DUST Search - AUR Refund TLDR

All Channels

General Discussions

AUR Refund TLDR

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Magnus Amadeuss Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 221	Posted - 2013.11.23 14:46:00 - [31] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: #1, you just admitted to circumventing a CCP ban, good job dummy. #2 Bait and Switch, go look it up. #3 Are you familiar with the term shthouse lawyer, because that is exactly what you are.... http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/B/BaitandSwitch.aspx for anyone curious, this is bait and switch. as defined by both canada, and US ruling. does not apply to this situation because - no competitng item is being sold -sale was not used as a method of distributing alturnate competing products -original product was indeed available for sale -original terms of sale for said product were upheld Linky Quote:* Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by merchants' advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching"). that seems oddly applicable doesn't it? an easy fix to Matchmaking
Magnus Amadeuss Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 222	Posted - 2013.11.23 14:50:00 - [32] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Also, aside from the questionable legality of removing sold (directly for real money) products, How bad would this action hurt CCP's reputation? Lets say CCP removes all BPOs in-game tomorrow... do you think the majority of people will ever spend another nickle on Dust? Don't you think this action could have serious repercussions for CCP as a whole? How many gaming sites would run this story? How far would the word of mouth travel? Are you serious taking a corporations side over the consumer? Lastly, do you want Dust 514 to fail? Removing all BPOs in-game is the surest way I can think of to make that happen. well for starters they removed and item sold via psudo-currency, not real money that psudocurrency was in turn purchased with a different psudocurrency, also not real money. the original currency (PSN credit) was the only thing purchased for real money. If you had read any of my arguments before, you would know I do not have a problem with CCP refunding items purchased with aurum. This I see as fully at CCP discretion, as the person in question purchased in-game currency with their IRL cash, then purchased in-game items with that currency. A refund of in-game currency is fair IMHO. I am referring to BPOs which were purchased directly for IRL cash. example example and of course the Collectors edition These items being removed would necessitate a real-life cash or PSN credit refund. an easy fix to Matchmaking
Ghosts Chance Inf4m0us 224	Posted - 2013.11.23 14:52:00 - [33] - Quote Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: #1, you just admitted to circumventing a CCP ban, good job dummy. #2 Bait and Switch, go look it up. #3 Are you familiar with the term shthouse lawyer, because that is exactly what you are.... http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/B/BaitandSwitch.aspx for anyone curious, this is bait and switch. as defined by both canada, and US ruling. does not apply to this situation because - no competitng item is being sold -sale was not used as a method of distributing alturnate competing products -original product was indeed available for sale -original terms of sale for said product were upheld Linky Quote:* Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by merchants' advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching"). that seems oddly applicable doesn't it? nope. customers visited the store and discovered that the advertised goods were available and at the price advertised. the customers were not then pressured to buy something else other then the advertised item. it doesnt match the only two key pieces nessesary for it to be bait and switch. there was no bait, and there was no switch.
Ghosts Chance Inf4m0us 224	Posted - 2013.11.23 14:53:00 - [34] - Quote Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Also, aside from the questionable legality of removing sold (directly for real money) products, How bad would this action hurt CCP's reputation? Lets say CCP removes all BPOs in-game tomorrow... do you think the majority of people will ever spend another nickle on Dust? Don't you think this action could have serious repercussions for CCP as a whole? How many gaming sites would run this story? How far would the word of mouth travel? Are you serious taking a corporations side over the consumer? Lastly, do you want Dust 514 to fail? Removing all BPOs in-game is the surest way I can think of to make that happen. well for starters they removed and item sold via psudo-currency, not real money that psudocurrency was in turn purchased with a different psudocurrency, also not real money. the original currency (PSN credit) was the only thing purchased for real money. If you had read any of my arguments before, you would know I do not have a problem with CCP refunding items purchased with aurum. This I see as fully at CCP discretion, as the person in question purchased in-game currency with their IRL cash, then purchased in-game items with that currency. A refund of in-game currency is fair IMHO. I am referring to BPOs which were purchased directly for IRL cash. example example and of course the Collectors edition These items being removed would necessitate a real-life cash or PSN credit refund. i do not disagree with you here. wich is why i dont think CCP will ever remove those particular BPOs i like you, your logical and rational, and i fully agree with you. bait and switch still doesnt apply to the current BPO situation though.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 14:58:00 - [35] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Ghosts Chance wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote: What's going on is that CCP is removing vehicles and modules and replacing them with entirely new versions, and some people are complaining that CCP is going to remove their BPOs of vehicle related stuff and give them AUR in exchange... I guess they'd rather keep the BPOs of soon-to-be-nonexistant items that won't work in-game... Because Logic. It's not really that simple when the items being removed will be literally irreplaceable. thats kinda the point, they were removed from the game, generally you cant replace things removed from the game :P Yes, you can. The reasonable thing would be to replace the BPOs with equivalents from the new content. I've used this analogy elsewhere; it's like being charged for entry to a theme park, only to find the park's main atraction out of commission. Would you not feel a little ripped off? Would it not be at least a little disingenuous of the theme park to not let you know before purchasing the ticket? except you CAN go to a theme park and find that the main attraction is closed. they then refund you in the manner in wich you paid if your unhappy with that. (if you paid with a non refundable gift certificate, they give you a new gift cirtificate not cash) wich is exactly what happened here. main attraction closed... they gave you the AUR you paid for it with back. not only that but... you got to ride teh attraction a while before it closed down, you just ignored the sign that said you may not be able to ride it forever. What CCP has done is the equivalent of the theme park saying "since our main attraction is only one of ten rides, we'll refund you 10%" Raising the legal freedom of CCP to do this, completely overlooks the fact that it's a dck move which people are right to be upset about. All I'm seeing here is shameless apologetics for a company treating its customers like sht just because they're legally allowed to. No.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:01:00 - [36] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: Ghosts Chance wrote: Magnus Amadeuss wrote: #1, you just admitted to circumventing a CCP ban, good job dummy. #2 Bait and Switch, go look it up. #3 Are you familiar with the term shthouse lawyer, because that is exactly what you are.... http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/B/BaitandSwitch.aspx for anyone curious, this is bait and switch. as defined by both canada, and US ruling. does not apply to this situation because - no competitng item is being sold -sale was not used as a method of distributing alturnate competing products -original product was indeed available for sale -original terms of sale for said product were upheld Linky Quote:* Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by merchants' advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching"). that seems oddly applicable doesn't it? nope. customers visited the store and discovered that the advertised goods were available and at the price advertised. the customers were not then pressured to buy something else other then the advertised item. it doesnt match the only two key pieces nessesary for it to be bait and switch. there was no bait, and there was no switch. Bait: Hey, come buy aurum for access to exclusive items such as BPOs Switch: sorry, no more BPOs, and we're taking the ones you have. But thanks for the moneys. No.
Ghosts Chance Inf4m0us 225	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:04:00 - [37] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: What CCP has done is the equivalent of the theme park saying "since our main attraction is only one of ten rides, we'll refund you 10%" Raising the legal freedom of CCP to do this, completely overlooks the fact that it's a dck move which people are right to be upset about. All I'm seeing here is shameless apologetics for a company treating its customers like sht just because they're legally allowed to. to do things any other way then they have been done, CCP would never ever ever be able to remove or modify an AUR purchased item from the game, ever. wich cant be true or you may as well shut down dust.
Ghosts Chance Inf4m0us 226	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:11:00 - [38] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: Bait: Hey, come buy aurum for access to exclusive items such as BPOs Switch: sorry, no more BPOs, and we're taking the ones you have. But thanks for the moneys. thats definatly a step up in logical argument then im used to dealing with on the forums. and you have sufficiantly convinced me that its not so clean cut as it seems, and merits way more thought and effort then i wish to put into it. and so i will leave that up to actual lawers. my OP still stands though because its funny as hell how badly these peopel are presenting the idea
Iyllaria Dai Legions of Infinite Dominion 29	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:18:00 - [39] - Quote What CCP has done is the equivalent of the theme park saying "since our main attraction is only one of ten rides, we'll refund you 10%" Raising the legal freedom of CCP to do this, completely overlooks the fact that it's a dck move which people are right to be upset about. All I'm seeing here is shameless apologetics for a company treating its customers like sht just because they're legally allowed to.[/quote] Except the fact they are giving you more then the said 10% you paid for. So again, the analogy is wrong. This is NO different than the majority of players who were all for other changes and those people such as the Cal Logis were offered NO compensation for their time or effort when their suits were changed and had stuff removed. Where was your uproar then? No where because it didn't affect you. Or as I posted before, it's like paying for a game, paying for monthly access, then months later the game goes F2P and you expect a return for your month's paid. Nothing is being stolen here. BPO's cause an in game economy issue. It creates a P2W game which if that is what you want there are plenty out there already. Dust is trying to avoid the P2W model and actually provide some form of balance.
Iyllaria Dai Legions of Infinite Dominion 29	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:23:00 - [40] - Quote [ [/quote] Bait: Hey, come buy aurum for access to exclusive items such as BPOs Switch: sorry, no more BPOs, and we're taking the ones you have. But thanks for the moneys.[/quote] Except the fact you fail to look at is they are giving you back SAID Aurum, which you can still use to buy exclusive items SUCH as BPO's and at a higher return on investment. The Switch is done by you, you CHOOSE what to buy, not CCP. Your failed understanding of the definition of bait and switch are askew. They invited you to buy AUR, which you did so willingly, knowing the terms of the EULA ( or in most cases, not bothering to read it ), and then buying in game whatever you desired with your AUR. Now they are removing a FEW things and refunding those at an insane return on investment, thus giving you a profit of AUR ( for which you had bought originally and therefore is a FULL REFUND ) and you guys are still mad?

Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:47:00 - [41] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: What CCP has done is the equivalent of the theme park saying "since our main attraction is only one of ten rides, we'll refund you 10%" Raising the legal freedom of CCP to do this, completely overlooks the fact that it's a dck move which people are right to be upset about. All I'm seeing here is shameless apologetics for a company treating its customers like sht just because they're legally allowed to. to do things any other way then they have been done, CCP would never ever ever be able to remove or modify an AUR purchased item from the game, ever. wich cant be true or you may as well shut down dust. How so? Modifying items for balance purposes hardly compares to removing permanent ones altogether. No.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 15:52:00 - [42] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Bait: Hey, come buy aurum for access to exclusive items such as BPOs Switch: sorry, no more BPOs, and we're taking the ones you have. But thanks for the moneys. thats definatly a step up in logical argument then im used to dealing with on the forums. and you have sufficiantly convinced me that its not so clean cut as it seems, and merits way more thought and effort then i wish to put into it. and so i will leave that up to actual lawers. my OP still stands though because its funny as hell how badly these peopel are presenting the idea Can I just bloody well pat you on the back for being able to appreciate an argument. It's a rare trait in humanity, never mind on the internet. I too am amused by those threatening legal action. The purchase of in-game currency is a well established legal immunity mechanic. I just object to the underhanded behaviour of CCP. No.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 16:01:00 - [43] - Quote Iyllaria Dai wrote: What CCP has done is the equivalent of the theme park saying "since our main attraction is only one of ten rides, we'll refund you 10%" Raising the legal freedom of CCP to do this, completely overlooks the fact that it's a dck move which people are right to be upset about. All I'm seeing here is shameless apologetics for a company treating its customers like sht just because they're legally allowed to. Except the fact they are giving you more then the said 10% you paid for. So again, the analogy is wrong. This is NO different than the majority of players who were all for other changes and those people such as the Cal Logis were offered NO compensation for their time or effort when their suits were changed and had stuff removed. Where was your uproar then? No where because it didn't affect you. Or as I posted before, it's like paying for a game, paying for monthly access, then months later the game goes F2P and you expect a return for your month's paid. Nothing is being stolen here. BPO's cause an in game economy issue. It creates a P2W game which if that is what you want there are plenty out there already. Dust is trying to avoid the P2W model and actually provide some form of balance. [/quote] This isn't a nerf or rebalance. This is selling aurum packs, one of the appeals of which was BPOs, and then removing those BPOs and calling it even because the now less valuable aurum is being refunded at the same amount. These changes don't affect me. I have roughly 24,000 sp in vehicles, and one BPO LAV. However, if CCP one day decided that skill boosters affected game balance, and removed them from our inventories, do you think there would be a significant issue? Would an aurum refund really satisfy people? Considering how many people bought aurum purely for said boosters? No.
Slag Emberforge Immortal Retribution 140	Posted - 2013.11.23 16:01:00 - [44] - Quote Ghosts Chance wrote: -im illiterate Well that much is obvious, I'm surprised you can spell illiterate. Actual tl;dr: bait and switch business practices are unethical and make a company seem not trustworthy, regardless of wether or not CCP has taken the appropriate CYA action.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 2267	Posted - 2013.11.23 16:09:00 - [45] - Quote Iyllaria Dai wrote: [ Bait: Hey, come buy aurum for access to exclusive items such as BPOs Switch: sorry, no more BPOs, and we're taking the ones you have. But thanks for the moneys.[/quote] Except the fact you fail to look at is they are giving you back SAID Aurum, which you can still use to buy exclusive items SUCH as BPO's and at a higher return on investment. The Switch is done by you, you CHOOSE what to buy, not CCP. Your failed understanding of the definition of bait and switch are askew. They invited you to buy AUR, which you did so willingly, knowing the terms of the EULA ( or in most cases, not bothering to read it ), and then buying in game whatever you desired with your AUR. Now they are removing a FEW things and refunding those at an insane return on investment, thus giving you a profit of AUR ( for which you had bought originally and therefore is a FULL REFUND ) and you guys are still mad? [/quote] Check the facts please. BPOs are no longer available on the market. The ones we have now are literally irreplaceable. As such, they are worth far more than the original aurum used to purchase them. Neither are many people getting a profit on their investment. It has been a long time since these BPOs were less than 100aur, and the massive amount of aurum being raked in by some with this change is an issue in itself. No.


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page