Let's say, theoretically, I wanted to refund Janthir Wilds...

[Sobx.1758]

16 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

You want me to quote a law - false advertising, it falls under the umbrella, i'm not going to make a case out of that law as a lawyer for you to prove my point lol.  You clealy dont understand how law or cases work.

It doesn't, the only thing it promises is that you'll be able to use a new weapon -and you are. If you think spear going through a balance change is gamebreaking for you, contact support. If you want to keep asking about why people still didn't rebel against balance patches (...) then ask yourself about it first. In the end, despite apparently being so shocked about mmo players not being gatcha players, you're still here.

It's not that "you won't make the case for me!" (but nice "no u!" attempt about you trying to force people to create a coherent argument FOR you when you have none), it's that you clearly don't remotely understand what you're talking about. I think I gave you a fair chance to specify what you're talking about, but you're still unable to do it after all these posts, so I'm done taking this awful bait.

 

16 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

i was imitating how you behave on the forums, your overall psychology suggests trolling as you nitpick at minute irrelevant details while ignoring the entire argument, because you have no argument.

Asking for details about your broad -and for now still clearly wrong- statements isn't "nitpicking at minute irrelevant details", it's an attempt to understand your point. If you didn't understand what I was talking about, I wouldn't have much against questions about it to make it clear -understanding the point someone is making is rather crucial to any discussion- so whatever you think you "imitated", you did it badly.

Edited September 11 by Sobx.1758

[Ashen.2907]

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

US FTC, and in japan the CAA regulate these things - look up false advertising laws, thats the legal ground that theoretically would be threatened with this sort of problem.

This would not fall under false advertising laws. ANet "advertises" that content is subject to change.

[Caitybee.3614]

8 hours ago, Smurfiness.3714 said:

oh my buttie is so hurt my warrior is no longer OP! I'm quitting!!

And I demand Anet give my Ranger permanent stealth with King Pet that one shot kills everyone in WvW and PvP! 

Or I demand full refund!!

It looks like OP doesn't know how GW2 releases works. They've been doing beta tests since EOD which isn't very long but that is also never the end of updates for content planned to release. They always do balance updates, and world polishes once in a while, especially to the newest content. OP shouldn't be entitled to a refund since they already purchased Janthir and played through it enough to unlock new perks for their account.

Edited September 11 by Caitybee.3614

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

It doesn't, the only thing it promises is that you'll be able to use a new weapon -and you are. If you think spear going through a balance change is gamebreaking for you, contact support. If you want to keep asking about why people still didn't rebel against balance patches (...) then ask yourself about it first. In the end, despite apparently being so shocked about mmo players not being gatcha players, you're still here.

It's not that "you won't make the case for me!" (but nice "no u!" attempt about you trying to force people to create a coherent argument FOR you when you have none), it's that you clearly don't remotely understand what you're talking about. I think I gave you a fair chance to specify what you're talking about, but you're still unable to do it after all these posts, so I'm done taking this awful bait.

 

Asking for details about your broad -and for now still clearly wrong- statements isn't "nitpicking at minute irrelevant details", it's an attempt to understand your point. If you didn't understand what I was talking about, I wouldn't have much against questions about it to make it clear -understanding the point someone is making is rather crucial to any discussion- so whatever you think you "imitated", you did it badly.

like how you glossed right past the similarities between gatchas and mmo's I guess you still just cant see it. lol

oh and you now changed the subject, where did i say it was gamebreaking.  I'll repeat what i said, HOW MANY PLAYERS BOUGHT THE EXPANSION IN PART BECAUSE SPEAR WAS OVERPPOWERED AND NOW ITS NOT.  No mention of gamebreaking or that I should contact support.  I acknowledge that the playerbase doesn't "rebel" against balance patches, but everyone i've talked too about it is disappointed, as is the OP, which is my point.  In gatcha games the playerbase would go nuts and cancel their accounts right and left, but no such thing occurs on mmo's, thats my other point, why does that not occur on here, but it occurs on gatcha games?  Still waiting for a coherent answer.

You are not even remotely trying to see my point, as my point is extremely simple and is outlined above, now go ahead and change the subject and throw out an insult or two and critique my grammar or ask me to cite 500 legal scholar books for citations lol.

Edited September 11 by Jumpin Lumpix.6108

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

1 hour ago, Ashen.2907 said:

This would not fall under false advertising laws. ANet "advertises" that content is subject to change.

its a grey area you could make an argument that it does using other examples.  Anet would of course say what you're saying.  This is how court cases work.

[QueenKeriti.5176]

I missed where Anet advertised spear renegade/herald doing 56k(? I don't remember the number)+ PvE DPS and spear warrior being an uncontested powerhouse in pvp. Can you please point out for me where Anet advertised those things? 

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

Just now, QueenKeriti.5176 said:

I missed where Anet advertised spear renegade/herald doing 56k(? I don't remember the number)+ PvE DPS and spear warrior being an uncontested powerhouse in pvp. Can you please point out for me where Anet advertised those things? 

balance patch notes

[QueenKeriti.5176]

Please point out for the class where Anet explicitly advertised, in the process of marketing the expansion, spear renegade/herald doing 56k(? I don't remember the number)+ PvE DPS and spear warrior being an uncontested powerhouse in pvp.

Chop chop, the Judge doesn't have all day.

[Elricht Kaltwind.8796]

Bro literally bought the expansion under the assumption that they were never going to do any balancing on specifically his build

[Ashen.2907]

10 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

its a grey area you could make an argument that it does using other examples.  Anet would of course say what you're saying.  This is how court cases work.

It is how failed court cases work. A merchant that provides explicit disclaimers in advance of purchase is in compliance with regulations governing accuracy in advertisement in most states (I say most because I am not specifically familiar with Hawaii's regulations in this matter, but in general states tend to follow each others' examples, often copying their regulations with minimal alteration). A consumer that acknowledges that disclaimer before purchasing the product will have difficulty finding an attorney willing to take the case on contingency.

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

like how you glossed right past the similarities between gatchas and mmo's I guess you still just cant see it. lol

How are those similarities relevant to anything said in this thread, especially your claims about balance patches not being ok "because it's like gatcha and players in gatcha complain about it!!" ? Of course online games are online games, but that doesn't make anything you said before any more coherent or relevant. The vague law you claim to apply still doesn't apply, the claims about it not being ok still are incorrect. What does your list supposed to be changing in regards of this thread and your claims that I'm supposed to address something about it? Because if it was supposed to be changing anything here, I fail to notice it and need you to spell it out.

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

oh and you now changed the subject, where did i say it was gamebreaking.

I didn't change the subject at all, you still clearly have no idea what you're talking about. As for "gamebreaking", what I mean by that is more of "it being a dealbreaker for you". If it's not a dealbreaker for you then I'm not sure why you're so surprised that it's not a dealbreaker for other players as well. 
See? You questioned something and I clarified without pretending you "nitpick at minute irrelevant details". What a wild concept.

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

I'll repeat what i said, HOW MANY PLAYERS BOUGHT THE EXPANSION IN PART BECAUSE SPEAR WAS OVERPPOWERED AND NOW ITS NOT. 

Tbh probably nobody cares (or even knows). As it was repeatedly pointed out in this thread, balance patches are normal -not just in THIS game, but in ANY other game. We know balance patches (plural! 😱) are coming every time new things are released, OP knew it, you knew it, anyone with a bare minimum knowledge about online games knew it. If you didn't know things could change, you didn't read what you agreed to. If you bought somethng mainly/only "because it was OP!!!!" then it's sad and it very much isn't what you were promised when you purchased the expanstion nor what was advertised. Without change, you have no basis for your wild claims.
Nothing here falls under your hopelessly thrown vague blanket of "false advertisement!!" laws.

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

but everyone i've talked too about it is disappointed

Great -and everyone I talked to was disappointed that broken/op things are added to the game so they welcomed the balance patch that still might not be good enough.

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

In gatcha games the playerbase would go nuts and cancel their accounts right and left, but no such thing occurs on mmo's, thats my other point, why does that not occur on here, but it occurs on gatcha games?  Still waiting for a coherent answer.

Still waiting for those links and sources instead of your empty claims. I'm also curious how your claim -apparently now amounting to nothing more than "but some people might dislike it and complain about it on a forum or cancel [something?]"- has anything to do with balance patches being against the law, resulting in anything being false advertisement or something that generally shouldn't be allowed.
In other words: share the sources and connect the dots how what amounts to someone complaining about it is relevant in any way to your previously thrown around claims.

 

1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

You are not even remotely trying to see my point

False. If I weren't even remotely trying to see your point, I wouldn't be asking for details to understand what you're talking about. It just so happens that you started talking about "laws" and then got triggered by questions about details because you actually didn't know what you were talking about when you made those mentions. So... less sensationalism and more specific arguments based on something "tangible"?

Edited September 11 by Sobx.1758

[voltaicbore.8012]

58 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

its a grey area you could make an argument that it does using other examples.  Anet would of course say what you're saying.  This is how court cases work.

Do... do you know how court cases in this sector of the law works? You insist on being so certain of some unspecified legalities, but if I had to guess, you couldn't even cite a single case or even the Lanham Act. The fact that I bring the Lanham Act up is even questionable - that's US law, and if there was any sort of lawsuit, Anet's lawyers would absolutely put up at least a token attempt at muddying the who-has-jurisdiction waters thanks to Anet being a subsidiary of NCSoft (and no, it seems unlikely that the existence of an intermediate umbrella subsidiary like NCSoft West/NC America would matter). Even a lawsuit itself is a questionable affair - unless Anet's lawyers are itching to get some quality litigation time in (said no sane firm ever), they'd likely ask the court to send the suit immediately into arbitration like the ToS says.

We haven't even touched the actual subject matter of the (likely never to see the inside of a courtroom) case - this is all just about how hard it would be to get a court to even listen to this in the first place. Once you get past that hurdle, if Anet's lawyers are not utterly incompetent, there's a huge range of arguments to be made on Anet's behalf, both statutory and common law justifications for their behavior, etc. Some of the lawyers involved might even get a chance to talk about one of my randomly favorite legal terms, "sales puffery" (I just like the sound of  the world "puffery.") Hell, this kind of lawsuit might be one of the rare cases that can't even survive a basic "hey your honor, there actually isn't even a real case here" 12(b)(6) motion (again assuming this is showdown is happening in the US system).

This also doesn't even touch what seems to be your insufficient understanding of what a "gacha" game even is, despite somehow thinking you can talk about them as if they're relevant to GW2 as a product. "Gacha" as a term comes from "gachapon," which is itself a romanization of a Japanese term that refers to.... basically an IRL lootbox vending machine. Lootbox. Random loot. Gambling. That's the core identity of a gacha game. In contrast - despite the existence of a single paid lootbox in the gem store - the Black Lion Chest is nowhere close to touching anything fundamental about the type of game GW2 is.

So no, @Jumpin Lumpix.6108, I don't find your appeal to legal authority compelling in the slightest. OP and you have zero legal ground to stand on (whether or not that is "fair" or "right" is a different question entirely). @Sobx.1758 has very patiently pointed out the WELL-established practice of balance patches and their associated expectations for both GW2 and the entire live-service category, which is basically where the discussion begins and ends.

I'm glad OP has worked it out to their satisfaction, but that is likely a purely customer-service based response, not a legal response. Which is what companies should be doing anyways, so I think it's safe to say that OP got the best outcome.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

1 hour ago, QueenKeriti.5176 said:

Please point out for the class where Anet explicitly advertised, in the process of marketing the expansion, spear renegade/herald doing 56k(? I don't remember the number)+ PvE DPS and spear warrior being an uncontested powerhouse in pvp.

Chop chop, the Judge doesn't have all day.

They don't have to point out that number they mentioned how long the torment duration is and they nerfed it.  Also the skill preview in game was also an official statement.  

I mean what are you saying they didn't advertise anywhere how spear works lmao

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

57 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

It is how failed court cases work. A merchant that provides explicit disclaimers in advance of purchase is in compliance with regulations governing accuracy in advertisement in most states (I say most because I am not specifically familiar with Hawaii's regulations in this matter, but in general states tend to follow each others' examples, often copying their regulations with minimal alteration). A consumer that acknowledges that disclaimer before purchasing the product will have difficulty finding an attorney willing to take the case on contingency.

Possibly and yet there is still ground there even with that contract sign, it does not make them immune from fraud, which false advertising is part of, so its not full proof but it is a good defense.

[VocalThought.9835]

On 9/10/2024 at 12:51 PM, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

Due to balance changes removing content I was paying for one balance patch in. 

Would that require my account be closed, or are there avenues for itemized removal of access?

When you say "Theoretically", do you mean "Hypothetically"? 

I think if you wanted a refund after you paid for something and they made changes, You would get not just your money back but also interest on a percentage on what you spent due to the time you spent playing. You should get paid for testing out their game for them to make adjustments. But that outcome would be "extraordinarily". 

Due to the contract you "sign" when you purchase the game, I think "theoretically" your agree to all the changes being made to enjoy playing their game. If you no longer enjoy playing the game, you just got to stop playing the game or play the game to your level of enjoyment. 

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

Well based on the responses in the thread I guess anet should just offer an expansion, sell it for 50 bucks and then after a month nerf all of the content in it to a small room with npc that says hi.  According to people in here there nothing that anet could do that would be legally actionable and its not possible for anything legal to arise under any circumstances ever. Lmao

 

And apparently that contract we sign when we sign up is ironclad and is unchallengable lol. Keep thinking it. Apparently according to the forum, no other games including gatcha games have legal problems because of said contracts being adhered to by the playerbase, and users never take legal action as they would always lose anyways 100% lol.

 

According to the wisdom of the forums, there are 0 similarities between gatcha games and mmos, its like comparing a zebra to the moon. Lol

I know the difference between gatcha and mmo communities, so I'll answer my own question for you all. The difference is that gatcha gamers don't tolerate it and they mass refund or report them.  Mmo players are complacent and fine with eating whatever companies shove down there throats because we're used to it and  are tolerant of it, accepting of it and in the case of this forum response, encouraging of it.  So that's why mmos can do what they want whenever and simply call it "balancing" because they all do that, so somehow that makes it ok, and more importantly, they know the community won't do anything, in fact they'll defend it lol.

Hey I got a bridge I can sell you all too.

Edited September 11 by Jumpin Lumpix.6108

[Sobx.1758]

Imagine comparing balance patches to what you just wrote. Truly another completely honest argument and it's just those other bad people who "don't try to see your point". Right.

"Difference between gatcha and mmo communities"? You still didn't even provide anything to support this nonsensically repeated claim. For now chances are there's no difference here, there's just your wishful thinking, making sensationalized empty claims and inability to support your own words with any sources.

 

12 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

they know the community won't do anything

Yeah, despite your sensationalized claims and complaints about "the community", you're still here. At least have a spine. 

Edited September 11 by Sobx.1758

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Imagine comparing balance patches to what you just wrote. Truly another completely honest argument and it's just those other bad people who "don't try to see your point". Right.

"Difference between gatcha and mmo communities"? You still didn't even provide anything to support this nonsensically repeated claim. For now chances are there's no difference here, there's just your wishful thinking, making sensationalized empty claims and inability to support your own words with any sources.

Where's your sources for anything you claimed, you asked about it I don't see any from you lol, you first

[Darklord Roy.2514]

4 hours ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

yah but whats stopping them from say, releasing an item as part of the expansion that makes enemies drop 10,000% the normal amount of gold and everyone buys it (the benefit is sort of similar to the increase in damage that spear brings for some classes).  Everyones happy and then after a month they "balance" it and now it only makes mobs drop 1% more gold per kill.  Is that ok?

I don't think that's entirely a fair comparison, mainly because you're comparing players spending real money on purchasing a single item that does one specific thing to players purchasing an expansion pack with many, many different things included. 

For one thing, going with this example, them releasing an item on the gem store that is *specifically marketed* to increase gold/exp/karma/whatever gain by 10000% and then nerfing it down to 1% is considered rugpulling (which is akin to false advertising) and would NOT be protected by the T&C. They would either face mass refunds or get sued because they completely changed something that was SPECIFICALLY MARKETED to do ONE thing. That's illegal.

That's the big difference. Nowhere in JW's marketing was it advertised that spears would never be subject to balance passes or changes, which are an integral part of any MMO. Going into a game in this genre and expecting balance to *never* change is naive. Balance changes does not mean that spears were falsely advertised to be better/stronger than they will be after this patch. If, for example, spears were promised in the Expac for every class and then on release it was discovered that it was only available for 3 classes instead of 9, THAT would be false advertising.

If you play MMO's, you go into them with the expectation that many, many changes will happen to skills and weapons and all kinds of things. Nobody complained about this when HoT or PoF launched and elite specs got balance passes in the following months, and it should be no different with JW.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

1 minute ago, Darklord Roy.2514 said:

I don't think that's entirely a fair comparison, mainly because you're comparing players spending real money on purchasing a single item that does one specific thing to players purchasing an expansion pack with many, many different things included. 

For one thing, going with this example, them releasing an item on the gem store that is *specifically marketed* to increase gold/exp/karma/whatever gain by 10000% and then nerfing it down to 1% is considered rugpulling (which is akin to false advertising) and would NOT be protected by the T&C. They would either face mass refunds or get sued because they completely changed something that was SPECIFICALLY MARKETED to do ONE thing. That's illegal.

That's the big difference. Nowhere in JW's marketing was it advertised that spears would never be subject to balance passes or changes, which are an integral part of any MMO. Going into a game in this genre and expecting balance to *never* change is naive. Balance changes does not mean that spears were falsely advertised to be better/stronger than they will be after this patch. If, for example, spears were promised in the Expac for every class and then on release it was discovered that it was only available for 3 classes instead of 9, THAT would be false advertising.

If you play MMO's, you go into them with the expectation that many, many changes will happen to skills and weapons and all kinds of things. Nobody complained about this when HoT or PoF launched and elite specs got balance passes in the following months, and it should be no different with JW.

I mean I'm arguing hypotheticals, this is easy, do you acknowledge that there is anything anet could do that would constitute false advertising in this regard, hypothetically?

Edited September 11 by Jumpin Lumpix.6108

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

Where's your sources for anything you claimed, you asked about it I don't see any from you lol, you first

I didn't make random claims, I simply asked for details about yours. You're unable to provide anything for 2 pages now and the only thing you came up with is some completely vague "nooo, YOU give me the sources!" ?
Dude.

Ok, now I guess we're done, i promise. 😄 

Edited September 11 by Sobx.1758

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

I didn't make random claims, I simply asked for details about yours. You're unable to provide anything for 2 pages now and the only thing you came up with is "nooo, YOU give me the sources!" ?
Dude.

Ok, now I guess we're done, i promise. 😄 

Where's your claims, you said no to everything I said with 0 sources lol

[Darklord Roy.2514]

Just now, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:

I mean I'm arguing hypotheticals, this is easy, do you acknowledge that there is anything anet could do that would constitute false advertising in this regard, hypothetically?

What do you mean? I already mentioned two examples of hypothetical false advertising (including the one that you brought up) in my last comment.

Nowhere am I saying that Anet *couldn't* ever falsely advertise anything, I'm saying that they *didn't* falsely advertise this expansion.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

2 minutes ago, Darklord Roy.2514 said:

What do you mean? I already mentioned two examples of hypothetical false advertising (including the one that you brought up) in my last comment.

Nowhere am I saying that Anet *couldn't* ever falsely advertise anything, I'm saying that they *didn't* falsely advertise this expansion.

OK so the place where the OP is at and what you argue is the grey area.  You could make an argument, which was my side point, my main point is why does the gatcha community not tolerate similar behavior from gatcha game makers? But mmo players do.  Gatcha gamers do not tolerate nerfs to any aspect of content they purchased.

Edited September 11 by Jumpin Lumpix.6108

[AzureTerra.1642]

I'm sure you had a weapon you liked before the spear, go back to using that that and enjoy the rest of the Smorgasbord of content you bought access to instead of just bemoaning the tofu steak