Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Taking legal action against The Secret World

1235716

Comments

  • Storman1977Storman1977 Columbus, OHPosts: 207Member

    To be honest, since the people who bought the LTS did so with the expectation of getting all future content free.  The way this change is working out, they will now have to spend thier points stipend (something that they were supposed to get anyway) in order to get the new content.  While the content is still free, technically, it is not so in the manner upon which they entered into agreement with FC. 

    The easiest, and most reasonable solution, would be to return the LTS players to free content with points stipend for the store.  Not have them having to spend their points for content they have actually already bought, with the exception of possible future paid expansion.  Even reducing the monthly points stipend would probably be considered reasonable.

    As for the recurring payment subscribers, I would have it set so that as long as their subscription is up to date, they have free access to all content, includiing the new content as it is released.  But, if their subscription lapses, they are relegated to basic content that the new B2P players (like myself) have access to.

    image

  • ezpz77ezpz77 Beale, CAPosts: 227Member

    *facepalm*

     

    You're really angry enough to take Funcom to court over a lifetime sub ($150) or a few months worth of subs ($60)? Just curious because you're going to be spending WAY more than that on court fees. Seriously, just shrug it off and move on with life. I sometimes wonder how people function IRL when they get so bent out of shape over something as stupid as a video game.

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by ezpz77
    *facepalm* You're really angry enough to take Funcom to court over a lifetime sub ($150) or a few months worth of subs ($60)? Just curious because you're going to be spending WAY more than that on court fees. Seriously, just shrug it off and move on with life. I sometimes wonder how people function IRL when they get so bent out of shape over something as stupid as a video game.

    $250.

    Weren't all great court decisions challenged on principal?

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • Sytek_88Sytek_88 Pikeville, NCPosts: 23Member
    lol someone must be hard up for xmas cash 
  • RighteousRighteous Chi-Town, ILPosts: 90Member
    Someone looks money hungry. Get over it, you did not lose anything.
  • ezpz77ezpz77 Beale, CAPosts: 227Member
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by ezpz77
    *facepalm*

     

     

    You're really angry enough to take Funcom to court over a lifetime sub ($150) or a few months worth of subs ($60)? Just curious because you're going to be spending WAY more than that on court fees. Seriously, just shrug it off and move on with life. I sometimes wonder how people function IRL when they get so bent out of shape over something as stupid as a video game.


     

    $250.

    Weren't all great court decisions challenged on principal?

     

    Yes, because it'd really be a landmark case that would forever inform future policy. Upset Nerd v. Funcom. It will be in the text books for certain.

     

    :P

  • ComanComan Hattem, AKPosts: 2,034Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ezpz77
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by ezpz77
    *facepalm*

     

     

    You're really angry enough to take Funcom to court over a lifetime sub ($150) or a few months worth of subs ($60)? Just curious because you're going to be spending WAY more than that on court fees. Seriously, just shrug it off and move on with life. I sometimes wonder how people function IRL when they get so bent out of shape over something as stupid as a video game.


     

    $250.

    Weren't all great court decisions challenged on principal?

     

    Yes, because it'd really be a landmark case that would forever inform future policy. Upset Nerd v. Funcom. It will be in the text books for certain.

     

    :P

    It will actually set a precident and would change future policy for companies who offer a service on a subsciption model and what to change this.

  • toddzetoddze no where, OKPosts: 2,155Member
    TSW went f2p, well is now a good time to gloat? Yes I believe so. I told you so! Lifetimers got exactly what they deserve. This game above all else was structured for this from the get go. It could not have been more clear. Lifetime subs ate only money traps fools buy into.

    Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
    Now Playing: N/A
    Worst MMO: FFXIV
    Favorite MMO: FFXI

  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,077Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Coman
    Originally posted by ezpz77
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by ezpz77
    *facepalm*

     

     

    You're really angry enough to take Funcom to court over a lifetime sub ($150) or a few months worth of subs ($60)? Just curious because you're going to be spending WAY more than that on court fees. Seriously, just shrug it off and move on with life. I sometimes wonder how people function IRL when they get so bent out of shape over something as stupid as a video game.


     

    $250.

    Weren't all great court decisions challenged on principal?

     

    Yes, because it'd really be a landmark case that would forever inform future policy. Upset Nerd v. Funcom. It will be in the text books for certain.

     

    :P

    It will actually set a precident and would change future policy for companies who offer a service on a subsciption model and what to change this.

    Only thing it would change is that noone would offer lifetime subs anymore, not exactly an industry shakeup.

  • WeretigarWeretigar winifrede, WVPosts: 609Member

    Seems like all of the internet lawyers are forgetting when people were asking blizzard for refunds for diablo 3 because of the complete fail at the begining and blizzard was telling everyone they didnt have to give out refunds because patching and server maintanince were in the TOS agreement. What happend does anyone remember ohh yeah North Korea's FTC RAIDED BLIZZARDS offices. Now TOS is not he LAW. I'm sorry that offends all of the people here, but it's sadly the truth. 

    I'm sure there is some crazy lawyer out their that will take any case. Even though I think this is silly, because your still getting to play the game for the remainder of it's lifetime with A higher status then other players. I'm sure REAL LAW"YERS are waiting to take the 15-30% off your bottom dollar to help you get 250$+Court Costs out of them. 

    I brought up the first statement only because it's even more silly to think that tos=god in mmo's. Did you know Aeria games has changed their tos 10+ times since the first time i've signed it and no ones ever told me about it? Is it legal to change A signed contract after it's been altered? No to all of them ohh yeah that's because TOS is not A LEGALLY BUINDING CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT. 

  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,077Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Weretigar

    Seems like all of the internet lawyers are forgetting when people were asking blizzard for refunds for diablo 3 because of the complete fail at the begining and blizzard was telling everyone they didnt have to give out refunds because patching and server maintanince were in the TOS agreement. What happend does anyone remember ohh yeah North Korea's FTC RAIDED BLIZZARDS offices. Now TOS is not he LAW. I'm sorry that offends all of the people here, but it's sadly the truth. 

    I'm sure there is some crazy lawyer out their that will take any case. Even though I think this is silly, because your still getting to play the game for the remainder of it's lifetime with A higher status then other players. I'm sure REAL LAW"YERS are waiting to take the 15-30% off your bottom dollar to help you get 250$+Court Costs out of them. 

    I brought up the first statement only because it's even more silly to think that tos=god in mmo's. Did you know Aeria games has changed their tos 10+ times since the first time i've signed it and no ones ever told me about it? Is it legal to change A signed contract after it's been altered? No to all of them ohh yeah that's because TOS is not A LEGALLY BUINDING CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT. 

    Well Diablo 3 was a bit different since the people who bought the game physically couldnt play the product they bought.

     

    I personally, would change it so that lifers get, all future content free, and maybe $5 in funcom points or something.

    /shrug

  • niceguy3978niceguy3978 Gainesville, FLPosts: 2,000Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Isn't this why mobile providers let former users get "grandfathered in", because if they change the payment contract when someone has a contract, they get sued?

    The thing is, they didn't change anything for existing subscribers payment contract.  They are getting the same thing (access to a service) that they got before, only now other people have access too who didn't before.  

  • niceguy3978niceguy3978 Gainesville, FLPosts: 2,000Member
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    You know what they ought to do?  Give subscribers like the original poster the option to keep the original terms.  That is, you lose access to the game when your subscrpition expires, you don't get the bonus points to spend in the store, etc.  And then see how many of them are dumb enough to take it.  And then complain that they were tricked into taking a worse deal.

    Agreed.  But oh boy, this is a minor sh*tstorm for a few people, if they had forced those with a sub to maintain the previous agreement there would have been a sh*tsomi.

  • niceguy3978niceguy3978 Gainesville, FLPosts: 2,000Member
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by Weretigar

    Seems like all of the internet lawyers are forgetting when people were asking blizzard for refunds for diablo 3 because of the complete fail at the begining and blizzard was telling everyone they didnt have to give out refunds because patching and server maintanince were in the TOS agreement. What happend does anyone remember ohh yeah North Korea's FTC RAIDED BLIZZARDS offices. Now TOS is not he LAW. I'm sorry that offends all of the people here, but it's sadly the truth. 

    I'm sure there is some crazy lawyer out their that will take any case. Even though I think this is silly, because your still getting to play the game for the remainder of it's lifetime with A higher status then other players. I'm sure REAL LAW"YERS are waiting to take the 15-30% off your bottom dollar to help you get 250$+Court Costs out of them. 

    I brought up the first statement only because it's even more silly to think that tos=god in mmo's. Did you know Aeria games has changed their tos 10+ times since the first time i've signed it and no ones ever told me about it? Is it legal to change A signed contract after it's been altered? No to all of them ohh yeah that's because TOS is not A LEGALLY BUINDING CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT. 

    Well Diablo 3 was a bit different since the people who bought the game physically couldnt play the product they bought.

     

    I personally, would change it so that lifers get, all future content free, and maybe $5 in funcom points or something.

    /shrug

    It would be interesting if they said "fine everything stays "as is" for those with a lifetime sub.  You get all content updates for free, nothing more."  It would have been a worse deal and it would have stuck to the letter of the original agreement.   There would have been even more complaining, go figure.

  • WeretigarWeretigar winifrede, WVPosts: 609Member
    Ohh, btw you know the guy that mentioned Geohot. You do know that sony settled the case because they knew they weren't going to win right? They were losing and they were already being boycotted by 100s of thousands of people so they gave up. Their TOS didn't mean the poop that is was written on there either.
  • VooDoo_PapaVooDoo_Papa Somewhere on a beach on the east coast, FLPosts: 883Member Uncommon

    so theyre suspending all lifetime accounts without refund? Oh, no... thats not it.

    their actually giving you more now than you had before. i fail to see the case

    image
  • RenoakuRenoaku Posts: 1,005Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

    Actually this is where you are wrong.

    If you purchased the game from your local store for example, and there was no agreement in the actual box or anything asking you to agree to anything lets assume you registered an account and never saw the agreement, and could prove this like me with Tera for Example, and you actually have the money to waste and a good Lawyer you could win a lawsuit against a game company.

    In a court or law its all about what you can prove, not just about agreements.

    So for example if you have a original agreement, or were not required to agree to a Terms and Conditions before you purchased your Grand Masters Pack then you could get your moeny back But see this is where you need a copy of the orginial agreement when you made your account, you need to review it look for loop holes, and know exact dates how much you paid, bank records, and proof of where there was an agreement you accepted and all.

    Even if you make the claim there wasn't you need proof there wasn't or its your word against theirs.

    http://www.pcpitstop.com/spycheck/eula.asp What more can I say?

  • ArtalisArtalis Reno, NVPosts: 17Member Common

    Unbelievable.

    A struggling game company changes their business model to get people to buy and play their game and someone wants to sue them over it.

    You get what you agreed to in the purchase. Access to the game. They can give anyone else anything else for whatever price they choose.

    I recommend a chill pill Maybe two.

  • hehenephehenep Charlottesville, VAPosts: 221Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The thing here is that you have to compare it to what it was before. Before a lifer would get ALL the content and some points to spend on the shop. Now you get more points but you also have to buy these DLC packs(content), so you DON'T get all the content. You have to decide between content or shop. Were did you get that $5 quote? it's not in that link.
    I know this is a few pages back, but small correction.  Before a lifetime would get all the content, no stipend of points to spend on the shop and a 10% discount in the store when they did buy points with their own money and spend them (or from that one time 30 mission 1200 points reward).  Going forward a lifetime member gets a $10 stipend of points, a costume piece, a 1 hour/day xp boost and a 20% discount on store items that aren't DLC.

     

    By all accounts $5 on DLC is just the minimum and it can be higher, but the game's producer is quoted as saying the stipend is "more than enough" points to cover DLC with some left over. Until they try and sell me DLC that costs more than 1200 points I'm going to take them at their word. If they ever try to sell me DLC that costs more it'd better be a freaking impressive DLC or I'm going to be ... perturbed.

    http://forums.thesecretworld.com/showpost.php?p=1475267&postcount=389

  • saden99saden99 Woodstock, GAPosts: 4Member

    Why would you even buy a lifetime sub in a game like this? It has limited content and not much in the way of player growth...they HAD to do some kind of F2P or B2P [although I didn't expect it] model.

     

    People need to calm down. They were so convinced just a few months ago that lifetime subscriptions were a good deal (you can still read forum posts that talk about it). Some of them even have people saying outright that it's a good deal and there's no way TSW will go F2P...hmmm

     

    The game has never really been that big or that good. You can eat the $200 lifetime subscription payment and just get over it...seriously...$200. That's what 13 months? Or maybe 15-16 months using the other subscription pricing? It's disappointing, but legal action usually requires some kind of intent. This is an online game where player-interests correlated to population [and other factors] is highly misunderstood so I'm sure they had no intent from the get go when they offered the lifetime subs.

     

    I believe there have been lifetime subs for games that are now completely shut-down. Be lucky they aren't shutting it down.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Gary, INPosts: 3,752Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Teala
    See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

         I have no idea why anyone did this for this game to begin with......Right of fthe bat they were into full cash grab mode...Some gamers just cant help themselves though.....You could put dog doo doo in a box and tell them its a new game and they'd drop whatever you ask for it.

  • svandysvandy mount holly, NJPosts: 224Member Uncommon

    So if I follow this right... OP and others made the rookie mistake of paying for a lifetime sub for an MMORPG. Said MMORPG changes their payment model so a monthly sub is no longer required, instead earning money through DLC. Lifetime members are not only given enough "funcom points" to purchase the DLC and then some, but can choose to allocate those points to other items at the store (with a 20% discount), and people want to SUE over this?

    If anyone is losing out, it's Funcom. If you liked the game enough to sub, wether lifetime or otherwise, why would you be so against the Devs/company making a move to improve the future of the game and at the same time give you MORE than what you agreed to pay for?

    And as far as legal action - until you can show some kind of written contract that shows that your sub, lifetime or otherwise, was supposed to do anything other than give you access to the game (other than pre-order items you will have already received), you will be laughed out of the courtroom if you can even find a lawyer so down on his luck that he will ruin his reputation to pursue your "case".

    Please visit my youtube channel for some H1Z1/DayZ casual roleplay videos!


  • mmo72mmo72 Mine, ALPosts: 10Member

    Worst part is they were still selling lifetime subs as of yesterday , yesterday , under the old conditions advertising it as making you not have to pay the sub fee.

    Whey they knew they were about to get rid of the sub fee.

    Funcom never has known how to run a business , their stock price is prime evidence of it.

    Games they can make ,  PR/business decisons they are one of the worst at.

  • rwyanrwyan raleigh, NCPosts: 461Member

    As a lifer, I'm GLAD funcom made this move.  The game was so lively upon launch and I'm looking forward to seeing more players in game.

     

    You still get the content for free.... you just have to buy it with the points you will now get... for free!  So yes, there is now an extra step but I feel like I've been fairly compensated.

     

     

  • huskie77huskie77 Nowhere, NEPosts: 354Member
    Originally posted by maplestone
    Originally posted by Roxtarr

    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

    IANAL but my understanding is that legal systems in most parts of the world see click-through argeements as being more like a handshake than a contract - that you can't hold people to anything more than common sense since they don't get to see the fine print until after the box has been opened.

    I can't imagine that arguing that the company has devalued what you paid for can go anywhere.  You don't own anything in the game so it can't be devalued or lost.  Time already played is already delivered, so there's no loss there.   I think the best someone could do is argue that a bait and switch has occurred and that the game the company is providing now is not similar to the one that was promised, even beyond the normal "game experience may change" warning on the box and that there should be a refund of the remaining subscription time.

    But if you bought a lifetime subscription ... well, unless the company promised how long that lifetime would be, then caveat emptor. 

    In business law, a handshake IS a contract. As is a verbal agreement and even just failing to deny an offer verbally. The law is written in favor of corporations, not individuals.

    A click to agree popup window is no less a contract than a thirty page document signed in person.

    image
This discussion has been closed.