After thousands of dollars in court the only thing I could possibly see you being entitled to is a refund. There is nothing illegal about what is going on.
First of all, the legality of an action is subject to degree. It is either illegal or it isn't.
Secondly...nobody is going to bring suit against SE. It's a lot of impotent rage, nothing more.
I would like to know what legal system you are talking about cause it's not the one in the United States. The way it works here is you have two sides who have lawyers that go and try to persade a judge that something was or wasn't illegal and then the judge decides what they think. You have three different judges you can get three different rulings on if it was or wasn't illegal and this happens over and over again and is not uncommon as a decision goes through an appeals process. So sorry but no something is not either illegal or it isn't. Just doesn't work that way.
Again wrong information.. 90% of these settlements NEVER go before a judge.
The LAST thing these companies want to do is get before a judge and have laws and precedents that would place oversight and regulation on them.
Most lawsuits are settled very quickly and quietly. Moderated Settlements.
Companies admit no wrong doing, pay the lawyers off, give the plaintiffs some free game time, free expansions, or free item mall currency.. Case settled.
This problem is due to an unforeseen circumstance, meaning they did not plan this. I'm sure that there are professionals behinds the scenes who are working on this diligently. All of this means that they are without fault and until they charge you for months at a time with no service all the while lying to you saying that you can play freely; you have NO legal case.
This is a hiccup, you are not being stolen from, you are not being wholly denied service. There is a problem with the servers which is preventing you from playing not DENYING your service. There is a very big difference between the two.
Hell I preordered the game too and I can't play because my motherboard is blown. So take that. The servers may be stable in a few days but I won't get to play for another week or so. You're still doing okay sweetheart.
AGAIN read the policy that SE has instituted that is the illegal part.
They are intentionally restricting some people's access to login or make new characters to try and control the problem.
Originally posted by Krashner While not necessarily legally binding, when you agreed to the ToS you agreed to let them do whatever they want.
Actually untrue it has been upheld in court that ToS are not legal or binding in any way shape or form. They are just there to try and fool stupid consumers.
Nothing you are FORCED to agree to to access something you paid for has any legal bearing.
And looked it up on the settlement card I got from Blizzard, they called it throttling.
Actually it has been upheld in some courts and not in others. In the case where it was not upheld only elements of the ToS. That, however, is irrelevant.
What Square is doing is perfectly legal and, frankly, smart. It helps them scale up their architecture. It means that they will have solid service in the long term. It is worth a little pain in the short term and if you were not being a child about it you would understand that.
Further, servers are not promised to be up 24 hours. All Square is legally obligated to do is put forth a good-faith effort to keep the service running and, when it goes down, to return it to service as quickly as possible.
I am always amazed at the level of crying that happens at the start of a large MMO launch. These kind of problems are going to happen and being a child about it helps no one. Making threats to sue or claiming they are doing things illegally just shows your own lack of knowledge.
In the future it would serve you well to avoid using your keyboard.
Originally posted by Krashner While not necessarily legally binding, when you agreed to the ToS you agreed to let them do whatever they want.
Actually untrue it has been upheld in court that ToS are not legal or binding in any way shape or form. They are just there to try and fool stupid consumers.
Nothing you are FORCED to agree to to access something you paid for has any legal bearing.
And looked it up on the settlement card I got from Blizzard, they called it throttling.
I see from you profile that you are from England, where consumer protection is much more robust than in the U.S. In the U.S. our supreme court has ruled that you can even forfeit your right to go to court over some financial transactions (these mainly relate to credit cards) and instead must go to mediation. I know they are different areas, but I just wanted to point out some of the major differences in legal protections for consumers between much of the Western world, and the U.S. We lack many of the protections that our European cousins have.
Originally posted by Krashner While not necessarily legally binding, when you agreed to the ToS you agreed to let them do whatever they want.
Actually untrue it has been upheld in court that ToS are not legal or binding in any way shape or form. They are just there to try and fool stupid consumers.
Nothing you are FORCED to agree to to access something you paid for has any legal bearing.
And looked it up on the settlement card I got from Blizzard, they called it throttling.
Actually it has been upheld in some courts and not in others. In the case where it was not upheld only elements of the ToS. That, however, is irrelevant.
What Square is doing is perfectly legal and, frankly, smart. It helps them scale up their architecture. It means that they will have solid service in the long term. It is worth a little pain in the short term and if you were not being a child about it you would understand that.
Further, servers are not promised to be up 24 hours. All Square is legally obligated to do is put forth a good-faith effort to keep the service running and, when it goes down, to return it to service as quickly as possible.
I am always amazed at the level of crying that happens at the start of a large MMO launch. These kind of problems are going to happen and being a child about it helps no one. Making threats to sue or claiming they are doing things illegally just shows your own lack of knowledge.
In the future it would serve you well to avoid using your keyboard.
HOWEVER.
Once again people twisting what I am saying...
WHEN A SERVER IS ONLINE, the provider must provide all customers equal access to said server, unrestricted, unthrottled, unmodified.
That is where SE by the wording of their own POLICY violates consumer protection laws.
This problem is due to an unforeseen circumstance, meaning they did not plan this. I'm sure that there are professionals behinds the scenes who are working on this diligently. All of this means that they are without fault and until they charge you for months at a time with no service all the while lying to you saying that you can play freely; you have NO legal case.
This is a hiccup, you are not being stolen from, you are not being wholly denied service. There is a problem with the servers which is preventing you from playing not DENYING your service. There is a very big difference between the two.
Hell I preordered the game too and I can't play because my motherboard is blown. So take that. The servers may be stable in a few days but I won't get to play for another week or so. You're still doing okay sweetheart.
AGAIN read the policy that SE has instituted that is the illegal part.
They are intentionally restricting some people's access to login or make new characters to try and control the problem.
THAT IS ILLEGAL!
This is due to a hardware limitation. This is not due to some maniacal scheme. Go get your refund if you want it. That is all you're legally entitled to. It is your fault if you feel you want one and haven't sought one.
Originally posted by Kyleran To all the junior lawyers in this thread, if there really was a way to sue and win against TOS provisions and make any money from it the pros would be all over it.
The fact they aren't tells you what your rights really are.
You sir are wrong sorry. There have been tons of lawsuits filed and won against game developers, and publisher, and providers.
The issue is that ALL of the settlements included NDA's to try and keep other consumers from knowing their rights and what they are entitled to.
As part of the settlement I've been talking about with Blizzard part of that settle gave a free month to ALL active subscribers at the time. MOST players thought Blizzard was being " nice " and giving free time for the problems they were having.
Truth is that free month for the non participants, and the 3-6 months for the participants came because some people did know their legal rights under consumer protection and e-commerce laws and provisions.
Sorry.
Nothing like this took place in the U.S. I played for the first 6 years of wow and there was never a class action settlement in that time period. There may have been one in another country, but that didn't happen in the U.S. I think this is where you are getting most of your differing opinions. As I said in an above post, most of the European countries have much more robust consumer protection laws than the U.S.
Edit: Also, within the U.S. some states have more robust protections than other states. There are some overarching federal laws, but beyond those, there is a major patchwork quilt of differing consumer laws across the U.S.
Originally posted by Spiider Some people will never learn. How many times does SOE need to do the same thing for you to figure out that they do not deserve your money?
What does this have to do with Sony Online Entertainment (SOE)? The game is by Square Enix (SE) and they have nothing to do with SOE.
"Give players systems and tools instead of rails and rules"
Originally posted by Krashner While not necessarily legally binding, when you agreed to the ToS you agreed to let them do whatever they want.
Basically this. While it may have business ramifications from an income standpoint and affect customer loyalty, it's certainly not illegal for an MMO to do what they need to do to keep the servers running.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
Originally posted by hockeyguy98 This post shows a much larger problem than an issue with a video game. This it a great example as to what is wrong in society today. Oh didnt get my way I better go sue somebody really? I have been reading "This world is currently full. Please wait until an opening is available and try again....1017" for the last hour and half, not once did I am going to sue them come to mind. Just sad what is wrong with people today.
This thread reminds me of a youtube video where someone who sounded like he was 12 was getting beat in a video game and said "you must be hacking im going to sue you, you idiot."
Why rant about it? Get a petition started here instead and file away your claim. You think these posts actually matter in the legal department of SE or any court for that matter?
Oh I know why, because the headache and cost for such an action greatly outweighs any inconvenience you may experience in the short term.
Some rather odd responses in this thread from armchair "lawyers".
ToS are contracts. Contract law is one of the oldest branches of law (another being Family Law). There are contract laws on the books in the U.S. (and thus I presume other European nations) that date back to the time of the Roman empire.
To adequately see if SE has broken any law (whether statute or case) it would be best to get a contract lawyer. Preferably one that specializes as contracts pertain to digital media and services.
When I was taking contract law in uni it was stressed that much of what goes for the customer "agreeing" to such and such terms and conditions in a contract dealing with digital goods and services has never been challenged in court nor gained serious momentum in state or federal legislatures for changing or clarifying such contracts. My profs were of the opinion the typical digital good/service contract is weighted toward benefiting the seller where it's possible to do so. If I remember correctly even lopsided contracts are permissible unless they're utterly "unconscionable" (unconscionable is a legal term).
The consensus of many of my profs was that a lot of the conditions in today's digital media contracts would not hold up in a court of law were someone(s) to have the nerve, time and money to challenge them. The real reason they are maintained is that the level of ignorance about contract law in all 50 states (as well as the enormous cost and time it would take to dispute) remains. And as someone else maintained - most contracts these days insist the consumer waive his/her right to have a judge and jury preside over a dispute at all. As part of "agreeing" to using the company's service or good you must also agree to have the dispute privately mediated/arbitrated instead. Law courts are no longer an option - else you are breaking the contract (breech of contract). And any settlement that might result from arbitration/mediation almost always includes the condition that the settlement never be discussed with anyone.
It may well be that SE is doing something "illegal" under U.S. contract law to U.S. consumers but until someone has the time, money and willingness to hire a top-notch law team to convince a court the case is legit and ok to procede...well...we're all stuck with what we have.
As for other countries...I don't know how it would play out there. I do hope European players are not experiencing the frustration that NA gamers are having. Best of luck to everyone.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
No, it's perfectly legal. It's hilarious how many rights people think they actually have when they pretty much agreed to the forfeiture of those rights.
Yeah, maybe you could challenge them but there's a cost of finding the state of incorporation, the associated contract law, ect. ect.
Honestly, I'd just as soon as deal with it and not worry about it. This issue just isn't dire enough to justify the expenditure.
Heck, I think even getting standing to sue would be a longshot.
Originally posted by Alamareth No, it's perfectly legal. It's hilarious how many rights people think they actually have when they pretty much agreed to the forfeiture of those rights.Yeah, maybe you could challenge them but there's a cost of finding the state of incorporation, the associated contract law, ect. ect.Honestly, I'd just as soon as deal with it and not worry about it. This issue just isn't dire enough to justify the expenditure.Heck, I think even getting standing to sue would be a longshot.
I agree. A great example of ignorance here. It's common knowledge that the game, the server and everything that is part of this game is actually owned by SE and they have the right to do what they want just like any other business reserves the rights for. Ever see a customer get kicked out of the movie theatre for being belligerent? Yes, they reserved that right to do that.
Just because they paid they aren't entirely entitled and if they didn't reserve this right, it would be abused by many uninformed, not-so-understanding MMO players like this OP. Hey, a companies gotta do what they gotta do but its not like they don't want everyone in there, I'm sure they are doing their best
The law is not very well settled when it comes to these kinds of agreements, but because of that the presumption for the time being at least is that they are enforceable as contracts.
Aside from that, there are various consumer protection laws, quite apart from contract law, which prohibit certain practices by sellers in contracts with consumers. These are all over the place, vary greatly by state in the US and by country internationally. It may well be the case that in some US states, some Canadian provinces and some EU countries there are consumer protection type laws that would impact whether SE is able to do what it is doing, regardless of whether the contract is legally enforceable. That is, the consumer protection law generally trumps the contract law argument, because a provision of a contract that contemplates an act which is otherwise illegal is generally not enforceable.
Having said that, trying to figure out whether the laws that apply to consumer transactions where you live would help in this situation is going to be time consuming and expensive as compared with $30, in any case.
Some rather odd responses in this thread from armchair "lawyers".
ToS are contracts. Contract law is one of the oldest branches of law (another being Family Law). There are contract laws on the books in the U.S. (and thus I presume other European nations) that date back to the time of the Roman empire.
To adequately see if SE has broken any law (whether statute or case) it would be best to get a contract lawyer. Preferably one that specializes as contracts pertain to digital media and services.
When I was taking contract law in uni it was stressed that much of what goes for the customer "agreeing" to such and such terms and conditions in a contract dealing with digital goods and services has never been challenged in court nor gained serious momentum in state or federal legislatures for changing or clarifying such contracts. My profs were of the opinion the typical digital good/service contract is weighted toward benefiting the seller where it's possible to do so. If I remember correctly even lopsided contracts are permissible unless they're utterly "unconscionable" (unconscionable is a legal term).
The consensus of many of my profs was that a lot of the conditions in today's digital media contracts would not hold up in a court of law were someone(s) to have the nerve, time and money to challenge them. The real reason they are maintained is that the level of ignorance about contract law in all 50 states (as well as the enormous cost and time it would take to dispute) remains. And as someone else maintained - most contracts these days insist the consumer waive his/her right to have a judge and jury preside over a dispute at all. As part of "agreeing" to using the company's service or good you must also agree to have the dispute privately mediated/arbitrated instead. Law courts are no longer an option - else you are breaking the contract (breech of contract). And any settlement that might result from arbitration/mediation almost always includes the condition that the settlement never be discussed with anyone.
It may well be that SE is doing something "illegal" under U.S. contract law to U.S. consumers but until someone has the time, money and willingness to hire a top-notch law team to convince a court the case is legit and ok to procede...well...we're all stuck with what we have.
As for other countries...I don't know how it would play out there. I do hope European players are not experiencing the frustration that NA gamers are having. Best of luck to everyone.
And you basically just went on and on about a few "profs"' opinion on digital service contracts. There is nothing in this specific ToS that guarantees 24/7 service. Usually there is an area that specifically states that they are not responsible for interruptions in service.
Man pays money for service....service goes down during heavy load... man sues service provider? I'm assuming you've never had a cell phone that lost its signal? Are you then going to sue Verizon because you couldn't use your phone for a period? This is assuming your service will resume when you're in the appropriate area. Same goes here, the service will resume. Apparently your degree was in fluff. I appreciated your thesis on irrelevant BS however.
Anyway! This is about the purchase of a 30-60 dollar game based on your edition. The SERVICE is only worth 12.99. It hasn't even been a month yet and you get a free month after purchase. So in actuality there has been ZERO loss of service in relation to money spent. The initial purchase is just for the right to play the game(This is known if you have played any MMO). So hang in there cowpokes you haven't lost anything yet besides your wits.
Seriously? It is illegal for them to restrict access to their servers? Geez people. You the user are paying for the privilege of using the SE server. Furthermore, you don't own the game you purchased. You merely have a CD key that allows you access to the SE servers. Your subscription fee is meant to keep servers running and helps pay the salaries of those running the game and the server. The policy SE has, while idiotic, is in no way, shape, or form; illegal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm aggravated as well, but venting isn't going to magically make things better. I have a legacy character that I haven't touched since Ver 1. I really have no intention of playing that character. I'd much rather create a new one on a fresh server. Fortunately, I have other things to do to keep me occupied until this weekend; when hopefully things will be cleared up, even if just a little bit.
All SE has to do is implement AFK timers and a confirmation box for those that are AFK (to prevent botting). That would allow them to log off inactive accounts and allow people to get in.
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
firstly your all talking shit, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31837/10-1125-consumer-rights-in-digital-products.pdf > is the UK white paper on guidelines to digital rights, in effect you've purchased a product (the game) they have supplied , you have paid your subs which then gives you access for period of time agreed upon by payment, if for the whole duration of period they do NOT allow you access to game (this means on any server at any time) then you have right to refund thats about it.
So until 720 of continious blocks occur on EVERY SERVER then you whistle.
nb this only covers UK law generally but still applies as a consumer in the EU (the us im not sure about)
Thanks point 1
point 2 .. I can do nothing but laught my cheesy nuts off at the amount of players i see in this post who just 72-144 hours ago on this very forum said something like
"dont worry its only open beta these problems are to be expected " or
"it will be sorted by release day they are doing this to check the load"
and here we are 24hours after release with the same problem
when are you fanboys going to complain with your wallets and get refunds and not play the game, or you just going to bitch and moan on a faceless forum but then log in when alt-tabbing
How many have even bothered to claim a refund but are sat here pretending they have this or that right.
firstly your all talking shit, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31837/10-1125-consumer-rights-in-digital-products.pdf > is the UK white paper on guidelines to digital rights, in effect you've purchased a product (the game) they have supplied , you have paid your subs which then gives you access for period of time agreed upon by payment, if for the whole duration of period they do NOT allow you access to game (this means on any server at any time) then you have right to refund thats about it.
So until 720 of continious blocks occur on EVERY SERVER then you whistle.
nb this only covers UK law generally but still applies as a consumer in the EU (the us im not sure about)
Thanks point 1
point 2 .. I can do nothing but laught my cheesy nuts off at the amount of players i see in this post who just 72-144 hours ago on this very forum said something like
"dont worry its only open beta these problems are to be expected " or
"it will be sorted by release day they are doing this to check the load"
and here we are 24hours after release with the same problem
when are you fanboys going to complain with your wallets and get refunds and not play the game, or you just going to bitch and moan on a faceless forum but then log in when alt-tabbing
How many have even bothered to claim a refund but are sat here pretending they have this or that right.
simply put boys n' girls
put up or shut up.
Well, the OP did make another thread stating he made a new toon on another server. So...
Comments
Who's to blame is the people who actually let their character logged on whilst they're away all day.
Yes, these kind of people. http://www.zam.com/forum.html?forum=152&mid=1377606778206139149&p=2#65.
Again wrong information.. 90% of these settlements NEVER go before a judge.
The LAST thing these companies want to do is get before a judge and have laws and precedents that would place oversight and regulation on them.
Most lawsuits are settled very quickly and quietly. Moderated Settlements.
Companies admit no wrong doing, pay the lawyers off, give the plaintiffs some free game time, free expansions, or free item mall currency.. Case settled.
AGAIN read the policy that SE has instituted that is the illegal part.
They are intentionally restricting some people's access to login or make new characters to try and control the problem.
THAT IS ILLEGAL!
Actually it has been upheld in some courts and not in others. In the case where it was not upheld only elements of the ToS. That, however, is irrelevant.
What Square is doing is perfectly legal and, frankly, smart. It helps them scale up their architecture. It means that they will have solid service in the long term. It is worth a little pain in the short term and if you were not being a child about it you would understand that.
Further, servers are not promised to be up 24 hours. All Square is legally obligated to do is put forth a good-faith effort to keep the service running and, when it goes down, to return it to service as quickly as possible.
I am always amazed at the level of crying that happens at the start of a large MMO launch. These kind of problems are going to happen and being a child about it helps no one. Making threats to sue or claiming they are doing things illegally just shows your own lack of knowledge.
In the future it would serve you well to avoid using your keyboard.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
I see from you profile that you are from England, where consumer protection is much more robust than in the U.S. In the U.S. our supreme court has ruled that you can even forfeit your right to go to court over some financial transactions (these mainly relate to credit cards) and instead must go to mediation. I know they are different areas, but I just wanted to point out some of the major differences in legal protections for consumers between much of the Western world, and the U.S. We lack many of the protections that our European cousins have.
HOWEVER.
Once again people twisting what I am saying...
WHEN A SERVER IS ONLINE, the provider must provide all customers equal access to said server, unrestricted, unthrottled, unmodified.
That is where SE by the wording of their own POLICY violates consumer protection laws.
This is due to a hardware limitation. This is not due to some maniacal scheme. Go get your refund if you want it. That is all you're legally entitled to. It is your fault if you feel you want one and haven't sought one.
Nothing like this took place in the U.S. I played for the first 6 years of wow and there was never a class action settlement in that time period. There may have been one in another country, but that didn't happen in the U.S. I think this is where you are getting most of your differing opinions. As I said in an above post, most of the European countries have much more robust consumer protection laws than the U.S.
Edit: Also, within the U.S. some states have more robust protections than other states. There are some overarching federal laws, but beyond those, there is a major patchwork quilt of differing consumer laws across the U.S.
What does this have to do with Sony Online Entertainment (SOE)? The game is by Square Enix (SE) and they have nothing to do with SOE.
Basically this. While it may have business ramifications from an income standpoint and affect customer loyalty, it's certainly not illegal for an MMO to do what they need to do to keep the servers running.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
This thread reminds me of a youtube video where someone who sounded like he was 12 was getting beat in a video game and said "you must be hacking im going to sue you, you idiot."
I just don't get it.
Why rant about it? Get a petition started here instead and file away your claim. You think these posts actually matter in the legal department of SE or any court for that matter?
Oh I know why, because the headache and cost for such an action greatly outweighs any inconvenience you may experience in the short term.
Ask for your money back and move on. Sheesh.
Some rather odd responses in this thread from armchair "lawyers".
ToS are contracts. Contract law is one of the oldest branches of law (another being Family Law). There are contract laws on the books in the U.S. (and thus I presume other European nations) that date back to the time of the Roman empire.
To adequately see if SE has broken any law (whether statute or case) it would be best to get a contract lawyer. Preferably one that specializes as contracts pertain to digital media and services.
When I was taking contract law in uni it was stressed that much of what goes for the customer "agreeing" to such and such terms and conditions in a contract dealing with digital goods and services has never been challenged in court nor gained serious momentum in state or federal legislatures for changing or clarifying such contracts. My profs were of the opinion the typical digital good/service contract is weighted toward benefiting the seller where it's possible to do so. If I remember correctly even lopsided contracts are permissible unless they're utterly "unconscionable" (unconscionable is a legal term).
The consensus of many of my profs was that a lot of the conditions in today's digital media contracts would not hold up in a court of law were someone(s) to have the nerve, time and money to challenge them. The real reason they are maintained is that the level of ignorance about contract law in all 50 states (as well as the enormous cost and time it would take to dispute) remains. And as someone else maintained - most contracts these days insist the consumer waive his/her right to have a judge and jury preside over a dispute at all. As part of "agreeing" to using the company's service or good you must also agree to have the dispute privately mediated/arbitrated instead. Law courts are no longer an option - else you are breaking the contract (breech of contract). And any settlement that might result from arbitration/mediation almost always includes the condition that the settlement never be discussed with anyone.
It may well be that SE is doing something "illegal" under U.S. contract law to U.S. consumers but until someone has the time, money and willingness to hire a top-notch law team to convince a court the case is legit and ok to procede...well...we're all stuck with what we have.
As for other countries...I don't know how it would play out there. I do hope European players are not experiencing the frustration that NA gamers are having. Best of luck to everyone.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Playing soon: Landmark beta, Swordman beta
No, it's perfectly legal. It's hilarious how many rights people think they actually have when they pretty much agreed to the forfeiture of those rights.
Yeah, maybe you could challenge them but there's a cost of finding the state of incorporation, the associated contract law, ect. ect.
Honestly, I'd just as soon as deal with it and not worry about it. This issue just isn't dire enough to justify the expenditure.
Heck, I think even getting standing to sue would be a longshot.
I agree. A great example of ignorance here. It's common knowledge that the game, the server and everything that is part of this game is actually owned by SE and they have the right to do what they want just like any other business reserves the rights for. Ever see a customer get kicked out of the movie theatre for being belligerent? Yes, they reserved that right to do that.
Just because they paid they aren't entirely entitled and if they didn't reserve this right, it would be abused by many uninformed, not-so-understanding MMO players like this OP. Hey, a companies gotta do what they gotta do but its not like they don't want everyone in there, I'm sure they are doing their best
The law is not very well settled when it comes to these kinds of agreements, but because of that the presumption for the time being at least is that they are enforceable as contracts.
Aside from that, there are various consumer protection laws, quite apart from contract law, which prohibit certain practices by sellers in contracts with consumers. These are all over the place, vary greatly by state in the US and by country internationally. It may well be the case that in some US states, some Canadian provinces and some EU countries there are consumer protection type laws that would impact whether SE is able to do what it is doing, regardless of whether the contract is legally enforceable. That is, the consumer protection law generally trumps the contract law argument, because a provision of a contract that contemplates an act which is otherwise illegal is generally not enforceable.
Having said that, trying to figure out whether the laws that apply to consumer transactions where you live would help in this situation is going to be time consuming and expensive as compared with $30, in any case.
If anything in this world should be illeagal, that is it.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
And you basically just went on and on about a few "profs"' opinion on digital service contracts. There is nothing in this specific ToS that guarantees 24/7 service. Usually there is an area that specifically states that they are not responsible for interruptions in service.
Man pays money for service....service goes down during heavy load... man sues service provider? I'm assuming you've never had a cell phone that lost its signal? Are you then going to sue Verizon because you couldn't use your phone for a period? This is assuming your service will resume when you're in the appropriate area. Same goes here, the service will resume. Apparently your degree was in fluff. I appreciated your thesis on irrelevant BS however.
Anyway! This is about the purchase of a 30-60 dollar game based on your edition. The SERVICE is only worth 12.99. It hasn't even been a month yet and you get a free month after purchase. So in actuality there has been ZERO loss of service in relation to money spent. The initial purchase is just for the right to play the game(This is known if you have played any MMO). So hang in there cowpokes you haven't lost anything yet besides your wits.
Seriously? It is illegal for them to restrict access to their servers? Geez people. You the user are paying for the privilege of using the SE server. Furthermore, you don't own the game you purchased. You merely have a CD key that allows you access to the SE servers. Your subscription fee is meant to keep servers running and helps pay the salaries of those running the game and the server. The policy SE has, while idiotic, is in no way, shape, or form; illegal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm aggravated as well, but venting isn't going to magically make things better. I have a legacy character that I haven't touched since Ver 1. I really have no intention of playing that character. I'd much rather create a new one on a fresh server. Fortunately, I have other things to do to keep me occupied until this weekend; when hopefully things will be cleared up, even if just a little bit.
All SE has to do is implement AFK timers and a confirmation box for those that are AFK (to prevent botting). That would allow them to log off inactive accounts and allow people to get in.
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
I would like to to add 2 points
firstly your all talking shit,
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31837/10-1125-consumer-rights-in-digital-products.pdf > is the UK white paper on guidelines to digital rights, in effect you've purchased a product (the game) they have supplied , you have paid your subs which then gives you access for period of time agreed upon by payment, if for the whole duration of period they do NOT allow you access to game (this means on any server at any time) then you have right to refund thats about it.
So until 720 of continious blocks occur on EVERY SERVER then you whistle.
nb this only covers UK law generally but still applies as a consumer in the EU (the us im not sure about)
Thanks point 1
point 2 .. I can do nothing but laught my cheesy nuts off at the amount of players i see in this post who just 72-144 hours ago on this very forum said something like
"dont worry its only open beta these problems are to be expected " or
"it will be sorted by release day they are doing this to check the load"
and here we are 24hours after release with the same problem
when are you fanboys going to complain with your wallets and get refunds and not play the game, or you just going to bitch and moan on a faceless forum but then log in when alt-tabbing
How many have even bothered to claim a refund but are sat here pretending they have this or that right.
simply put boys n' girls
put up or shut up.
This post is all my opinion, but I welcome debate on anything i have put, however, personal slander / name calling belongs in game
where of course you're welcome to call me names im often found lounging about in EvE online.
Use this code for 21days trial in eve online https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=d385aff2-794a-44a4-96f1-3967ccf6d720&action=buddy
Well, the OP did make another thread stating he made a new toon on another server. So...