If you get Star Citizen, play it for less than 2 hours and ask for a refund the next day (within CIG's 14 days timeframe) I am quite sure that you get a refund.
According to the quote in the original post, the timeframe was more than 14 days (or 30 days).
Have fun
Erillion, lots of people have received refunds while being out of the "statutory refund period". The issue is that they are now using the existence of a patch that the refunder does not have access to as a reason for denial.
I am aware that some people got such refunds and have read the OP.
They don't say they won't issue a refund, just that you aren't eligible for one. They've changed the wording a bit maybe in an attempt to stem the tide.
As others have said, delivering 3.0 very well may not be enough to prevent future refunds. I guess it depends on the wording of the TOS when you purchased things.
The biggest issue isn't that people are asking for refunds, it's why they are doing so. It doesn't look like CIG is moving away from their push for a life sim rather than a space combat sim.
Personally, I dont understand how a company with as much money as CIG is "supposed" to have has an issue giving someone a refund. It does not say in the OP but how much money this person put in? A whopping $45? Maybe $125? Are they really getting hit with so many requests for refunds that they need to shut that facet off?
Before these new responses were coming out they were taking about two weeks from request to actual refund. I think these letters are hoping to discourage more people from pushing for refunds and also letting them know the delay will be even longer if they do.
Always something to piss and moan about. Why would anyone want a refund now when the biggest and most important update of the game is almost in the public's hands? Crying about refunds after at least trying it makes more sense and frankly, would be a relief to see them go too...win/win for all of us!
I didnt piss and moan. But after Gamescom i refunded both my accounts totalling $3,300. Had them for 4+ years. Figured that after losing faith due to the lack of evidenced progress at Gamescom, if the game does get there, Ill just buy back in later.
Not everyone who refunds is a hater.
I'm with you PieMonster, I refunded as well, I ultimately want SC to succeed but I spat my dummy out after being in the US last year at the presentation where CR said that V3.0 would be out by December, when it wasn't I refunded.
As a weird twist of fate I then won a $300 package on a website and have since been invited to the Evocati testing, shame I'm getting a max 12FPS atm on the new v3.0 release, not a happy camper atm about it.
yeah optimisation is gonna come right at the end. Well, heres hoping we both get to play a great game when it is finally released. FIngers crossed, because for all the bitchin of the masses one way or the other.. its all guesswork on how it will finally turn out.
I was watching the lead dev of Diablo 1 and 2 on stream saying that if your initial engine doesn't have amazing framerate with little going on, you are very unlikely to magically optimize it into a good engine later. It's best to start over with a better algorithm. (He wasn't referring to any games in particular)
But I do find it hard to believe that they can later turn what they have into a smoothly running game.
As a weird twist of fate I then won a $300 package on a website and have since been invited to the Evocati testing, shame I'm getting a max 12FPS atm on the new v3.0 release, not a happy camper atm about it.
yeah optimisation is gonna come right at the end. Well, heres hoping we both get to play a great game when it is finally released. FIngers crossed, because for all the bitchin of the masses one way or the other.. its all guesswork on how it will finally turn out.
I was watching the lead dev of Diablo 1 and 2 on stream saying that if your initial engine doesn't have amazing framerate with little going on, you are very unlikely to magically optimize it into a good engine later. It's best to start over with a better algorithm. (He wasn't referring to any games in particular)
But I do find it hard to believe that they can later turn what they have into a smoothly running game.
They are rewriting major parts of the engine so that means they're also switching to many new algorithms.
Add to that, they've got CryEngine which is very capable as a base. Any performance problems they have are caused by them using CryEngine for things it wasn't designed for, or possibly faults in their own code, the CryEngine base they've got should have good enough performance for everything that engine was designed to do.
Many of these consumer protection laws were likely made without consideration for crowd funded projects. There is a big difference between purchasing a product and contributing to the product's production.
This will have to be worked out because it also isn't fair on a company to be using the capital for production and not merely for recuperation.
And as a stalling tactic to maybe either hope they withdraw their request or maybe forget about it. Either way it's slimey in my eyes
Slimey compared to what ?
The biggest critic of CIG does not give refunds AT ALL.
How would you rank THAT on your "Slime"-Scale ?
Have fun
Hey look at that strawman over there!! I don't care about your boogeyman Derek Smart. We are talking about Star Citizen so please stay on topic
I WAS staying on topic. You call CIG slimey. They have offered refunds for years in a world where most companies do not offer refunds AT ALL after a laughably short period of time (less than a month). They could just kick people out the door if they ask for a refund after a month, like the others do. They could claim that this is a pledge and not a sale. Why do you consider CIGs policy of offering refunds for much much longer "slimey" ? How do you rank then the others on the "slime" scale? Ever got a 5 month refund from Sony ? Or a refund after 8 months from EA ?
Personally, I dont understand how a company with as much money as CIG is "supposed" to have has an issue giving someone a refund. It does not say in the OP but how much money this person put in? A whopping $45? Maybe $125? Are they really getting hit with so many requests for refunds that they need to shut that facet off?
Before these new responses were coming out they were taking about two weeks from request to actual refund. I think these letters are hoping to discourage more people from pushing for refunds and also letting them know the delay will be even longer if they do.
How is a refund going to delay a patch even longer?
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
And as a stalling tactic to maybe either hope they withdraw their request or maybe forget about it. Either way it's slimey in my eyes
Slimey compared to what ?
The biggest critic of CIG does not give refunds AT ALL.
How would you rank THAT on your "Slime"-Scale ?
Have fun
Hey look at that strawman over there!! I don't care about your boogeyman Derek Smart. We are talking about Star Citizen so please stay on topic
I WAS staying on topic. You call CIG slimey. They have offered refunds for years in a world where most companies do not offer refunds AT ALL after a laughably short period of time (less than a month). They could just kick people out the door if they ask for a refund after a month, like the others do. They could claim that this is a pledge and not a sale. Why do you consider CIGs policy of offering refunds for much much longer "slimey" ? How do you rank then the others on the "slime" scale? Ever got a 5 month refund from Sony ? Or a refund after 8 months from EA ?
Have fun
The difference between Sony or EA is they delivered a finished product. No I don't get refunds after 5 or 8 months because no consumer protection law would allow that on a FINISHED and DELIVERED game.
SC is still in a very unfinished state with horrendous delays and them walking back promises in order to get things out the door. SC has yet to deliver a game so they have to give refunds, not because they are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Stop trying to paint CIG as some saint of gaming because they still offer refunds after all these years. They still do it because they would be in a very hot pot of water if they tried to hold the money back
And as a stalling tactic to maybe either hope they withdraw their request or maybe forget about it. Either way it's slimey in my eyes
Slimey compared to what ?
The biggest critic of CIG does not give refunds AT ALL.
How would you rank THAT on your "Slime"-Scale ?
Have fun
Hey look at that strawman over there!! I don't care about your boogeyman Derek Smart. We are talking about Star Citizen so please stay on topic
I WAS staying on topic. You call CIG slimey. They have offered refunds for years in a world where most companies do not offer refunds AT ALL after a laughably short period of time (less than a month). They could just kick people out the door if they ask for a refund after a month, like the others do. They could claim that this is a pledge and not a sale. Why do you consider CIGs policy of offering refunds for much much longer "slimey" ? How do you rank then the others on the "slime" scale? Ever got a 5 month refund from Sony ? Or a refund after 8 months from EA ?
Have fun
The difference between Sony or EA is they delivered a finished product. No I don't get refunds after 5 or 8 months because no consumer protection law would allow that on a FINISHED and DELIVERED game.
SC is still in a very unfinished state with horrendous delays and them walking back promises in order to get things out the door. SC has yet to deliver a game so they have to give refunds, not because they are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Stop trying to paint CIG as some saint of gaming because they still offer refunds after all these years. They still do it because they would be in a very hot pot of water if they tried to hold the money back
Give it a rest son. 5 years later and you still pretend to not grasping the difference between buying a finished product and backing or pledging for a project in development. And using caps won't make your argument any stronger.
But.. as i said in my post above, let them have their money back and move on.
And as a stalling tactic to maybe either hope they withdraw their request or maybe forget about it. Either way it's slimey in my eyes
Slimey compared to what ?
The biggest critic of CIG does not give refunds AT ALL.
How would you rank THAT on your "Slime"-Scale ?
Have fun
Hey look at that strawman over there!! I don't care about your boogeyman Derek Smart. We are talking about Star Citizen so please stay on topic
I WAS staying on topic. You call CIG slimey. They have offered refunds for years in a world where most companies do not offer refunds AT ALL after a laughably short period of time (less than a month). They could just kick people out the door if they ask for a refund after a month, like the others do. They could claim that this is a pledge and not a sale. Why do you consider CIGs policy of offering refunds for much much longer "slimey" ? How do you rank then the others on the "slime" scale? Ever got a 5 month refund from Sony ? Or a refund after 8 months from EA ?
Have fun
The difference between Sony or EA is they delivered a finished product. No I don't get refunds after 5 or 8 months because no consumer protection law would allow that on a FINISHED and DELIVERED game.
SC is still in a very unfinished state with horrendous delays and them walking back promises in order to get things out the door. SC has yet to deliver a game so they have to give refunds, not because they are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Stop trying to paint CIG as some saint of gaming because they still offer refunds after all these years. They still do it because they would be in a very hot pot of water if they tried to hold the money back
Give it a rest son. 5 years later and you still pretend to not grasping the difference between buying a finished product and backing or pledging for a project in development. And using caps won't make your argument any stronger.
But.. as i said in my post above, let them have their money back and move on.
If this were kickstarter I'd agree with you but since CIG are selling things on their website it no longer is a pledge and so doesn't enter into that grey area of kickstarter pledging. Using caps is putting emphasis on the key parts that show the difference between a product Sony releases and a "product" CIG puts out
During the kickstarter it would count as a pledge, ie you are promising to pay $60 if they reach their funding goal but after the kickstarter it's not a pledge.
You can count it as you want, does not make it so tho.
Whether you are fundraising via 3rd party platform or directly makes no difference, pay attention to TOS.
Consumer sales act is applied to companies when they sell goods to private citizens and the terms dictated by the consumer sales act can't be negotiated.
Yeah. But IS IT a sale ? Even THAT is not clear, as the discussion here shows.
The sales act only applies to sales !
Have fun
In the UK at least, VAT is added, so as far as the UK is concerned, it IS a sale/purchase.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Personally, I dont understand how a company with as much money as CIG is "supposed" to have has an issue giving someone a refund. It does not say in the OP but how much money this person put in? A whopping $45? Maybe $125? Are they really getting hit with so many requests for refunds that they need to shut that facet off?
Before these new responses were coming out they were taking about two weeks from request to actual refund. I think these letters are hoping to discourage more people from pushing for refunds and also letting them know the delay will be even longer if they do.
How is a refund going to delay a patch even longer?
reread their repsonse and what i said. they are saying there will be a longer delay on processing the refunds due to them working on 3.0. I implied nothing about delaying 3.0
why would them working on it delay refunds? They have 50K workers at 400000 studios on 5 planets at last count,I suspect some of them are customer support and not actually working on the game So that is as weak an excuse as you will ever see.
Also the whole "theyre hoping 3.0 will change peoples minds." if it were THAT great they could open it up for EVERYONE right now. and that would solve the refund issues also (if they really think 3.0 is going to change anyones mind). I suspect the rampant refund requests over the past few days ARE in fact 3.0 related but for the more obvious reason of its not good rather that now suddenly after the seminal moment in SC history people are now wanting to get out.
I think a lot of people actually feel like I do that the actual 'release' of 3.0 will be the EA/MVP and thus make it 'legally' impossible for people to get refunds going forward. So theyre getting while the getting is good.
Seriously if they have all this money and the game really is 'right there' then CiG refunding money would be a good thing for them. They lose that requirement to give these 'early 'backers' their perks and will then be able to charge them a premium when the game launches.
This is like a company refusing to cancel someones insurance policy BEFORE the hurricane hits. It just doesnt make sense.
You entitled Goonsquad / DSmart kuks can leap off the legal bridge now.
We're delivering something that our lawyers in the UK constitutes as
legelly playable. No more refunds policies for your whiney little subs
and forums to Trump over. - CIG
Shit has reached levels of hilarity.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
The TOS doesn't really mean much though, they can write whatever they want but if it attempts to break consumer law then it has no bearing.
Lucky backers are not consumers then, they are donors.
Again, whether you are fundraising via Kickstarter or directly through your website makes no difference - you pledge/donate, you are a donor.
Kickstarter backers could be argued to be donors but even that is something which is not clarified. Making a pledge on the KS website does not necessarily make it a donation.
Anyone making a purchase from CIG's web store would be considered a customer. They are making a purchase and they fulfilling their end of the transaction immediately, thus it is a sale. There's no expectation of receiving goods when making a donation, ie you are giving them money/goods for free. That's not the case with any crowdfunded game.
Imagine being so poor, that you have to refund a video game.
I know, I know. After flying around in your ship for a couple of weeks in an alpha with zero content, you are bore..er..suddenly "unsatisfied with the direction the game is going." wink wink
They also have a right to IP ban refunded players.
Imagine being so poor, that you have to refund a video game.
I know, I know. After flying around in your ship for a couple of weeks in an alpha with zero content, you are bore..er..suddenly "unsatisfied with the direction the game is going." wink wink
They also have a right to IP ban refunded players.
But I do find it hard to believe that they can later turn what they have into a smoothly running game.
Well, its build on the Cry Engine. Crysis (2007) started running good on Ultra High settings with my GTX980 card (2014). It is jsut a matter of patience.
But, yeah, he is right. Actual base line performance is not likely to improve, but hardware advances might make up for it over time. In that regard the prolonged development is working in their favor.
Comments
Have fun
The biggest critic of CIG does not give refunds AT ALL.
How would you rank THAT on your "Slime"-Scale ?
Have fun
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/
They don't say they won't issue a refund, just that you aren't eligible for one. They've changed the wording a bit maybe in an attempt to stem the tide.
As others have said, delivering 3.0 very well may not be enough to prevent future refunds. I guess it depends on the wording of the TOS when you purchased things.
The biggest issue isn't that people are asking for refunds, it's why they are doing so. It doesn't look like CIG is moving away from their push for a life sim rather than a space combat sim.
But I do find it hard to believe that they can later turn what they have into a smoothly running game.
Add to that, they've got CryEngine which is very capable as a base. Any performance problems they have are caused by them using CryEngine for things it wasn't designed for, or possibly faults in their own code, the CryEngine base they've got should have good enough performance for everything that engine was designed to do.
This will have to be worked out because it also isn't fair on a company to be using the capital for production and not merely for recuperation.
You stay sassy!
Have fun
SC is still in a very unfinished state with horrendous delays and them walking back promises in order to get things out the door. SC has yet to deliver a game so they have to give refunds, not because they are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts.
Stop trying to paint CIG as some saint of gaming because they still offer refunds after all these years. They still do it because they would be in a very hot pot of water if they tried to hold the money back
But.. as i said in my post above, let them have their money back and move on.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Again, whether you are fundraising via Kickstarter or directly through your website makes no difference - you pledge/donate, you are a donor.
The whoile 3.0 thing....
why would them working on it delay refunds? They have 50K workers at 400000 studios on 5 planets at last count,I suspect some of them are customer support and not actually working on the game So that is as weak an excuse as you will ever see.
Also the whole "theyre hoping 3.0 will change peoples minds." if it were THAT great they could open it up for EVERYONE right now. and that would solve the refund issues also (if they really think 3.0 is going to change anyones mind). I suspect the rampant refund requests over the past few days ARE in fact 3.0 related but for the more obvious reason of its not good rather that now suddenly after the seminal moment in SC history people are now wanting to get out.
I think a lot of people actually feel like I do that the actual 'release' of 3.0 will be the EA/MVP and thus make it 'legally' impossible for people to get refunds going forward. So theyre getting while the getting is good.
Seriously if they have all this money and the game really is 'right there' then CiG refunding money would be a good thing for them. They lose that requirement to give these 'early 'backers' their perks and will then be able to charge them a premium when the game launches.
This is like a company refusing to cancel someones insurance policy BEFORE the hurricane hits. It just doesnt make sense.
Shit has reached levels of hilarity.
Interesting .... i am sure you have some data to show us that this claim is true. Or is this just your OPINION ?
Have fun
Kickstarter backers could be argued to be donors but even that is something which is not clarified. Making a pledge on the KS website does not necessarily make it a donation.
Anyone making a purchase from CIG's web store would be considered a customer. They are making a purchase and they fulfilling their end of the transaction immediately, thus it is a sale. There's no expectation of receiving goods when making a donation, ie you are giving them money/goods for free. That's not the case with any crowdfunded game.
I know, I know. After flying around in your ship for a couple of weeks in an alpha with zero content, you are bore..er..suddenly "unsatisfied with the direction the game is going." wink wink
They also have a right to IP ban refunded players.
If only it was such a simple matter.
But, yeah, he is right. Actual base line performance is not likely to improve, but hardware advances might make up for it over time. In that regard the prolonged development is working in their favor.