Taking legal action against The Secret World

fallenlords · December 2012

Originally posted by Rypht

Funcom is doing the right thing, for the long term survival of the game. If this allows them to keep the game going, keep adding new content, and attract new players to the game, it benefits everyone interested in the game, including subscribers and lifetimers.

Funcom is doing what suits Funcom. They are not bothered about the long term survival of this game, they are bothered about the short term survival of their company.

minttunator · December 2012

Originally posted by lizardbones

You left out the 'h'. It's "prefishional" help. Prefishional help is when you don't eat enough fish, and lack the omega 3 fatty acids and b vitamins and it makes you grumpy. I would have thought the word would be "fishional", but the pre is because the help is arriving prior to the arrival of the fish.

This, absolutely. I just had some nice cod filet today, gotta get those omega 3-s!

Why isn't this ridiculous topic dead yet?

TribeofOne · December 2012

Originally posted by fallenlords

Originally posted by Rypht

Funcom is doing the right thing, for the long term survival of the game. If this allows them to keep the game going, keep adding new content, and attract new players to the game, it benefits everyone interested in the game, including subscribers and lifetimers.

Funcom is doing what suits Funcom. They are not bothered about the long term survival of this game, they are bothered about the short term survival of their company.

can you not see that they are the same thing?

Stravas · December 2012

There are people still buying life time subscriptions to newly launched MMOs??? What???

NobleNerd · December 2012

Originally posted by banzai014
Originally posted by xeniar

You knew it could happen yet you still lifetimed. don't come crying now.

I'm not talking about just lifetimers. I'm talking about people with remaining subscription time, who might have signed up for a three-monthly payment plan - they deserve a refund option.

How is it that someone subscribing up to this point would need any compensation? They agreed to the terms of the game as it currently was up to this time. They did not get anything taken away from them and they can continue to subscribe and receive benefits for doing so? Lifetimers will get bonuses also for their support. All this is doing is giving people an option to buy the game and enjoy playing it with a 3rd option. If you subscribe and do not want to continue then play for free and lose the bonuses for subscribing. If you payed a lifetime fee then you get rewarded with bonuses for as long as you play the game. No one is being cheated out of anything.

fallenlords · December 2012

Originally posted by TribeofOne
Originally posted by fallenlords
Originally posted by Rypht

Funcom is doing the right thing, for the long term survival of the game. If this allows them to keep the game going, keep adding new content, and attract new players to the game, it benefits everyone interested in the game, including subscribers and lifetimers.

Funcom is doing what suits Funcom. They are not bothered about the long term survival of this game, they are bothered about the short term survival of their company.

can you not see that they are the same thing?

Don't agree, I think Funcom could of floated TSW as a free to play model with regular DLC. This buy to play model is a bit of a nonsense and a quick cash grab for them. There are takeover/sale rumors, not sure things have been sorted out yet with the criminal charges and the ex-CEO which could still have repercussions. Overall I would be cautious about anything to do this company at the moment. Funcom might still be around for another ten years, but their focus as has already been stated is no longer MMO's. So does this game have a future? Seems like you are buying an MMO from a developer who is no longer doing MMO's. That doesn't sound like a smart move to my mind. Where as if it had been free to play with purchasable DLC, it's a safer bet with next to no risk.

Ortwig · December 2012

I think we've beaten this one to a fine pulp. Any chance we can close this thread?

taziar · December 2012

B2P model is bad? It seems to be working rather well for Guild Wars. Also F2P games make it impossible to keep out spammers, botters, cheaters, and gold farmers, as the barrier to simply create new accounts after banning is nothing.

Yamota · December 2012

Originally posted by Xepo
Originally posted by banzai014
Originally posted by xeniar

You knew it could happen yet you still lifetimed. don't come crying now.

I'm not talking about just lifetimers. I'm talking about people with remaining subscription time, who might have signed up for a three-monthly payment plan - they deserve a refund option.

How is it that someone subscribing up to this point would need any compensation? They agreed to the terms of the game as it currently was up to this time. They did not get anything taken away from them and they can continue to subscribe and receive benefits for doing so? Lifetimers will get bonuses also for their support. All this is doing is giving people an option to buy the game and enjoy playing it with a 3rd option. If you subscribe and do not want to continue then play for free and lose the bonuses for subscribing. If you payed a lifetime fee then you get rewarded with bonuses for as long as you play the game. No one is being cheated out of anything.

Not compensation, refund. It does not matter if it is better now or worse, what they paid for before has now changed so they should be entitled to a refund.

botrytis · December 2012

Originally posted by Yamota
Originally posted by Xepo
Originally posted by banzai014
Originally posted by xeniar

You knew it could happen yet you still lifetimed. don't come crying now.

I'm not talking about just lifetimers. I'm talking about people with remaining subscription time, who might have signed up for a three-monthly payment plan - they deserve a refund option.

How is it that someone subscribing up to this point would need any compensation? They agreed to the terms of the game as it currently was up to this time. They did not get anything taken away from them and they can continue to subscribe and receive benefits for doing so? Lifetimers will get bonuses also for their support. All this is doing is giving people an option to buy the game and enjoy playing it with a 3rd option. If you subscribe and do not want to continue then play for free and lose the bonuses for subscribing. If you payed a lifetime fee then you get rewarded with bonuses for as long as you play the game. No one is being cheated out of anything.

Not compensation, refund. It does not matter if it is better now or worse, what they paid for before has now changed so they should be entitled to a refund.

Read the EULA - they have no rights. Not a leg to stand on.

I am not saying this was a cold-hearted, sleazy move by Funcom, it was.

SomeOldBloke · December 2012

Originally posted by banzai014
As some of you may be aware, Funcom's The Secret World today shifted from a subscription only model to B2P (http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/12/the-secret-world-officially-abolishes-subscriptions/). This was a completely unannounced and sudden change: the only warning given was a "prank" youtube video (http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/10/the-secret-worlds-dev-video-blog-begins-end-of-days-chronicle/).
....

The only people who win from a class action lawsuit are the lawyers. And if you go it alone and assuming you are a lifetime sub, you will get the balance of you lifetime sub less 7x$15... it will cost you a lot more than that in legal fees.

Omnifish · December 2012

Originally posted by Teala
See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

Quite true, someone always ends up getting offended because they change the business model at some point to atrract new business.

Most TOS state specifically that you don't own anything to do with the game, it's pretty much a rental agreement, you pay them a charge to access a, 'service', they allow you to do so as long as you agree to their terms. Empathise on their terms. Their terms does not mean consulting you on if they'd like to change the business model.

We've seen this before and tbh there've been worse examples, (I'd dread to think what those who took the CO lifetime sub think now of the, 'value', of their purchase. Also make no mistake, it is a shitty move by any company to offer a lifetime sub for a game, it gives me no confidence in the future of the title.), put it down to experience and maybe next time you might not be so willinging to throw your money on fool's gold.

Yamota · December 2012

Originally posted by botrytis
Originally posted by Yamota
Originally posted by Xepo
Originally posted by banzai014
Originally posted by xeniar

You knew it could happen yet you still lifetimed. don't come crying now.

I'm not talking about just lifetimers. I'm talking about people with remaining subscription time, who might have signed up for a three-monthly payment plan - they deserve a refund option.

How is it that someone subscribing up to this point would need any compensation? They agreed to the terms of the game as it currently was up to this time. They did not get anything taken away from them and they can continue to subscribe and receive benefits for doing so? Lifetimers will get bonuses also for their support. All this is doing is giving people an option to buy the game and enjoy playing it with a 3rd option. If you subscribe and do not want to continue then play for free and lose the bonuses for subscribing. If you payed a lifetime fee then you get rewarded with bonuses for as long as you play the game. No one is being cheated out of anything.

Not compensation, refund. It does not matter if it is better now or worse, what they paid for before has now changed so they should be entitled to a refund.

Read the EULA - they have no rights. Not a leg to stand on.

I am not saying this was a cold-hearted, sleazy move by Funcom, it was.

Yeah I am sure you are right, legally. But logically, morally if you make an agreement and then change it then they should offer refunds. I know some games, like Allods, offered refunds when making big changes to the payment model.

Yamota · December 2012

Originally posted by Omnifish
Originally posted by Teala
See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

Quite true, someone always ends up getting offended because they change the business model at some point to atrract new business.

Most TOS state specifically that you don't own anything to do with the game, it's pretty much a rental agreement, you pay them a charge to access a, 'service', they allow you to do so as long as you agree to their terms. Empathise on their terms. Their terms does not mean consulting you on if they'd like to change the business model.

We've seen this before and tbh there've been worse examples, (I'd dread to think what those who took the CO lifetime sub think now of the, 'value', of their purchase. Also make no mistake, it is a shitty move by any company to offer a lifetime sub for a game, it gives me no confidence in the future of the title.), put it down to experience and maybe next time you might not be so willinging to throw your money on fool's gold.

Bad example. Rental Agreements cannot just be changed on the fly, unless their is a clause which says it can but usually there is no such clause as that would not make much sense to sign a service agreement and then have it changed without the signer being offered to give consent, compensation or similar.

SpottyGekko · December 2012

I'm eagerly awaiting the filiing of this lawsuit...

But I suspect it's all just posturing and hot air.

The outcome is dubious at best. It will take a considerable amount of time and effort, not to mention upfront cash investment in ongoing legal fees. The whole case could take several years to run it's course, especially if corporate lawyers start exploiting technicalities and requesting postponements.

But some people feel very strongly that the "principle of the matter" is the important thing. So they'll not mind investing a few hundred hours to recover $200 (or part thereof) which did not yield the supposed value that was implied.

I'm a typical lazy consumer with no "principles" to fight about. I'll happily accept the changes that are being made to TSW. I've not bothered to read the fine print in detail, but it seems to me that the outcome for "Grand Masters" (i.e. Lifetime subs) is actually pretty good. Certainly a few orders of magnitude better than having the game shut down, which would represent a total loss.

VikingGamer · December 2012

Originally posted by banzai014
As some of you may be aware, Funcom's The Secret World today shifted from a subscription only model to B2P (http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/12/the-secret-world-officially-abolishes-subscriptions/). This was a completely unannounced and sudden change: the only warning given was a "prank" youtube video (http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/12/10/the-secret-worlds-dev-video-blog-begins-end-of-days-chronicle/).

This leaves players with existing subscription time and lifetime subscribers in the lurch. In this new model, players that purchase the box price have full access to the game in its current state. Players can then subscribe for $15/month for 1200 Funcom points ($10 in real money) that expire after 6 months needed to buy future DLC (slated to be released in monthly installments costing $5-10), a fluff vanity item of the month, an xp booster item and a 10% discount on the item shop. Existing subscribers are being switched to this plan for the remainder of their subscription time, without a refund option. Remember that these subscribers also had to buy the game box in the beginning.

This is not what subscribers paid for. The deal they signed up for has been changed without their consent or prior knowledge. The terms of agreement have been pulled out from under them. Subscribers paid for access to updates ("DLC") but also access to the game itself. In the P2P model you simply could not log in if you were'nt subscribed. Now that you can get full access for free, the value of the subscription has been cheapened.

The services subscribers get with the B2P model are worthless. $15 per month for $10 worth in limited time points, whereas a B2P player can buy DLC each month for cheaper ($5) and have exactly the same access to the game. $15 (sub per month) > $10 (in virtual Funcom monies) > $5 per month for DLC you need to keep up with other players.

I feel that the subscription option is only there so that they don't have to refund people with existing subs and of course lifetimers. The sub has no value and is a ripoff. A sub gave players both access to new content and to the game itself. Since everyone has access to the game now for the box price, the sub has lost part of its value and so people with existing sub time should demand a refund. I would really like to know what a lawyer's legal opinion of this change would be.

I have contacted Massively and MMORPG.com suggesting they write an article investigating the legal implications of TSW's B2P change or otherwise recommend me a lawyer specializing in this area that I could talk to. I hope this way we can get something started moving forward and clarify exactly what legal recourse existing subscribers have. My demands are fair: I only ask that players get the option of having their extant subscription time refunded, since the subscription service has so wholly changed from what they originally intended to pay for (i.e. which in large part was paying for access to the game itself).

You do realize that many games (such as WoW) make you pay for updates AND pay the subscription. TSW has said that they will still give some content free just not all of it. Sounds a lot like what the other games do. Except that TSW appears to want to sell updates in smaller pieces for smaller amounts. A DLC for $10 as opposed to a monolithic X-pac for $50.

Beyond that, all they are doing is simply not requiring a subscription. You are going to have a tough time convincing anyone that you have been wronged by a company that simply isn't asking you to pay any more.

Slampig · December 2012

Oh boy, another one of these threads...

Ortwig · December 2012

Originally posted by Slampig
Oh boy, another one of these threads...

Yeah, we need to stop posting and let it die...

TheLizardbones · December 2012

Originally posted by Ortwig
Originally posted by Slampig Oh boy, another one of these threads...

Yeah, we need to stop posting and let it die...

Agreed. We should stop quoting people and posting in this thread. For reals.

Omnifish · December 2012

Originally posted by Yamota
Originally posted by Omnifish
Originally posted by Teala
See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

Quite true, someone always ends up getting offended because they change the business model at some point to atrract new business.

Most TOS state specifically that you don't own anything to do with the game, it's pretty much a rental agreement, you pay them a charge to access a, 'service', they allow you to do so as long as you agree to their terms. Empathise on their terms. Their terms does not mean consulting you on if they'd like to change the business model.

We've seen this before and tbh there've been worse examples, (I'd dread to think what those who took the CO lifetime sub think now of the, 'value', of their purchase. Also make no mistake, it is a shitty move by any company to offer a lifetime sub for a game, it gives me no confidence in the future of the title.), put it down to experience and maybe next time you might not be so willinging to throw your money on fool's gold.

Bad example. Rental Agreements cannot just be changed on the fly, unless their is a clause which says it can but usually there is no such clause as that would not make much sense to sign a service agreement and then have it changed without the signer being offered to give consent, compensation or similar.

Clearly you don't have much experience with service contracts then, because contractors will and do change the service provided if it suits their business needs. Say for instance an ISP downgrades your service for some reason, they will offer to cancel that contract if your not happy with the terms now, but your not owed anything. Companies change agreements constantly and only offer a termination at best if a customer isn't happy with that change. This is a question of ownership and as you don't own the IP, network or whatever your not entitled to any compensation because of that change.

Would you realistically think that, say if you had a phone contract, and they decided to put up the charges drastcially, you could cancel and then get all your money back for all the time you used that service?

Your only owed something if the service isn't provided to what they stated. With a lifetime sub you are guarnteed access to the game but not access to all of the content the game may/or may not have in the future. If you were then expansions and the like would be included as part of that deal. If said lifetime subber can access the game still, then the company hasn't broken any contractual agreement, they've just added extra services to what they offer as optional extras.

Spiider · December 2012

To all AULA and Terms and Condition fetishists: These do not trample laws of the country you live in. For the last time, you can click on accept when company claims you have to pass them a kidney yet this would still be illegal.

Now my dear clueless "I'm so scared of Terms and Condictions" people, a one sided change of contract is not allowed in any normal country and you have the right to take legal action. And if you have a good lawyer and plenty of cash to go around you will win.

See where I'm going with this? It is not just possible but very probable that this person will win his lawsuit. "Will it be worth it?" is completely different question.

Same happens to you with your banks, cell phone companies, credit card companies... They all change existing contract one sided and hope there is enough sheep to not react in fear.

Dura lex sed lex. (it has nothing to do with Durex).

Spiider · December 2012

Originally posted by zymurgeist
Originally posted by wormed
People seem to think contracts protect companies from doing completely illegal and ridiculous shit.

People seem to thing that changing your business model is completely illegal rediculous shit. They're wrong.

Changing business model <> Breach of contract.

Hard to understand?

Skooma2 · December 2012

Filing the lawsuit in federal court: $300.00

Expenses incurred in preparing paperwork, serving summons, etc.: $100.00

Having to pay Funcom's attorney's fees for filing a frivolous lawsuit: Priceless

Zinzan · December 2012

Originally posted by Slampig
Oh boy, another one of these threads...

It's amusing to watch people try

jdnyc · December 2012

You do realize that they could just shut the game down and cut their losses right?

I mean what's the legal ramifications of that? Oh that's right, nothing. Lifetime means until the game ceases to exist. Everyone knew there was a good chance this would happen. I would be happy that you're getting more for your investment and they came up with a sound B2P option to get more people to play. It's win win.

Howdy, Stranger!

Taking legal action against The Secret World

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Taking legal action against The Secret World

Comments