Charge Back and Refunds

MaxBacon · July 2016

SpottyGekko said:
Looks to me like this witch-hunt is becoming a bit frantic.

Are some people getting scared that SC may actually produce something tangible in the near future ?

DON'T YOU EVEN DARE! Star Citizen is a scam, it always will be, it will fail and be all bad and awful, that's what's in the holy books (of something something only-truth-in-the-universe-&-cats), and it shall be the one and only truth. Everybody else, the poor deluded backers shall burn for all eternity in game-hell stuff.

On a serious note it is quite true, every time SC does a release there's some sort of "damage control" being done, hide all the positives, show and over-dramatize all the negatives and you're all set for a few weeks of continuous drama. And the loop shall continue, forever.

dsmart · July 2016

Except for the fact that SC stopped being about "crowdfunding" and became all about "pre-purchasing" product. Which people have been doing. For years.

And now, because CIG/Roberts has not lived up to the promises made, people are exercising their rights under available consumer protection laws to get refunds.

The only reason they "gave" this guy his money back was so that his complaint with the CA AG and FTC would no longer be active.

Too bad for them that the CA AG is going to investigate, anyway.

THAT is the thing CIG wanted least of all in this whole mess.

Yes - that's precisely why they've been giving refunds to people who they feel have the potential to cause some serious problems. Heck, a few weeks ago, a guy in Australia got about $16K back. In full.

The thing is, for over a year I have been saying that the ToS would never survive any scrutiny by the law or any State or Federal authorities. All it needed was for someone to go all the way. And Streetroller did just that.

HOWEVER, the part the most people don't know is that it didn't take Streetroller for it to get this far, people were ALREADY filing complaints against CIG to the State and Fed officials. It just so happens that he hit all the points and - according to what I was told over there - at a time when they were already getting a lot of reports. His just happened to be exceptionally thorough and straightforward. To make things worse, Ortwin - in his usual fashion - sent in yet another unprofessional response to a third-party; then went so far as to LIE blatantly.

And THAT is why the investigator and the AGs office said to tell others to continue filing their complaints.

The problem for CIG is that CA doesn't mess around with stuff like this. Especially where consumers are concerned. This is just the tip of the iceberg and my guess is that, as I've said before, once the authorities get involved, it's all downhill from here.

And all those people trying to obfuscate "pledge" with "pre-order" know NOTHING about the law. They are free to ignore ALL the FTC and AG investigations and rulings as they fit; it won't CHANGE the way the law works. The ToS does NOT trump ANY law. Period. End of story. And there is NOTHING special about CIG under which they will get a pass.

dsmart · July 2016

MaxBacon said:

On a serious note it is quite true, every time SC does a release there's some sort of "damage control" being done, hide all the positives, show and over-dramatize all the negatives and you're all set for a few weeks of continuous drama. And the loop shall continue, forever.

WHY should they be treated any differently? Who is responsible for ALL the hype that they built up. Then FAILED to live up to them over five years and $117 million later?

GrumpyHobbit · July 2016

dsmart said:

CrazKanuk said:

Turrican187 said:

CrazKanuk said:
[...]

Let me ask you this, if you were to pledge money to a 10 year-old who was supposed to run in a marathon for cancer research, and they didn't finish the race, would you ask for your money back? I feel quite confident that you wouldn't. Would you go on some sort of online attack against the youngster because they didn't finish the race? Probably not.

[...]

Indeed because you can compare a charity event with a profit orientated multi million dollar company ...
This is the worst, unethically troll posting I have read in years.

Really? Is it? It seems you have a misunderstanding of crowdfunding. I might encourage you to read up on it here

What's unethical is the fact that there are people who are, literally, maliciously buying and charging back purchases in an attempt to harm a company. Also, not only does the Internet encourage it, but they endorse it. Honestly, I'm very happy I'm not an American. Unfortunately it's descended into a country interested more in the court of public opinion than actually proving something using factual evidence.

Right. And you have irrefutable EVIDENCE of this, right?

nope, didn't think so.

Here's the deal.

1) The State and Fed officials have made it clear that in crowd-funding, there is an expectation of delivery.

e.g. this was less than a year ago. there are others by the FTC

http://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/ag-makes-crowdfunded-company-pay-shady-deal

2) If CIG didn't think that refunds were something they couldn't do, they would NEVER have put it in the ToS that THEY wrote. NOBODY made them write it. They used it as a carrot stick.

3) They started refusing refunds once the 18 (was 12) months deadline for refunds from lack of delivery of the project in Nov 2014, rolled around. Most challenged them; and when push came to shove, they refunded.

4) Then after it started looking like a scam and with no intentions of ever delivering what was promised (MVP anyone?), the refund requests increased.

What this person did was follow the guidelines I wrote up and he went straight to the authorities; who agreed with him.

http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/07/star-citizen-this-war-of-mine/comment-page-1/#comment-3465
What people don’t realize is that this is precedent setting. I have ALWAYS said that their ToS would NEVER survive ANY legal challenge.
This was $3K they could have refunded quietly and be done with it. but no.
The fact that they think it’s OK to refuse backers access to a game they PAID for, then REFUSE to refund when they reject a ToS change is alarming to me.
And so stuff like this happens.

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/07/14/one-star-citizen-backer-got-a-refund-with-the-help-of-the-la-attorney-general-ftc-and-dcba

http://www.pcinvasion.com/star-citizen-backer-earns-3k-refund-contacting-us-district-attorney

http://www.pcgamesn.com/star-citizen/star-citizen-refunds-ftc

There is no way to spin it. They made a promise to backers. They broke it. They are due refunds. Simple.

And my guess is that very soon when the lawsuit becomes public and CIG/RSI are forced to honor a ToS in which they were to provide refunds *and* financial accounting as promised, that's when this whole thing ends.

It's coming. The E.L.E. is in full swing.

EDIT:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/07/14/star-citizen-refund/

http://gameranx.com/updates/id/64881/article/star-citizen-backer-gets-refund-but-needed-u-s-governments-help/

http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/07/star-citizen-backer-recovers-3000-after-contacting-attorney-general/7448/

When are the lawsuits against your PROVEN failure to deliver happening?

CrazKanuk · July 2016

dsmart said:

Youre playing a dangerous game considering that the status of your project which was due out in 2014 is still under development. This is the point. We can't have one be guilty without holding all accountable, which essentially means the demise of crowd funding, to the joy of some, I'm sure.

Honestly, though, if this does come to pass then I hope that you are treated equally harshly.

You're cute.

Comparing a self-funded early access (nope - not the same as crowd-funded, look it up) game by an indie dev who has released over a dozen games over a two decade period to this over-ambitious liability-laden dumpster fire is always hilarious.

There's nothing to judge. Line Of Defense, like ALL my games, is coming along just fine and just as it was designed from the onset.

No comparison.

Stick to the subject at hand: the on-going Star Citizen train wreck.

No, there is a comparison. Self-funded or not, you took people's money, maybe not many, but a couple. I think it's cute that you feel you have plausible deniability because you are an EA game that wouldn't be affected by legislation surrounding crowd funding as a whole.

So so your official stance is that you currently offer full refunds on all of your products? Like you stand behind them 100%? Funny because that's not the story as I understand it.

This goes beyond SC and, I know it's hard for you to accept, but it goes beyond you and your ego. This is a situation that will impact my kids, the way they play games and the way they develop games. SC, like you, is larger than life, but they do deserve due process without people maliciously working against them, the same way people shouldn't cause you additional time and cost by buying and charging back your games, preventing you from doing business, right?

dsmart · July 2016

When are the lawsuits against your PROVEN failure to deliver happening?

OK I'll bite.

Go ahead and show me one instance of where

i) any such ramblings of "failure to deliver" exist

ii) where I promised anyone, anything - let alone a refund - for delivery by any fixed date.

I'll wait. Pressing F5 until you come back. OK?

MaxBacon · July 2016

dsmart said:
MaxBacon said:

On a serious note it is quite true, every time SC does a release there's some sort of "damage control" being done, hide all the positives, show and over-dramatize all the negatives and you're all set for a few weeks of continuous drama. And the loop shall continue, forever.
WHY should they be treated any differently? Who is responsible for ALL the hype that they built up. Then FAILED to live up to them over five years and $117 million later?

Hype It's not any crime, it's called Marketing. And it is up to each individual to have some degree of intelligence before taking that the cookies look as good inside the box than what they are pictured as on the cover. It's like expecting a game's gameplay be as good as it appears on a trailer. If they do, then they're stupid.

In the end, SC is a game being developed, with or without delays, whenever one individual likes it or not.

Like in any game... Let the haters hate, let the haters preach the apocalypse, the end of times, spread the word of truth and enlightenment as you see it. The game keeps moving forward, and that's what matters. I don't need anyone to blame, i'm not on any terminal stage of my life and i can very well wait.

Already had more fun on SC with the 45$ i spent than games that costed me more i just tried and quit them. So i have no reasons to be part of hate campaigns against a videogame.

dsmart · July 2016

CrazKanuk said:

dsmart said:

Youre playing a dangerous game considering that the status of your project which was due out in 2014 is still under development. This is the point. We can't have one be guilty without holding all accountable, which essentially means the demise of crowd funding, to the joy of some, I'm sure.

Honestly, though, if this does come to pass then I hope that you are treated equally harshly.

You're cute.

Comparing a self-funded early access (nope - not the same as crowd-funded, look it up) game by an indie dev who has released over a dozen games over a two decade period to this over-ambitious liability-laden dumpster fire is always hilarious.

There's nothing to judge. Line Of Defense, like ALL my games, is coming along just fine and just as it was designed from the onset.

No comparison.

Stick to the subject at hand: the on-going Star Citizen train wreck.

No, there is a comparison. Self-funded or not, you took people's money, maybe not many, but a couple. I think it's cute that you feel you have plausible deniability because you are an EA game that wouldn't be affected by legislation surrounding crowd funding as a whole.

So so your official stance is that you currently offer full refunds on all of your products? Like you stand behind them 100%? Funny because that's not the story as I understand it.

This goes beyond SC and, I know it's hard for you to accept, but it goes beyond you and your ego. This is a situation that will impact my kids, the way they play games and the way they develop games. SC, like you, is larger than life, but they do deserve due process without people maliciously working against them, the same way people shouldn't cause you additional time and cost by buying and charging back your games, preventing you from doing business, right?

Again, reaching for straws with pointless and hollow arguments.

This has nothing to do with plausible deniability (showing you don't even know what that means). It has to do with FACTS. Early Access != crowd-funding. No matter how you argue, it's NOT the same thing.

And as to refunds, the refund policy for my games has never changed. Like ever.

And that "as I understand it" is the usual nonsense that people like you write when pulling crap out of the anus and trying to pass it as fact - and with zero cited sources.

You're wasting your time making this about me or my products. It's not going to make Star Citizen ANY less of a train-wreck or a SCAM. Deal with it.

And the lesson you need to teach your kids (lol!!) is that they shouldn't support scams.

GrumpyHobbit · July 2016

dsmart said:

When are the lawsuits against your PROVEN failure to deliver happening?

OK I'll bite.

Go ahead and show me one instance of where

i) any such ramblings of "failure to deliver" exist

ii) where I promised anyone, anything - let alone a refund - for delivery by any fixed date.

I'll wait. Pressing F5 until you come back. OK?

How is your Steam game going? Or was it removed, I don't keep up to date with all the successes of your grand career. What was it called again...it is so forgetable...I guess it would be hard for me to find rambling posts of failure to deliver, someone has to care to spend the time rambling about whatever it is you do.

And I guess you really are that slimy to use the old "hey I didn't say WHEN it would be delivered so you can't complain when I NEVER deliver it, thanks for the money"...

You are an obvious scam artist trying to being down the guy who destroyed your career by being better at game development, better and marketing and better at life.

I honestly have never encountered a more vile person then you in my 35 years of being involved in computers.

CrazKanuk · July 2016

dsmart said:

CrazKanuk said:

dsmart said:

Youre playing a dangerous game considering that the status of your project which was due out in 2014 is still under development. This is the point. We can't have one be guilty without holding all accountable, which essentially means the demise of crowd funding, to the joy of some, I'm sure.

Honestly, though, if this does come to pass then I hope that you are treated equally harshly.

You're cute.

Comparing a self-funded early access (nope - not the same as crowd-funded, look it up) game by an indie dev who has released over a dozen games over a two decade period to this over-ambitious liability-laden dumpster fire is always hilarious.

There's nothing to judge. Line Of Defense, like ALL my games, is coming along just fine and just as it was designed from the onset.

No comparison.

Stick to the subject at hand: the on-going Star Citizen train wreck.

No, there is a comparison. Self-funded or not, you took people's money, maybe not many, but a couple. I think it's cute that you feel you have plausible deniability because you are an EA game that wouldn't be affected by legislation surrounding crowd funding as a whole.

So so your official stance is that you currently offer full refunds on all of your products? Like you stand behind them 100%? Funny because that's not the story as I understand it.

This goes beyond SC and, I know it's hard for you to accept, but it goes beyond you and your ego. This is a situation that will impact my kids, the way they play games and the way they develop games. SC, like you, is larger than life, but they do deserve due process without people maliciously working against them, the same way people shouldn't cause you additional time and cost by buying and charging back your games, preventing you from doing business, right?

Again, reaching for straws with pointless and hollow arguments.

This has nothing to do with plausible deniability (showing you don't even know what that means). It has to do with FACTS. Early Access != crowd-funding. No matter how you argue, it's NOT the same thing.

And as to refunds, the refund policy for my games has never changed. Like ever.

And that "as I understand it" is the usual nonsense that people like you write when pulling crap out of the anus and trying to pass it as fact - and with zero cited sources.

You're wasting your time making this about me or my products. It's not going to make Star Citizen ANY less of a train-wreck or a SCAM. Deal with it.

And the lesson you need to teach your kids (lol!!) is that they shouldn't support scams.

I must say I've never quite seen that pretty a dance around a direct question. Straight from the horses mouth, you don't offer refunds.

What I also find interesting is that you made a point of talking, previously, about how your staff is human and how they don't deserve to be attacked. So why is it that the employees of CIG do? Do you feel that your behaviour encourages attacks against your employees?

mr1602 · July 2016

Xeno.phon said:

mr1602 said:

MaxBacon said:

mr1602 said:

Erillion said:

Feel free to tell us more about "the lawsuit".

Because Streetrollers case is no lawsuit.

Have fun

It is worse than a lawsuit. Authorities are now involved.

????????? O.o

Read the story on my signature. Rockpapershotgun has the same story as well. DCBA is 'building a case' against CIG.

Dont you mean "A bunch of idiots that have no concept of what crowdfunding is are trying to figure out what is right and wrong" Really has nothing to do with RSI, in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Until RSI cancels their development and or stop being able to prove progress the only rights backers have is to wait like adults for the product they ordered and didnt get a delivery date for.

I don't think you will have much luck on trying to convince anyone that you know more about courts / rights than the California Attorney General.

dsmart · July 2016

mr1602 said:

Xeno.phon said:

mr1602 said:

MaxBacon said:

mr1602 said:

Erillion said:

Feel free to tell us more about "the lawsuit".

Because Streetrollers case is no lawsuit.

Have fun

It is worse than a lawsuit. Authorities are now involved.

????????? O.o

Read the story on my signature. Rockpapershotgun has the same story as well. DCBA is 'building a case' against CIG.

Dont you mean "A bunch of idiots that have no concept of what crowdfunding is are trying to figure out what is right and wrong" Really has nothing to do with RSI, in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Until RSI cancels their development and or stop being able to prove progress the only rights backers have is to wait like adults for the product they ordered and didnt get a delivery date for.

I don't think you will have much luck on trying to convince anyone that you know more about courts / rights than the California Attorney General.

heh yeah, it's hilarious watching them flailing. Wait for what comes next.

FYI Kotaku US picked it up as well.

http://kotaku.com/report-star-citizen-backer-gets-2550-refund-1783699701

Talonsin · July 2016

GrumpyHobbit said:

And I guess you really are that slimy to use the old "hey I didn't say WHEN it would be delivered so you can't complain when I NEVER deliver it, thanks for the money"...

Wait... Isnt the man/game you are defending so vigorously on this forum guilty of the exact same thing? Didnt he also recently change the ToS to say he no longer even needs to deliver the game?

GeezerGamer · July 2016

What a mess

Talonsin · July 2016

Xeno.phon said:

in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Funny, when I backed this project I was given a two year delivery date and I had it in writing that if the game was not delivered within 18 months of that date I would get a refund. Of course, after he got our money, Chris Roberts did a complete 180, changed the ToS to deny any refunds and said he would not be held to "artificial" delivery dates...

That is quite a guy who you are defending.

Distopia · July 2016

Talonsin said:

Xeno.phon said:

in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Funny, when I backed this project I was given a two year delivery date and I had it in writing that if the game was not delivered within 18 months of that date I would get a refund. Of course, after he got our money, Chris Roberts did a complete 180, changed the ToS to deny any refunds and said he would not be held to "artificial" delivery dates...

That is quite a guy who you are defending.

You left out a rather pertinent factor there...

Talonsin · July 2016

Distopia said:

Talonsin said:

Xeno.phon said:

in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Funny, when I backed this project I was given a two year delivery date and I had it in writing that if the game was not delivered within 18 months of that date I would get a refund. Of course, after he got our money, Chris Roberts did a complete 180, changed the ToS to deny any refunds and said he would not be held to "artificial" delivery dates...

That is quite a guy who you are defending.

You left out a rather pertinent factor there...

I dont understand, I was given a delivery date of 2 years and a promise of a refund if they did not deliver the game within 18 months of the date. What did I leave out?

Distopia · July 2016

Talonsin said:

Distopia said:

Talonsin said:

Xeno.phon said:

in fact if this was a real world product that you pre purchased despite not being given a delivery date the courts would call you an idiot and throw you out.

Funny, when I backed this project I was given a two year delivery date and I had it in writing that if the game was not delivered within 18 months of that date I would get a refund. Of course, after he got our money, Chris Roberts did a complete 180, changed the ToS to deny any refunds and said he would not be held to "artificial" delivery dates...

That is quite a guy who you are defending.

You left out a rather pertinent factor there...

I dont understand, I was given a delivery date of 2 years and a promise of a refund if they did not deliver the game within 18 months of the date. What did I leave out?

they left open a rather lengthy window for original backers to get refunds if they didn't agree with those changes in plans. Quite a convenient thing to omit IMO...

Talonsin · July 2016

Distopia said:

they left open a rather lengthy window for original backers to get refunds if they didn't agree with those changes in plans. Quite a convenient thing to omit IMO...

Agreed to a point, however, they closed the window THEN cancelled Star Marine after promoting it for most of 2015. Until the PU was released in Dec of 2015 and refunds stopped, many people had no reason to ask for a refund. Star Marine being indefinitely postponed, delivery dates being thrown out the window and called "artificial", lies about a $21,000 lobby door, art plagiarism, the announcement that ships introduced and sold in 2015 and beyond would not be in the initial release of the game, co-op completely removed from the single player and the game being launched as a MVP all happened AFTER the window closed.

lokiboard · July 2016

FFS people...Get your money back or don't get your money back....Play it or don't play it....Why do you people come on here a bicker? Did your mommy not pick you up fast enough when you cried as a little baby? Geez GET OVER IT!

Talonsin · July 2016

Distopia said:

they left open a rather lengthy window for original backers to get refunds if they didn't agree with those changes in plans. Quite a convenient thing to omit IMO...

Also, what is the point of your comment? I was addressing the person for saying a court would call a person an idiot for per-purchasing a product without a delivery date. I was simply showing him we were given dates and a ToS that provided refunds if that date was not met. How does that relate to your comment about having a refund window?

MaxBacon · July 2016

Yeah the refunds were being given quite openly for several months, it was even noticed on the media. For those who did not want to remain as backers, who did not agree with the direction neither with the time that it is taking... Gosh there was enough opportunities for refunds. I had not met any original KS backer that got a refund refused during such times.

Ofc some here care more about an office door, coffee machines and similar... than one game being developed, that's part of the troll-drama-llama, without that, there would be no forum flame wars about SC; and that can't be!

Talonsin · July 2016

lokiboard said:

FFS people...Get your money back or don't get your money back....Play it or don't play it....Why do you people come on here a bicker? Did your mommy not pick you up fast enough when you cried as a little baby? Geez GET OVER IT!

Hold me!

MaxBacon · July 2016

lokiboard said:
FFS people...Get your money back or don't get your money back....Play it or don't play it....Why do you people come on here a bicker? Did your mommy not pick you up fast enough when you cried as a little baby? Geez GET OVER IT!

That can't be, people not over-dramatizing, over-emotional and so on, about a video-game....

Would mean this forum would not be a permanent flame war, and that is not the point.

The point is keep stuff as a permanent flame war of attacks, against posters, the company developing the game, the individuals developing the game, to the extent their families.

The show hate campaign must go on!

Talonsin · July 2016

MaxBacon said:

Yeah the refunds were being given quite openly for several months, it was even noticed on the media. For those who did not want to remain as backers, who did not agree with the direction neither with the time that it is taking... Gosh there was enough opportunities for refunds. I had not met any original KS backer that got a refund refused during such times.

To be fair, up until Dec 2015 when the PU launched, Chris was running around telling everyone what they wanted to hear so there was not much reason to ask for a refund. It was only AFTER they stopped giving refunds and used the PU as the excuse for it that they started changing directions and gave cause for refunds.

If you look at the last 6 to 7 months, more things have been cut/changed in the project than had been changed in all of the years before 2016.

Howdy, Stranger!

Charge Back and Refunds

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Charge Back and Refunds

Comments