Got a friend whose mother is a lawyer, and has been through similar cases to this one more than once, all of which were resolved in the customer's favour. Asked her to look at the original wording of the Merc Pack compared with the current wording, and got her to look at multiple official sources - from both Sony and CCP - stating that the game isn't commercially released yet. She says there's a really solid case. I also had a friend who's in a law degree doing a case study specifically based around online purchases and the relevant laws, and he can't see any possible way for a lawsuit to fail if CCP don't give some form of refund of Merc Pack content to the purchasers who bought it with the original terms. Does that count?


As mentioned, both CCP and Sony have gone on record, publicly, stating that the game isn't yet commercially released. When people approach Sony about the issue, they specifically refuse to get involved until commercial release. When people have been arguing that the game is commercially released, CCP have said no, and in a thread where people were discussing the wording of the Human Endurance event's original posting, there was mention of Uprising "leading into commercial release" and CCP directly stated that Uprising WILL NOT BE THE RELEASE BUILD.

You cannot punish a person for asking what you legally agreed to give them. So keep dreaming. If my SP is reset guess what so is yours but you want have anything to show for the reset while I will. I've been through many wipes whats another?

1: I'm guessing your friends mom didn't read the EULA (I have. Spoiler: you're screwed.)

This X1000000.

They made a special offer so people would spend money on a "beta" otherwise no one would have.

Boy are you misguided. We don't want a reset. We are waiting for commercial release big difference. PS its yet to happen.

Dude its OFFICIALLLY stated we are not commercial released. By CCP themselves!

You are responsible for reviewing the Fees section of the Game for changes in the Fee or payment terms. If a change is unacceptable to you, you may, as your sole and exclusive remedy, terminate the EULA and close your Account as described in section 13 below. You are responsible for paying all applicable taxes and for all hardware, software, Internet service, and other costs you incur to access the System.

What change?

No, she didn't read the EULA.

There's a good reason for that. It's not relevant to the purchase agreement, the contents of which include the product description as it stood at the time of purchase.

Doesn't matter what civilised country you're applying the laws for - I'd say "even" Britain, but "especially" might fit better, since they offer better consumer protection than most US states, in which this is still not legal - but you can't retroactively use a digital product's EULA to get out of ANY detail included in a purchase agreement.

Spoiler: The product description in an online store legally comprises a part of the purchase agreement. By British law as well as US, NZ, Australian and most other countries that actually have consumer laws with any possibility of application to online purchases.

Upon termination of this beta, CCP may, in its sole discretion, delete or destroy all characters, character attributes, skills, and items acquired during the beta. As a participant in the beta, you acknowledge and agree you have no right to retain characters or their attributes, skills, or other acquired items.

If you "acquired" the Merc Pack through gameplay, rather than purchasing it online through PSN or Gamestop (or in-store in the case of Gamestop), this would be relevant. I don't know of anyone who did, so it's not at all applicable to the Merc Pack in any situation that I've heard of as a possibility.

The purchase agreement is legally binding REGARDLESS OF WHAT ANY EULA CONTENT MIGHT STATE ABOUT CCP'S RIGHT TO CHANGE THINGS.

There's significant legal precedent in many countries - including CCP's chosen jurisdiction - for EULAs to be overruled by purchase agreements. By my own local laws, even the EULA's claim to apply British law can't be enforced when I'm questioning something in the purchase agreement, and my local laws (which are almost identical to British law anyway) are applicable. And by those laws, I'm entitled, regardless of the contents of any post-purchase EULA, or even a pre-purchase EULA that was made separate from the purchase itself, to what I was offered when I bought the product.

Purchase agreements are also legally binding, and are legally binding OUTSIDE of the limitations of EULAs, which are only binding within the confines of the purchased product.

When you buy a Merc Pack, that purchase agreement - which includes the product description at the time of purchase - supercedes any EULA because it's applicable outside of the content itself, while the EULA isn't.

Someone who agreed to the EULA before buying the Merc Pack is still legally entitled to what the Merc Pack description said at the time of purchase, in spite of them having "no legal rights" with regard to the content of the beta. The Merc Pack purchase occured OUTSIDE the beta, so any EULA relating to the beta is irrelevant.

Its also a **** move and seen as bullying.

Gbghb why should a player who supported this game during closed beta be punished for wanting what they paid for?

Aur refund does not eqaul skill reset. You guna cry about free boosters blah blah blah? Blame Ccp not the consumer.

Ps feelings are irrelavent to a purchase agreement.

I raise you one 'aur refund at commercial release'