2021 replies to this topic

[Tragos]

So let's see how it works:

Caustic:



River City (a few different ones)




And Forest Colony:

[Mystere]

Rad Hanzo, on 20 August 2013 - 06:32 PM, said:

Spoiler

False or Misleading Representations and Deceptive Marketing Practices

False or Misleading Representations and Deceptive Marketing Practices Under the Competition Act

The Competition Act contains provisions addressing false or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices in promoting the supply or use of a product or any business interest. All representations, in any form whatever, that are false or misleading in a material respect are subject to the Act. If a representation could influence a consumer to buy or use the product or service advertised, it is material. To determine whether a representation is false or misleading, the courts consider the "general impression" it conveys, as well as its literal meaning.

The Act provides two adjudicative regimes to address false or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices.

Under the criminal regime, the general provision prohibits all materially false or misleading representations made knowingly or recklessly. Other provisions specifically forbid deceptive telemarketing, deceptive notices of winning a prize, double ticketing, and schemes of pyramid selling. The multi-level marketing provisions prohibit certain types of representations relating to compensation.

Under the civil regime, the general provision prohibits all materially false or misleading representations. Other provisions specifically prohibit performance representations that are not based on adequate and proper tests, misleading warranties and guarantees, false or misleading ordinary selling price representations, untrue, misleading or unauthorized use of tests and testimonials, bait and switch selling, and the sale of a product above its advertised price. The promotional contest provisions prohibit contests that do not disclose required information.

False or misleading representations and deceptive marketing practices can have serious economic consequences, especially when directed toward large audiences or when they take place over a long period of time. They can affect both business competitors who are engaging in honest promotional efforts, and consumers.

What Are the Possible Penalties?

Under the criminal regime, certain practices are brought before the criminal courts, requiring proof of each element of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. On summary conviction, the person is liable to a fine of up to $200,000 and/or imprisonment for up to one year. If convicted on indictment, the person is liable to a fine at the discretion of the court and/or imprisonment for up to 14 years.

Under the civil regime, certain practices may be brought before the Competition Tribunal, the Federal Court or the superior court of a province and require that each element of the conduct be proven on a balance of probabilities. The court may order a person to cease the activity, publish a notice and/or pay an administrative monetary penalty. On first occurrence, individuals are liable to penalties of up to $750,000 and corporations are liable to penalties of up to $10,000,000. For subsequent occurrences, the penalties increase to a maximum of $1,000,000 for indidividuals and $15,000,000 for corporations. In situations where a person has made materially false or misleading representations about a product to the public, the court may also make an order for restitution, requiring the person to compensate consumers who bought such products, and an interim injunction to freeze assets in certain cases.

The Bureau conducts its investigations in private and keeps confidential the identity of the source and the information provided. However, if someone has important evidence about a contravention under the Act, that person may be asked to testify in court.

Advertising Dos and Don'ts

The following "Dos and Don'ts" will help businesses comply with the Competition Act.

Dos
•Do avoid fine print disclaimers. They often fail to change the general impression conveyed by an advertisement. If you do use them, make sure the overall impression created by the ad and the disclaimer is not misleading.
•Do fully and clearly disclose all material information in the advertisement.
•Do avoid using terms or phrases in an advertisement that are not meaningful and clear to the ordinary person.
•Do charge the lowest of two or more prices appearing on a product.
•Do ensure that you have reasonable quantities of a product advertised at a bargain price.
•Do, when conducting a contest, disclose all material details required by the Act before potential participants are committed to it.
•Do ensure that your sales force is familiar with these "Dos and Don'ts." Advertisers may be held responsible for representations made by employees.

Don'ts
•Don't confuse "regular price" or "ordinary price" with "manufacturer's suggested list price" or a like term. They are often not the same.
•Don't use "regular price" in an advertisement unless the product has been offered in good faith for sale at that price for a substantial period of time, or a substantial volume of the product has been sold at that price within a reasonable period of time.
•Don't use the words "sale" or "special" in relation to the price of a product unless a significant price reduction has occurred.
•Don't run a "sale" for a long period or repeat it every week.
•Don't increase the price of a product or service to cover the cost of a free product or service.
•Don't use illustrations that are different from the product being sold.
•Don't make a performance claim unless you can prove it, even if you think it is accurate. Testimonials usually do not amount to adequate proof.
•Don't sell a product above your advertised price.
•Don't unduly delay the distribution of prizes when conducting a contest.
•Don't make any materially misleading product warranty or guarantee, or promise to replace, maintain or repair an article.
•Don't use the results of product performance tests and/or testimonials in your advertising unless you are authorized to use them; or if you are authorized to use them, don't distort test results or the scope of testimonials.
•Don't forget that no one actually needs to be deceived or misled for a court to find that an advertisement is misleading.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Competition Bureau is an independent law enforcement agency that contributes to the prosperity of Canadians by protecting and promoting competitive markets and enabling informed consumer choice.

Headed by the Commissioner of Competition, the Bureau is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Competition Act, the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act, the Textile Labelling Act and the Precious Metals Marking Act.

Gotcha for good, fellas ...
You guys at PGIGP rather get that so called "HARDCORE" server queues running asap ( meaning: NOW)
or you are going to lose another customer that WILL get every €-cent invested into this back on his way out and thinking about filing a lawsuit for time invested and emotional damage.

I´m pissed off and sick of getting lied to the face, in fact so sick and pissed off I´m not even gonna get creative in regards to swearwords.

This is a threat, served in icecold anger to you, MOVE IT.
N O W !

The terms of use might get in the way of any lawsuit.

[Karl Marlow]

Homeless Bill, on 20 August 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

Pretty much everything you said there is working as intended. You'll be delighted to know that you don't get the robust implementation of 3PV you want because they're trying to please the anti-3PV half of the playerbase by giving 3PV various disadvantages (forced arm lock, no free look, lack of HUD info, etc.).

In reality, their implementation only serves to gimp new players by having the camera too high to see legs and the lack of a map. It also ****** off the rest of us, because 3PV still offers massive advantages that many of us don't want to play with or against.

a thousand times this. 3PV in its current implementation is a HUGE disadvantage. Starting new players are getting forced into that view that might not know it can be turned off is going to turn people off. It doesn't even help them see their legs orientation in regards to their torso since in most mechs you cant see your legs.

Edited by ThomasMarik, 20 August 2013 - 07:10 PM.

[Bloody Moon]

Erbun, on 20 August 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

You guys do realize that the extra "view" you get from third person doesn't benefit you right? I mean, the only thing missing is you don't visually see the enemy, but he'll be on your mini map.

Is this supposed to be sarcasm? I hope so, since i could see enemies with 3PV well before they appeared on the minimap in the single game i played after the patch.

Did you miss the screenshots floating around?

[Victor Morson]

White Panther, on 20 August 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

I can see everyone and line up my shot without them even being able to see me

But you see, they don't understand seeing a drone / seeing a 'mech you can actually shoot at are two entirely different things.

If the Camera Drone was made into a free module and could be shot down, it would have been a welcomed change instead of entirely hated. It'd have trade-offs and counters then. But this is terrible.

[MonkeyCheese]

Victor Morson, on 20 August 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

Now stop bothering Paul so he can get to Ghost Heat II: Ghost Delays.

Hahahaha oh that is gold!

[Cael Voltek]

Thirdstar, on 20 August 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

How many long time players and Founders would you like to see be banned?

Did you pay attention to the quote I put in? I'd start with him. Long time player or founder doesn't have anything to do with it, you are just trying to manipulate my statement. If it isn't 3PV, it's something else. This place has just become an echo chamber. On ongoing ***** session where where people post just to complain.

[Ransack]

Wales Grey, on 20 August 2013 - 06:27 PM, said:

As much as I would like PGI to split the queue, I'm not sure the game has enough players to survive such a split in the playerbase.

so then they should take that {Scrap} out and keep the players that they have. You know, the ones that WANT to play the game and WILL spend money on it. A bird the hand...

Reading Peiper's post straightened me up a bit. I'll still log into The Hub.

[Mrllamaface]

After a few drops here is some constructive critiques.

1) Being able to see over/around terrain is a distinct advantage. Possible fixes, make the "camera" big enough that if someone using 3rd person is hiding behind cover it is clear to everyone (because of huge camera not the small thing you have now) is pointing them out. Or (this is what I would prefer) simply make it so that if you cant see it in 1st person you cant see it in third.

2) Several mechs legs are not visible in 3rd person, making the original reason for having it (people are having problems driving) moot. Perhaps pull the camera back and lower it some to show more of how the legs are pointed.

Will add some more when after a few more drops.

Edit: I honestly now think that it might be best to add a "fog of war" aspect to third person. Go ahead and give them all the arm movement, mini map, etc. but only let them see mechs that would be visible in first person. I would be ok if terrain were visible etc as this would help new players learn to drive. I don't know if that is a happy middle spot, if it is possible or totally off base. I do think it is an idea the prevents "abuse" and would allow PGI to keep united drops.

Edited by Mrllamaface, 22 August 2013 - 03:32 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Tragos, on 20 August 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So let's see how it works:

Caustic:



River City (a few different ones)




And Forest Colony:

This should in the OP for every 3rd person thread that gets started.

[Cael Voltek]

Bloody Moon, on 20 August 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

Try that and they assure the guy wins the lawsuit without question.

Uh, no.

[Ranik Selesky]

Victor Morson, on 20 August 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

But you see, they don't understand seeing a drone / seeing a 'mech you can actually shoot at are two entirely different things.

If the Camera Drone was made into a free module and could be shot down, it would have been a welcomed change instead of entirely hated. It'd have trade-offs and counters then. But this is terrible.

This is the crux of it. They are simply too foolish or incompetent to realize it.


I believe they could make it better. However if they knew what they were doing they wouldn't have put it in at all until it was ready. At the moment it's breaking the game.

Edited by Ranik Selesky, 20 August 2013 - 07:14 PM.

[MonkeyCheese]

Tragos, on 20 August 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

So let's see how it works:

Caustic:



River City (a few different ones)




And Forest Colony:

Bravo good sir, wall hack 2.0 working as intended

[Name140704]

Tabrias07, on 20 August 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

Where's the 1PV only queue?

Re-posted from page "1" for those who don't have a problem with 3pv.


That's not the real problem at all. Even if it was balanced, it's a flat lie now. All of it.

[Bloody Moon]

Cael Voltek, on 20 August 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Uh, no.

He did not violate the TOS or anything, so he cannot be banned just 'cos you think they should. Go figure.

[NATIONALCAPITALGAMING]

Erbun, on 20 August 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

You guys do realize that the extra "view" you get from third person doesn't benefit you right? I mean, the only thing missing is you don't visually see the enemy, but he'll be on your mini map.

Wait, you mean your not watching the mini map?

Then the tactical edge your losing won't matter much at that level.

Anyways - I've never had a problem with the 3pv whine crowd... (Seriously when the hell did all the wow players decide to play mechwarrior?), however that being said...

Why the **** do I default in 3pv? Stop that ****. Stop that **** now.

PS - If you want to stop the cryers, because if someone using 3pv gains an advantage over someone not using it, there's not enough skill in the match for it to matter, remove the hud. Not the targeting reticle, let them still aim, but remove the information recieved from the hud.

Problem solved.

Your welcome.

OR. They could ignore your idea, and just separate the queues. Everyone wins.

[Butane9000]

Mystere, on 20 August 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

The terms of use might get in the way of any lawsuit.

a Terms of Use agreement does not grant them protection from false advertising/statements they made to customers.

[Killashnikov]

Cael Voltek, on 20 August 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

Did you pay attention to the quote I put in? I'd start with him. Long time player or founder doesn't have anything to do with it, you are just trying to manipulate my statement. If it isn't 3PV, it's something else. This place has just become an echo chamber. On ongoing ***** session where where people post just to complain.

Sadly the key here is that it has "become" what it is because of decisions made by the devs, then abandoned or ignored later. When this game was closed beta the forums were really quite positive - because the game was fun and they listened - mostly.
Since "open beta" we have been relegated to a source of income which can be ignored. This is what infuriates so many, and leads to this type of negativity in the forums.

[WM Wraith]

Meatoburrito, on 20 August 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

Best picture ever!!!! Literally had the misfortune of taking a drink of water when I saw the arrow pointing to the "Easy to Navigate Legs" for new users. Spit water everywhere !!!

[Cael Voltek]

Bloody Moon, on 20 August 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

He did not violate the TOS or anything, so he cannot be banned just 'cos you think they should. Go figure.

And yet, endless posts demanding changes, or tossing accusations, because the poster "thinks" so. Double standard much?