'aur refund at commercial release' so um deal with it?

You put in $10 yet I know some people who have put much more than that. More than anything though people bought AURUM in good faith that it was going to be refunded to them at commercial release when the game is out of beta. CCP should honor that.

You put in $10 yet I know some people who have put much more than that. More than anything though people bought AURUM in good faith that it was going to be refunded to them at commercial release when the game is out of beta. CCP should honor that.

Then you'd better be happy with an SP and ISK reset as well. And probably all AUR items in your inventory and your KDR. Basically, this is due to the fact that you have used the AUR already, having it reset to you would give you 2x the AUR, one half of which you have not "paid for".

Therefore in order to reset the AUR, any SP gained from boosters would be taken away from your account, your Kills and ISK would need to be resetted due to it being gained from AUR items, and you'd basically start fresh over.


AUR Reset = Character Reset.




You make the choice.




Also: I don't really care about the reset or not, I've put in $10 into the game I'm not going to start a whole campaign for $10.

I acknowledge that, but then you must be willing to put up with a complete character reset as well if you want the AUR back. That's how it's always worked.

You guys must be mistaken if you thought you'd just get all you AUR back that you used on the same character for double the stuff.

Or you could email Sony and get a refund relatively easy. And better yet as an apology Sony let's you keep the merc pack items.

That's bullying.

@Gbghg

Exactly as i thought, jealousy. you want to deny people an item they have purchased because of a percieved unfair advantage. Lets punish players because Ccp suck at communication

To the people opposed to the idea of aur refund for closed beta stuffs, why?

Ps why do people think they can add conditions to the sales agreement i have with ccp?

@Gbghg

Exactly as i thought, jealousy. you want to deny people an item they have purchased because of a percieved unfair advantage. Lets punish players because Ccp suck at communication

To the people opposed to the idea of aur refund for closed beta stuffs, why?

Ps why do people think they can add conditions to the sales agreement i have with ccp?

please for the third time, tell me how it's bullying, to get a reset for having AUR refunded, as has happened at numerous stages throughout closed beta.

@Gbghg

Exactly as i thought, jealousy. you want to deny people an item they have purchased because of a percieved unfair advantage. Lets punish players because Ccp suck at communication

To the people opposed to the idea of aur refund for closed beta stuffs, why?

Ps why do people think they can add conditions to the sales agreement i have with ccp?

It's bullying because its get the stuff we promised and start back at zero (which they have stated will not happen) or lose it and keep your SP. Simple enough for ya?

What part of this is not going through your head? IF YOU WANT AN AURUM REFUND, THEN YOU WILL ALSO NEED A CHARACTER RESET, TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ITEMS YOU HAVE ALREADY SPENT AURUM ON.


The way that you guys are suggesting it (acting like victims), make it seem as if you want 2x the AUR for half the price. CCP can agree to the "agreement" by resetting your character as they give you the AUR back.


Essentially, this falls to the P2W argument.

It's bullying because its get the stuff we promised and start back at zero (which they have stated will not happen) or lose it and keep your SP. Simple enough for ya?

What part of this is not going through your head? IF YOU WANT AN AURUM REFUND, THEN YOU WILL ALSO NEED A CHARACTER RESET, TO ACCOUNT FOR THE ITEMS YOU HAVE ALREADY SPENT AURUM ON.


The way that you guys are suggesting it (acting like victims), make it seem as if you want 2x the AUR for half the price. CCP can agree to the "agreement" by resetting your character as they give you the AUR back.


Essentially, this falls to the P2W argument.

Have you done this? if so explain it further please. thanks

'aur refund at commercial release'

What part is not getting through your head?

According to Sony Terms of Service, the sale and the terms involved is no longer valid.

Most Terms of Service are worded in such ways to prevent frivolous lawsuits like this.

Also the wording doesnt say AUR, it says items not currency.

I can see CCP thinking should we support the people who actually support us or support those who want to play this game for free?

How about both? Only take away SP gained from boosters, you'll have the respec anyways, take out any AUR items from assets, and refund it. Most balanced way.

How about you mind your own damn business and stop attempting to add conditions to a sales agreement i have with ccp?

How about both? Only take away SP gained from boosters, you'll have the respec anyways, take out any AUR items from assets, and refund it. Most balanced way.

Dude I luv ya but where I'm from your word is your word.

And where I come from, a legal binding document is a legal binding document, and not understanding the terms in which you agreed to doesn't suddenly nullify your commitment to the terms that you agreed to.

So why all the arguing and not asking for answers from CCP? That's where we all should focus our attention and not wait till May.

[quote=JL3Eleven]So why all the arguing and not asking for answers from CCP? That's where we all should focus our attention and not wait till May

You're the ones posting it on the forums instead of emailing support like you're supposed to.

I do believe icey authored this thread opposed to consumer rights, not one of the people defending them.

All i hear is 'waaaaaaaah i didn't support dust in closed beta and i want the people who did to be punished'

Jealousy is unbecomming fellas

@Gbghg

Exactly as i thought, jealousy. you want to deny people an item they have purchased because of a percieved unfair advantage. Lets punish players because Ccp suck at communication

To the people opposed to the idea of aur refund for closed beta stuffs, why?

Ps why do people think they can add conditions to the sales agreement i have with ccp?

No more SP resets according to CCP. The source of this information is posted on the stickies.

Uh ?? Sorry, where is it, cause i can't find it...

I know he existed, but I think he's not anymor ...

Alright... *cracks knuckles* ...amateur hour is over. Time to get down to brass tacks with this subject (this is truly a snafu of the first magnitude).

Let's do some ethics (hope you packed a lunch):

First, it is necessary for us to CLEARLY define the terminology that was used, and is currently under debate now - in as far as, how it may have -ábeen defined by the consumer, as well as, how CCP may have intended it to be defined, both in light of the actual literal interpretations of said terms.

-áTerms currently under debate:

GÇó Mercenary Pack
GÇó Credited in full
GÇó Character reset
GÇó Commercial release

"...Mercenary Pack will be credited in full to your in-game DUST 514 account after each character reset AND for the commercial release."

(emphasis added)

I am, of course, assuming that the above quote is accurate.

"Mercenary pack" is easy. We all know what it is and what it contains.

"Credited in full", like above, is also VERY clear.

"Character reset", now here is we're we star to run into some problems. What exactly is a character reset (in as far as, both the paying customer and CCP may have defined it).

"Commercial release", and again we run into the same problem as above: what exactly does a "commercial release" Intel?

Let's explore the contested terms.

1. Character reset:

As a consumer, there are two ways to interpret this phrase:

1. Singular: "my character will be reset". This excludes the necessity for the consumer to concern themselves with any other consumer who may have purchased the "Mercenary Pack". In essence, in this interpretation, the consumers purchase occurred in a vacuum.

2. Plural: "all consumers are subject (SUBJECT not entitled) to a reset when it occurs. In this interpretation, the consumer is buying the "Mercenary Pack" with the understanding that the affect, "character reset" insinuates, is as follows: when a character reset occurs, it will affect all consumers.

So, which one is it?

Before we delve any deeper into this, let's take the following scenario under consideration:

During the last character reset (just prior to the open beta launch) if it had been optional, at that time (during that character reset) to opt out of the reset, would this have been desirable to anyone? Speaking from my own perspective, the answer is yes, and I am quite certain that there are many others out there who share sentiment. The reason for this is because I was quite satisfied with what I had, to that point, accomplished with my character. But would this have been fair to the other consumers that were not satisfied? As so many people are so fond of saying, this is a beta, and as such, "a work in progress", an unfinished product subject to change. Now can the consumer be held financial responsible for the purchase of a product that is subject to change? Take the following as an example:

I walk into a grocery store to which it took me two months to drive to (the only grocery store on the planet infact). I take an apple from the shelf, and take it to the teller in order to purchase it. As the teller swipes the apple across the scanner, to ring up the sale, through some act of magic, the apple suddenly turns into an orange. Is it still my responsibility to purchase the orange? The answer is, most emphatically, no.

Now let's say that there are ten people at the teller with me (all purcasing apples) yet mine is the only one that keeps tuning into an orange. Befuddled, I look around in bewilderment and by chance happen to spot a man in a dress shirt and tie waving a wand everytime the teller tries to scan the apple. He is wearing a name tag, it says: "CCP owner/manager". The man notices me noticing him and promptly approaches me, and the following conversation ensues:

CCP: Hello sir. My name is CCP, I'm the owner. What seems to be the problem?

Bob, the unsatisfied customer: Well, quite frankly I'm trying to buy an apply but it keeps turning into an orange.

CCP: Ahh, i see. We have had this problem happen before. I am afraid that you will have to return to you're place of residence, obtaine a notarized afidavid stating that you have returned to your please of residence, and then return to CCP Mart, at which time, we here a CCP Mart guarantee that the issue will be resolved.

Bob, the unsatisfied customer: but it took me two months to drive to CCP Mart, what about the time and effort I spent to get here?

CCP: I am quite sorry sir. That is CCP Mart policy.

I'll leave it up to your imagination to figure out what bobs reaction is at that point.

So, as we should all plainly be able to see, an option to opt out of a reset is not an ethical/fair one, because all of those satisfied with the game get to continue on being satisfied with the game while those who are not satisfied, loose an irreplaceable set of commodities: time and effort.

Ok, that takes care of the first contested term. Let's move on to the next:

2. Commercial release:

Legally speaking, this is VERY specific, as well as, VERY binding and for good reason: because it removes consumer responsibility to act responsibly with their purchases until CCP makes the consumer aware that the property has been "commercially released"

Regardless of what CCP had intended to mean by "commercial release" is irrelevant. The fact is that the two terms "commercial release" and reset are not connected in any way, no matter how much CCP or any one else, for that mater, wants them to be. By this term, CCP is legally obligated to credit the items in question to any consumer that purchased a Mercenary Pack.

The simple fact is that CCP should never have included "commercial release", in the contract literature, if that is not what the were intending to do. it is miss leading in the extreme, and gives those who were mislead by it a valid argument:

I was not responsible with my money because CCP assured me that I did not have to be until the "commercial release".

There is, legally, only three options that CCP can pursue:

1. Reset all player accounts upon commercial release


This is an option that neither the majority of the player base nor CCP themselves want. I can tell you personall that, if my lifetime skill points is reset to zero again, I will no longer be playing this game, and I am sure that there are many others out there who would feel the same, which is the reason why CCP does not desire this option ether.

2. CCP can offer to reset the accounts of any one who wants a Mercenary Pack credit, however, this is entirely unethical toward those who were genuinely mislead by the language of the purchase contract. If this is the path CCP chooses, I will not choose to have my character reset, but neither will I be leaving the game.

3. CCP can take it on the chin like a real man, cut their losses and give out the credits to every one who bought a Mercinary Pack, as to HONOR the original agreement. I would actually consider it a reward to those who helped CCP develop their game in beta. This seems reasonable, and was, in all honesty, what I interpreted this thing to mean when CCP announced that there will be no further "character resets".

And that's my 20 cents worth. Hope this all in some way helped this debacle to get resolved in a desirable fashion that is agreeable to all parties involved.

I don't understand where everyone gets this promise of an AUR reset on commercial release. the disclaimer specifically stated that they MAY need to reset char's during beta and on commercial release and in that case all Merc Pack items would be reset also. There was no guarantee of reset at any time including commercial release.

That was on the assumption that there would be a reset at commercial release

Actually, it wasn't.

Source? Dev/GM/CCP PR guy/CCP lawyer confirmation that this wasn't the intent behind their poor choice of wording?

Because it's entirely possible this was exactly what CCP intended, but that the way it was written didn't convey that intent at all. I'm hoping that wasn't the case, or if it was, I'm hoping whoever they hired to write the product description no longer works for the company, or at least has no important responsibilities any more.

But regardless of intent, that is definitely not how the description was worded, so realistically, the motivation behind the description doesn't matter. What's important is what was promised to the customer at the time of purchase.

The move to tranquility was the commercial release. Some of ccp just didn't know that at the time.

Source? Dev/GM/CCP PR guy/CCP lawyer confirmation that this wasn't the intent behind their poor choice of wording?

Because it's entirely possible this was exactly what CCP intended, but that the way it was written didn't convey that intent at all. I'm hoping that wasn't the case, or if it was, I'm hoping whoever they hired to write the product description no longer works for the company, or at least has no important responsibilities any more.

But regardless of intent, that is definitely not how the description was worded, so realistically, the motivation behind the description doesn't matter. What's important is what was promised to the customer at the time of purchase.

On the old Merc pack screens and on several occasion CCP said AUR would be refunded upon commercial release. Here is a link to a screen shot of the screen. http://www.dust411.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MercPackTerms.jpg

I was asking for a source that confirmed the INTENT behind the wording. Since that was what both parties in my quote were claiming to know. But thanks anyway. While not actually what I was asking for, your link is helpful and useful for other aspects of the discussion.

I believe the wording on the screen shot is cut and dry on CCP's intent. At the time of selling the product they where intent on refunding AUR at every reset and also upon commercial release of the game. I don't beleive a game can be in both open beta and commercial release at the same time, nor have I EVER seen a company that is confused as to whether or not their game has been released.

My question is has CCP come out with a statement explaining that AUR is not going to be refunded? Or are people whining on the forums because of a feeling that CCP isn't going to honor their original agreement?

I believe the wording on the screen shot is cut and dry on CCP's intent. At the time of selling the product they where intent on refunding AUR at every reset and also upon commercial release of the game. I don't beleive a game can be in both open beta and commercial release at the same time, nor have I EVER seen a company that is confused as to whether or not their game has been released.

My question is has CCP come out with a statement explaining that AUR is not going to be refunded? Or are people whining on the forums because of a feeling that CCP isn't going to honor their original agreement?

The wording specifically says "each character reset AND for commercial release" - that distinctly separates commercial release from the requirement to be another reset.

The intent behind that wording may have been to guarantee early adopters some form of extra perk in exchange for their loyalty, or it may have been due to their original intent being a reset on commercial release.

Until there's an official statement from CCP, we don't know which of those scenarios is the correct one.

From Gamespot's Site which still has original disclamer:

*IMPORTANT NOTICE: During beta periods, CCP may need to reset characters, skills and other items included in the DUST 514-« GameStop Mercenary Pack. DUST 514-« GameStop Mercenary Pack will be credited in full to your in-game DUST 514-« account after each character reset and for the commercial release. CCP cannot guarantee all items will be identical and reserves the right to substitute items of similar value. No other form of refund is permitted.

People are reading that to mean that a character reset and Merc pack reset are separate but they are not and never had been, and anyone with a shred of common sense would realize that. This part "DUST 514-« GameStop Mercenary Pack will be credited in full to your in-game DUST 514-« account after each character reset and for the commercial release. " being part of the overall disclaimer is specifically referring to a commercial reset at release, whether people are interpereting it that way or not.

Uh ?? Sorry, where is it, cause i can't find it...

I know he existed, but I think he's not anymor ...

Sorry but your understanding of the English language is incorrect. The word AND indicates to seperate conditions.
For example: If I was applying for a job that required me to have my Masters in Mathematics and to speak French then I would not get the job, because i do not speak French.

No it does not, because if they never had a character reset there would never be any reason to refund the merc pack. The entire disclaimer deals with character resets FFS. How is that so ******* difficult to understand. EVERYTHING in the disclaimer is to do with character resets.

No it does not, because if they never had a character reset there would never be any reason to refund the merc pack. The entire disclaimer deals with character resets FFS. How is that so ******* difficult to understand. EVERYTHING in the disclaimer is to do with character resets.

That's just blatantly wrong. Learn to read bro.

What specifically am I wrong on? Why would they need to reset aurum if they weren't planning on resetting characters during beta? Everything that you buy with aurum is consumable save bpo's. The reason that they were refunding during character reset is because the benefits of aurum bought items were being erased with the reset, hence they needed to reset to ensure you got what you paid for with the merc pack. since there are no further reset's now there is no further need to refund. Everyone who purchased the merc pack got every single item listed in the description. What they didn't get was the common sense to realize that no more char reset meant no more merc pack refunds.

P.S. before anyone even says it the disclaimer is NOT an item in the Merc pack.

Woohoo! Necroing threads!

Omg icy tiger. How many threads on the same subject do you gotta start? U r fishing for likes? Is it really as petty as that?

The player proposed refund for reset deal is not a violation of your consumer rights in any way shape or form - It is in fact the fairest option currently on the table. Get over yourself.

EDIT: It is also worth mentioning, again, that there are several articles in the EULA (a legally binding document which we all signed) in which you waive your consumer rights with regards to in game items.