excuse hold up in any way? If it's obvious to even a non-gamer that you're given the same basic house, it should be obvious that you can use an example from another instance of the same house.

Your point is completely fair. Like you said, if you were to tell them in the initial claim, 'look, I don't have a picture of MY home, but here is a picture of an identical home, and it shows the EXACT same problem that I'm referring to in this claim'. That SHOULD do it for you. There should NOT be a denial based on this, it seems perfectly logical, and reasonable.

And if you have no choice, i.e. no before pics of your own, then I would say to obtain the evidence from their very own videos only. And do so before they take them down or change them. At least you are then using a source that is known to them and should in no way be a cause for denial.

My caution in this regard was to anyone who could prevent this in cases where changes have yet to be made. Insurance, essentially. But your point is quite valid, it shouldn't matter at all if the evidence remains accurate and undeniable. But, in the interest of you the consumer, I would be upset if any claims were denied based on something that could have been otherwise prevented. I was 'covering all the bases', so to say yes?

Understood.

CountEdmondDantes · June 2017

SilverIce58 wrote: »

Maybe they're gonna make you buy windows...like a real house

Actually, my house (like most houses) came with windows.

Buying new windows? That's a homeowner's choice.

Tavore1138 · June 2017

I'd like to believe that they would sink so low as to try and sell us our missing windows!!

I'm going to figure out how to capture vids of my existing homes tonight just so I have something to compare them too every couple of weeks - amazed I even have to do such a thing but...

psychotrip · June 2017

Tavore1138 wrote: »

I'd like to believe that they would sink so low as to try and sell us our missing windows!!

I'm going to figure out how to capture vids of my existing homes tonight just so I have something to compare them too every couple of weeks - amazed I even have to do such a thing but...

I know people are throwing that idea around, but I honestly don't believe they'd do something so brazen and hilariously evil. As of now, this is just a weird and frustrating quirk. The entirety of games media would be jumping down their throats if they did something like that.

Cpt_Teemo · June 2017

From the looks of it they want you to buy more manors I'm guessing by nerfing previous less expensive houses

billp_ESO · June 2017

Since housing is purely cosmetic, it is amazing that after you buy it, the cosmetics change.

My guess is that they are using the same bits of scenery in other locations, and someone changed it for that location, without knowing that it was also used in some houses. They probably don't know which graphics bits were re-used like this, so they need feedback from the users.

If ZOS is indeed reserving the right to change the looks of things after you pay real money for them, that would be unbelievable. Like buying a blue horse mount because you like blue, and tomorrow they change it to red.

If it's true the Crown Store is all cosmetics only, and ZOS can change the cosmetics at any time, what are you really buying?

Stormshaper · June 2017

Tavore1138 wrote: »

I'm going to figure out how to capture vids of my existing homes tonight just so I have something to compare them too every couple of weeks - amazed I even have to do such a thing but...

Good idea! Everyone should start doing this. Personally, I have like 6-7 homes only but documenting them as-is, and being thorough will take some time. BTW - there's plenty of good apps but personally if you have a newer NVIDIA card, the built-in capture with the Experience software is pretty good.

psychotrip · June 2017

billp_ESO wrote: »

Since housing is purely cosmetic, it is amazing that after you buy it, the cosmetics change.

My guess is that they are using the same bits of scenery in other locations, and someone changed it for that location, without knowing that it was also used in some houses. They probably don't know which graphics bits were re-used like this, so they need feedback from the users.

If ZOS is indeed reserving the right to change the looks of things after you pay real money for them, that would be unbelievable. Like buying a blue horse mount because you like blue, and tomorrow they change it to red.

If it's true the Crown Store is all cosmetics only, and ZOS can change the cosmetics at any time, what are you really buying?

Well there's an easy way to check this. Someone go to Auridon and see if the buildings Mathiisen is modeled off of have their windows missing on the inside as well. I believe Matthiisen's model is seen all over the island. It's like a manor / town hall type building, yes?

Tavore1138 · June 2017

FYI - just got this from support:

Hello!

Thank you for reaching out to support regarding your issue with the houses. After reviewing the information you've provided, we have bugs in our system both for Mathiisen Manor (windows specifically) and Hunding's Palatial Hall (the beach clutter and ship). These are issues that our support team are working on resolving in a future update to the game. Even the mentioned Earthtear Cavern (that I found through your links) is also being reviewed by our development team.

Not a solution and no excuse for lack of forum comms but does suggest it is on someone's radar, I asked for an estimate on fix time and will update if they can give me anything useful.

Lord-Otto · June 2017

The npc buildings are fine.
I reported this two weeks after Morro launch in the bug section, no response.

P.S.: Don't look at the "wooden" chimney shelves and the 1. floor "wooden" support beams. (^_-)

Molec · June 2017

If it isn't a bug then they must be trying to reduce the "draw calls" in the larger Homestead houses by reusing the wall texture to provide better FPS on lower spec machines. If this is the case there are more than likely others missing as removing a single texture and it's reapplications is bit of a backward move.

Prof_Bawbag · June 2017

No doubt we'll get the usual sound bites the next time they do their Q&A live thingymabob, like "we're looking into it", "We're attempting to be more interactive with the community" and the usual horse *** we're fed. Really not good enough. Forgot how much crowns the furnished Mathiisen Manor cost, but if by the end of the 4 days this all remains unanswered and my ticket gets the generic treatment, I will expect all of those crowns returned to my account, with all the furnishing that have been put in by myself to be put into my bank or inventory.

Farcical that they're charging people through the nose for this *** and they haven't even got the decency to communicate with their paying fan base whenever something is deserving of an answer. We're not rabble rousers, we're just consumers wanting a simple explanation to the following question; Are these changes intended or is it a bug? I'd really appreciate an answer to know where I stand.

Illurian · June 2017

Tavore1138 wrote: »

FYI - just got this from support:

Hello!

Thank you for reaching out to support regarding your issue with the houses. After reviewing the information you've provided, we have bugs in our system both for Mathiisen Manor (windows specifically) and Hunding's Palatial Hall (the beach clutter and ship). These are issues that our support team are working on resolving in a future update to the game. Even the mentioned Earthtear Cavern (that I found through your links) is also being reviewed by our development team.

Not a solution and no excuse for lack of forum comms but does suggest it is on someone's radar, I asked for an estimate on fix time and will update if they can give me anything useful.

Amazing. That actually puts me at ease. Thanks for sharing that.

I doubt they'll give you an ETA though, notorious as they are with ETAs.

psychotrip · June 2017

And we've received a response from @ZOS_GinaBruno on another thread:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hi everyone, apologies for the delay in replying. We're talking through some possible options, and will let you know what we plan to do regarding these changes. Will keep you all in the loop and let you know what's decided as soon as possible.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/4273078#Comment_4273078

It's all strangely vague. What does she mean by options? Well, at least we've made progress.