---

Originally posted by Rayshe

---

Originally posted by DarkOmega Funcom is a terrible company when it comes to handling your money. They will strip whatever they can from  your wallet and will do whatever they can to ignore any attempts from you to get any sort of compensation.   Thankfully companies like Paypal exists which still believe in the rights of the consumer. They make it much less of a hassle to give a big F U to low life companies like Funcom.

---

 

Actually lifers are still given the deal of a life time for it. only 2 or 3 are complaining... normally the same ones too. Heres the thing with what they are given Funcom will technically be paying YOU to play the game. So long as the game sticks around that long. Wanna know how to make a game stick around that long PLAY IT.

 

If i am correct if the game survives into 2014 on this model and lifertime will come ot with a PROFIT, from a Gains to Loss standbpoint. Because Funcom is such a lowlife company that they pay you to play their games... Those greedy bastards.

---

Point being, Could of spent nothing on a lifetime sub and played the game for free now. These dlc content updates are described as LESS than what were getting now! thats laughable because content updates at present are just like +10 quests..

Being a "lifetime subscriber" should entitle me to much more than a few points every month imo. And i should be given the option for refund over these changes if i so desire.

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.

*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.

---

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?

lol someone must be hard up for xmas cash 

Someone looks money hungry. Get over it, you did not lose anything.

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

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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

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.  

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

---

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