158 replies to this topic

[HiplyRustic]

Cole Allard, on 06 February 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

What you are saying is : any terms of service is wrong and non existing, if the country the klicking person lives in has other rights. Thats true.

BUT (<- cant make it fat enough.) try to go for a refund over your Credit Card...or even better...over paypal. Just try it and tell me what reality told you.

Until I actually see people getting cash back from internet transactions (via credit), I wont belive it.

Here's what my reality tells me; my reality tells me I have almost two decades of corporate retail management experience, with much of it dealing with e-commerce. My reality tells me that in the unlikely event someone actually went so far as to go to VISA and make a formal claim requesting a reversal of an MC charge based on "this company charged me real money for a product, then took my product away from me and only offered me an in-store credit...they didn't give me my money back." my money's on the customer based on VISA viewing it as a refund and refund protection is baked in to many credit card agreements.

As I said, I don't know the specific law on this...we're dealing with virtual items, which some courts have acknowledged as having tangible value (see some rulings on virtual land and items in Second Life), and the law is by no means settled. If it ever becomes settled and gives virtual items the same protections as "real" items then what happened in this case would not have been legal, the example of Best Buy coming to your house, taking away your TV while giving you your money back but then forcing you to buy it back at a higher price if you wanted it back would apply...and that ain't legal.

[Rauchsauger]

RG Notch, on 05 February 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

Some of you people are in for a rude awakening when you grow up.

And if an actual grown up us pissed enough to take this to court (or consumer groups) pgi and you would probably be forced to realize that you can put what you want in an "agreement" - unlawful is unlawful.
Just look at how valve had their *** handed to them in europe concerning their EULAs

[Joseph Mallan]

VonRunnegen, on 06 February 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

It's not currency, its more akin to a credit note though the analogy is flawed.

If you bought yourself a car for $1k and the car company took it back and instead of giving you your money back said 'its ok, we'll knock 1k off the price of all our other cars' when all the rest were $100k beasts you'd be pretty annoyed at them as they've taken your money and aren't giving it back, the credit is worthless if you're not willing to fork over the other $99k.

Yes, the new deal might be worth it for some, not for others. But refunding MC is NOT the same as refunding the purchase price and e-transactions here (UK) are covered by distance selling regs here so the buyers rights are enshrined in law in this country - though perhaps not where the buyer comes from. No matter what the terms of service say this doesn't change.

Edit: I agree with the above post saying actually getting money back is quite another thing to having the right to do so - but it doesn't make it inappropriate to complain about it. Being realistic doesn't mean you have to abandon your sense of justice, just know that it won't always be possible to get what's right.

true IF they only gave you back $1k for one car. But what if they gave you back $1K for each car you ever bought from them(like We just got... I was given back 17,000 MC!). Sure some folks wouldn't get back much if they were frugal and drove their cars into the dirt. now you can buy the new hotness (at a 50% discount) or you could lease yourself the same car you have now for less money than you did the first time.

[Biruke]

come on. I got MC 4500 back and spent only 1000 this time. I paint all my mechs in one color Wanna play with colors? Pay more, it's simple.

[Greers]

Bulu, on 05 February 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

XD Please God tell me that at least,there are one guy out there who can see the point of what im saying, just one¡

OH, dont wanna forget, thanx Tennex for the answer

Just paint a dozen other Mechs the Phranken-Color and you have won a lot of MC! I see you point but it's just not universally applicable. Most people paint multiple Mechs and they are good with the new system.

[Cole Allard]

HiplyRustic, on 06 February 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

Here's what my reality tells me; my reality tells me I have almost two decades of corporate retail management experience, with much of it dealing with e-commerce. My reality tells me that in the unlikely event someone actually went so far as to go to VISA and make a formal claim requesting a reversal of an MC charge based on "this company charged me real money for a product, then took my product away from me and only offered me an in-store credit...they didn't give me my money back." my money's on the customer based on VISA viewing it as a refund and refund protection is baked in to many credit card agreements.

As I said, I don't know the specific law on this...we're dealing with virtual items, which some courts have acknowledged as having tangible value (see some rulings on virtual land and items in Second Life), and the law is by no means settled. If it ever becomes settled and gives virtual items the same protections as "real" items then what happened in this case would not have been legal, the example of Best Buy coming to your house, taking away your TV while giving you your money back but then forcing you to buy it back at a higher price if you wanted it back would apply...and that ain't legal.

we are on the same page and I get you.

Why do people complain then? Guys, do what he says !

[Rauchsauger]

Cole Allard, on 06 February 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

What you are saying is : any terms of service is wrong and non existing, if the country the klicking person lives in has other rights. Thats true.

BUT (&lt;- cant make it fat enough.) try to go for a refund over your Credit Card...or even better...over paypal. Just try it and tell me what reality told you.

Until I actually see people getting cash back from internet transactions (via credit), I wont belive it.

The problem is that if someone takes it to court we could end up with a regional ban/cease desist and pgi fined out of business

[b00zy]

Rauchsauger, on 06 February 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

And if an actual grown up us pissed enough to take this to court (or consumer groups) pgi and you would probably be forced to realize that you can put what you want in an "agreement" - unlawful is unlawful.
Just look at how valve had their *** handed to them in europe concerning their EULAs

YES LETS TAKE THEM TO COURT OVER THE PAINT JOB ON MY VIRTUAL MECH

[REDACTED]

Edited by Biruke, 06 February 2013 - 08:30 AM.

[SI The Joker]

From the Terms of Use:

Quote

• Payment Terms.
  
• You may create an Account without paying any registration or subscription fees, however, some content, products or games related to the IGP Offerings may require the payment of fees. If you choose to subscribe, purchase or become a member of any such fee-based offering, you warrant that (i) you are or over the age of thirteen (13), or, if you are under thirteen (13), your parent or guardian has submitted all payment information and read and accepted this Agreement on your behalf, (ii) your use of the provided credit card or other method of payment is authorized, (iii) all information that you submit is true and accurate, and (iv) you agree to pay all fees you incur, including any recurring subscription fees unless and until you affirmatively terminate your Account or such fee-based offering in accordance with the specific terms thereof.
  
• All fees and other charges are payable in advance and are non-refundable. We may, from time to time and without prior notice, modify, amend, or supplement our fees and billing methods, provided that such changes are made to this Agreement or elsewhere on the Website. All such modifications, amendments or supplements will be effective immediately upon posting to the Website. If any change is unacceptable to you, you may cancel your Account at any time, but we will not refund any fees that may have accrued to your Account before such cancellation, and we will not prorate fees for any charges.
  
• You agree to promptly notify us of any changes to your payment method’s account number, its expiration date and/or your billing address, and you agree to promptly notify us if your payment method expires or is cancelled for any reason.
  
• You acknowledge and agree that we do not ensure continuous or error-free access or availability of any content, feature, service or server related to the IGP Offerings, and may change, modify, disable, suspend or remove any such content, feature, service or server in our sole discretion.

And this as well...

Quote

Governing Law and Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of British Columbia. You hereby irrevocably consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of British Columbia in connection with any matter arising under this Agreement.

[Naja]

Rauchsauger, on 06 February 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

And if an actual grown up us pissed enough to take this to court (or consumer groups) pgi and you would probably be forced to realize that you can put what you want in an "agreement" - unlawful is unlawful.
Just look at how valve had their *** handed to them in europe concerning their EULAs

But they didn't do anything unlawful. You gave them real money for the MC, not for the skins, and that is completely different. People bought MC's, that is where the transaction ended. When PGI took away what you bought WITH those MC's, they reimbursed people with the MC's. You never paid real money for the colours/patterns.

Anyway, it was of my understanding (though granted I never sat there and worked it out on a case by case basis), that under the current system it all worked out cheaper in the long run, especially if you changed the colour of the pattern before purchasing it. If someone wants to put in the effort of setting up a table of costs new vs. old i'd be interested in seeing the actual difference

[HiplyRustic]

b00zy, on 06 February 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

YES LETS TAKE THEM TO COURT OVER THE PAINT JOB ON MY VIRTUAL MECH

you people are mentally handicaped morons

Complaining about business practices involving money =/= taking someone to court over a paint job on virtual mech. I can see how you might have been confused though.

Edited by HiplyRustic, 06 February 2013 - 06:14 AM.

[Squigles]

Cole Allard, on 06 February 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

What you are saying is : any terms of service is wrong and non existing, if the country the klicking person lives in has other rights. Thats true.

BUT (<- cant make it fat enough.) try to go for a refund over your Credit Card...or even better...over paypal. Just try it and tell me what reality told you.

Until I actually see people getting cash back from internet transactions (via credit), I wont belive it.

Done and Done.

Paypal refunded my purchase of the horrible POS known as The War Z, without much of any question.

[Joseph Mallan]

Quote

Governing Law and Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of British Columbia. You hereby irrevocably consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of British Columbia in connection with any matter arising under this Agreement.

Sooo thats it then Eh?

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 February 2013 - 06:15 AM.

[b00zy]

HiplyRustic, on 06 February 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

Complaining about business practices involving money =/= taking someone to court over a paint job on virtual mech. I can see how you might have been confused though.

actually it does when the sole reason for the topic being brought up due to the paint job on the virtual mech

[MustrumRidcully]

I believe pretty much all F2P games use a intermediate currency you buy to get the in-game virtual goods these days, and I believe it is exactly to protect them from requiring to need to go through refunds just because a patch has affected the perceived value of a virtual good.

In a way, it's like someone demanding a refund for his Porsche because new traffic laws set the maximum allowed speed on German streets cannot exceed 130 kph. Except in F2P games, it would mean that Porsche is also responsible for determining the traffic laws. Which may be all the difference.


I suppose the big legal question is - is the layer provided by the virtual currency actually sufficient? And I believe this is subject to interpretation of the laws, and thus the answer could change over time, depending on the judge and the lawyers involved.
I believe for practical reasons, it needs to be sufficient, though I would hope for some form of refund options (even if it was just exchanging a non-satisfactory virtual item against virtual currency.)

[Mercules]

HiplyRustic, on 06 February 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

Here's what my reality tells me; my reality tells me I have almost two decades of corporate retail management experience, with much of it dealing with e-commerce. My reality tells me that in the unlikely event someone actually went so far as to go to VISA and make a formal claim requesting a reversal of an MC charge based on "this company charged me real money for a product, then took my product away from me and only offered me an in-store credit...they didn't give me my money back." my money's on the customer based on VISA viewing it as a refund and refund protection is baked in to many credit card agreements.

As I said, I don't know the specific law on this...we're dealing with virtual items, which some courts have acknowledged as having tangible value (see some rulings on virtual land and items in Second Life), and the law is by no means settled. If it ever becomes settled and gives virtual items the same protections as "real" items then what happened in this case would not have been legal, the example of Best Buy coming to your house, taking away your TV while giving you your money back but then forcing you to buy it back at a higher price if you wanted it back would apply...and that ain't legal.

The issue is that you are not buying a paint scheme for a mech with your credit card. All you purchased with the credit card for money was MC. The court would look at it as you being promised X MC for Y dollars. It would see you got X MC, transaction completed. What was done with the "In Game Credit" afterward has no bearing on your purchase, especially since PGI gave them the MC back when the mechanics changed. In fact the courts would probably look at it as PGI going above what they are required to do as there was really no demand on them to refund those MC when the mechanics of the system changed.

[Gargoth]

ok, i was expecting QQ about PPC's being too OP now..
...but QQ about camo paints and patterns?

MW:o forums, you never cease to amaze me with your impossibru QQ subjects.
What next, OMGWTFBBQ! NERF CAMO PATTERNS THEY ARE WAY TOO POWERFUL!!!

seriously...

[Spawnsalot]

People aren't buying mechs/camo/paint with "real money" stop thinking that.

You've bought a gift card.

You then used this gift card to buy goodies.
The people you're buying the goodies off have stated "Our goodies are still in development and we reserve the right to change them at any time.", and you've agreed to this or you wouldn't/shouldn't have gone through with the purchase.

The developers have now come back and said, "We've made some changes to the way our goodies are handled, we're going to have to take your old goodies back because they don't fit with the new goodies system. We have refunded your gift card with all the funds you spent on our goodies and we've got an introductory sale going on for our new goodies too."

This is not unreasonable. Deal with it.



P.S.
Anyone dumb enough to ignore the price breakdown in the bottom right, *just* above the "Save" button and buy premium paints deserves to have their money taken away from them.
Don't come on these forums crying about how you blindly mashed buttons without thinking.

P.P.S.
And really, the 750MC chassis unlocks? Waste of MC tbh, unless you've got 10 mechs of the same chassis or you're *really* indecisive.
Pro tip: Get the PC Gamer colours.

[HiplyRustic]

Ironbar Sinister, on 06 February 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

You people are taking this far too seriously in my opinion.

If you value the money spent on MWO so highly, I question whether you should be spending money on MWO at all -- sounds like you couldn't (or shouldn't) afford to spend the money in the first place.

I think the discussion, for a few people at least, has moved past a couple of dollars and into the larger conversation about online services, virtual items, and the RMT involved in them. While it's not paint-job specific it does make for an interesting topic for some people.

[Rauchsauger]

b00zy, on 06 February 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

YES LETS TAKE THEM TO COURT OVER THE PAINT JOB ON MY VIRTUAL MECH

you people are mentally handicaped morons

First of all you are immature
Secondly you fail to understand that for example (like with valve) a consumer protection group can take that to court without any actual gamer wanting that.