It was already proven to be fake.
Most likely an alt of that clown.
Oh, I know it was proven to be a fake, it just seems like something petty that he would do at this point in time.
It was already proven to be fake.
Most likely an alt of that clown.
It helps people exercise their rights and get refunds for non delivered products. If some stories are fake, ban those users and let CIG sue them if they want.
How is it a "non-delivered product" though? Crowfunding isn't just giving money in exchange for a product. I really don't understand getting refunds for crowdfunded games games. They aren't just a game pre-order but it seems a lot of people treat it like it is (it's the same with other kickstarters as well based on comments I've read for other projects where people start asking to have their money back when someone goes wrong). You're outright told multiple times that things might not work out right and will probably change, if someone isn't willing to take that risk of delays or changes or even just having the whole project fail, don't say that you are by backing it.
Demanding refunds for a crowdfunded game that you've backed just seems like completely the wrong attitude to have towards this sort of thing to me. The whole point of crowdfunding is that you're giving them money to help try to realize an idea and that you're donating money to pay for them to work towards it, you aren't just paying for something. Having a mentality of basically "Even though I said I was fine with the chance that I'll getting nothing from this when i backed it, i'll just change my mind demand my money back when something doesn't go perfectly!" is just absurd to me.
If you aren't really willing to take a chance with a crowdfunded project, don't say you are by giving them money in the first place.
SC is both a product and a service. There is no denying it. They do sales, they have to charge VAT in Europe and now Australia. They are obligated to provide refunds for not delivering the product in countries that have strong consumer rights, and merely threatening them with an AG is enough to have them deliver a refund in the US, which has pretty shitty consumer laws in most states.
There is no reason to not get your money if you feel disappointed in the game, its production or practices. To not do so weakens your position as a consumer. If you are disappointed in the game, and are not getting a refund you are either lazy (me) or irrational (people wanting to possibly go down with the ship out of some space bushido belief)
There's also that, under UK law at least, you deciding you "no longer want an item" isn't a valid reason for a refund: https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds. If anything the reason of a customer "knew an item was faulty when they bought it" not being a situation where you can get a refund is closer to this than anything as you accepted the risk of it not going perfectly.
How is it a "non-delivered product" though? Maybe sure if I've just misunderstood what you mean by that, I'm assuming you mean the project as a whole but considering it's still in development that doesn't make sense.
Crowfunding isn't just giving money in exchange for a product. I really don't understand getting refunds for crowdfunded games games. They aren't just a game pre-order but it seems a lot of people treat it like it is (it's the same with other kickstarters as well based on comments I've read for other projects where people start asking to have their money back when someone goes wrong). You're outright told multiple times that things might not work out right and will probably change, if someone isn't willing to take that risk of delays or changes or even just having the whole project fail, don't say that you are by backing it.
Demanding refunds for a crowdfunded game that you've backed just seems like completely the wrong attitude to have towards this sort of thing to me. The whole point of crowdfunding is that you're giving them money to help try to realize an idea and that you're donating money to pay for them to work towards it, you aren't just paying for something. Having a mentality of basically "Even though I said I was fine with the possibility of this not going well, i'll just change my mind demand my money back when something doesn't go perfectly anyway!" is just absurd to me.
If you aren't really willing to take a chance with a crowdfunded project, don't say you are by giving them money in the first place.
It would be nicer if Kickstarter then worked as real funding would... you do not get the game, but a percentage of profits based on the investment you did (which is what I hate about the Oculus Kickstarter where the only investors that made a tons of cash where private investors that poured money in after the Kickstarter and earned the money Facebook later paid... all made possible by Kickstarter backers that essentially only preordered a headset).
You are aware the U.S. government has laws regulating that? As a random person, you can't come in off the street and become an investor. If you're an accredited investor, you can use Fig to invest in companies that are willing to work with investors. You wouldn't see much return from investing $20 anyway.
That is incorrect. In online sales in the EU you can refund for no reason at all. You no longer wanting an item is only not valid if it it's a presencial sale. The link you provide actually says:
You must refund the customer within 14 days of receiving the goods back. They don't have to provide a reason.
For such contracts, the consumer should have a right of withdrawal unless he has consented to the beginning of the performance of the contract during the withdrawal period and has acknowledged that he will consequently lose the right to withdraw from the contract.
"i) Provision of digital content prior to expiry of the cancellation period. Possibly the most controversial requirement of the Directive is that the provider must obtain the consumer's express consent before making purchased digital content available to the consumer during the 14-day cancellation period by way of download or stream, together with an acknowledgement from the consumer that they will lose their cancellation right once they start to access the content. Providers have been concerned that such language may be intimidating to consumers and may lead to a negative effect on sales and conversion. "
Please note that you may not use goods that you have received before deciding to withdraw from the purchase. The right to withdraw exists to allow you to examine the product in the same way as you would in a shop, not to give you 14 days free use.
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htmIn the EU you have the right to return these purchases within 14 days for a full refund. You can do so for any reason – even if you simply changed your mind.
The 14-day "cooling off" period does not apply, among others, to:
online digital content, if you have already started downloading or streaming it
If you buy a house, and the housebuilder ships you a fancy welcome card, do you lose the right to claim a refund for the house?Having actually read some of what the UK and EU law says about online refunds, no, you're incorrect. That isn't a "you can refund no matter what happens!" situation. The "refund within 14 days" is referring to a customers "right to cancel" with online products, but that has its own limitations - again, that's not just a "refund no matter what" situation.
What the "right to cancel" actually refers to is that customers are allowed to change their mind on a purchase if it hasn't been provided to them already. Your "right to cancel" is invalidated the moment the service is started to be provided to you, which in the case of digital products like this, would be the activation of any keys/you getting access to things.
Having actually read some of what the UK and EU law says about online refunds, no, you're incorrect. That isn't a "you can refund no matter what happens!" situation. The "refund within 14 days" is referring to a customers "right to cancel" with online products, but that has its own limitations - again, that's not just a "refund no matter what" situation.
What the "right to cancel" actually refers to is that customers are allowed to change their mind on a purchase if it hasn't been provided to them already. Your "right to cancel" is invalidated the moment the service is started to be provided to you, which in the case of digital products like this, would be the activation of any keys/you getting access to things.
As an example, that's why Steam at one point told you when you purchased something that your right to withdraw/cancel would disappear the moment you made the purchase, because on the activation of the game key their end of the contract is fulfilled and you are they have no legal obligation to provide a refund.
Here's what the EU law actually says about digital purchases:
Here's a full post i wrote about it a while ago: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=237047844&postcount=402
Quotes from that post that outline what UK/EU law actually says:
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm
So no, you are not obligated to receive a refund with this sort of thing.
Except most of the purchase is tied to a digital ship. Many of the ships are not yet in the game in any format, most don't have any files in the game.
Therefore you would indeed be legally allowed to file for a return in the 14 day window.
But the whole point is moot. Regardless of what we feel is legally possible, the company is still offering refunds. If you feel you want a refund for any reason, CIG is okay with it. They're already approving it, for now. So since they approve of it, no one should feel guilt or shame for wanting and applying for refunds. There are also a ton of changes in circumstances, like losing jobs, having kids, health issues, new games that are more exciting, lack of trust, that would indeed be reasonable excuses for selling or retracting a financial investment.
Indeed, I would probably recommend it as things may look like they'll get a lot worse before it might get better. I wouldn't count out a "run on the bank" situation if there were some truly bad news released. At that point you probably won't be able to get much if anything back.
Having actually read some of what the UK and EU law says about online refunds, no, you're incorrect. That isn't a "you can refund no matter what happens!" situation. The "refund within 14 days" is referring to a customers "right to cancel" with online products, but that has its own limitations - again, that's not just a "refund no matter what" situation.
contract is fulfilled and you are they have no legal obligation to provide a refund.
Here's what the EU law actually says about digital purchases:
Here's a full post i wrote about it a while ago: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=237047844&postcount=402
Quotes from that post that outline what UK/EU law actually says:
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm
So no, you are not obligated to receive a refund with this sort of thing.
It's fairly irrelevant whether you have your ship or not as the provision of the services has already begun. You've started to access the content and therefore have no right for a refund anymore.
Regardless my point originally was that treating Crowdfunding like it's just a pre-order rather than actually taking into account you're outright told it could go wrong and shouldn't back it if you aren't alright with that is the completely wrong stance to take. If you aren't happy with that, don't back it in the first place.
It's fairly irrelevant whether you have your ship or not as the provision of the services has already begun. You've started to access the content and therefore have no right for a refund anymore.
Regardless my point originally was that treating Crowdfunding like it's just a pre-order rather than actually taking into account you're outright told it could go wrong and shouldn't back it if you aren't alright with that is the completely wrong stance to take. If you aren't happy with that, don't back it in the first place.
It's fairly irrelevant whether you have your ship or not as the provision of the services has already begun. You've started to access the content and therefore have no right for a refund anymore.
Regardless my point originally was that treating Crowdfunding like it's just a pre-order rather than actually taking into account you're outright told it could go wrong and shouldn't back it if you aren't alright with that is the completely wrong stance to take. If you aren't happy with that, don't back it in the first place.
Kickstarter themselves mention that failing a kickstarter does not give users any form of defense against possible litigation. And there has been plenty of litigation in the past, even from people that explicitly thought kickstarter was a regular e-commerce site, that have gone through courts and ruled favorably to the consumer. Hell, I remember reading about a crowdfunding lawsuit that ruled favorably to the plaintiff because the crowdsourcing happen mostly out of traditional crowdsourcing sites. An AG looking at CIGs site will think its just a normal commerce site, with a shopping cart, sales, charging taxes. They'll laugh off the ToS and any fine script trying to absolve the company from any wrong doing.
Also, the mental gymnastics required to believe that SC is not enough of a game yet to criticize (Because its in alpha, nothing is finalized, etc) while simultaneously being enough of a game to deny refunds for is mind boggling. You cant have it both ways.
SC right now is more of a tech demo than an actual demonstration of a near finalized game. People would be up in arms in these forums if a company like Ubisoft/Activision/EA decided to deny a refund to someone because they preordered a game, got into a closed alpha for it and then the consumer decided to cancel the pre-order. I'm pretty sure a closed alpha for a game from those publishers would be eons more complete than what SC is right now as well.
e-Anyways out of refund chat. They posted the schedule report and had a massive decrease in issues needed to be fixed prior to a closed alpha test. Mostly by redefining what those issues were so that they didn't fit into the "Gotta keep delaying this till they are fixed" category. Who the fuck thought that things like texture bugs and light sources not showing up properly were showstoppers in the first place? Just fucking get this out to the door ASAP, people haven't gotten a proper content update for this in nearly a year
Oh, I know it was proven to be a fake, it just seems like something petty that he would do at this point in time.
It will be interesting to see how fast updates come out after 3.0. its been claimed that even with the delays other content is still getting work on, if thats the case 3.1 should come out quickly
So I just watched my friend play SC after me being personally disappointed playing the Gamescom demo at the gamescom booth.
I now want to pledge a bit of money.
Can somebody give me a detailed summary of whats to come in the 3.0 patch in October? I only find some bits and pieces of information on some gaming news sites.
appreciate it!
It will be interesting to see how fast updates come out after 3.0. its been claimed that even with the delays other content is still getting work on, if thats the case 3.1 should come out quickly
"The ground work is done, things should be coming out faster now" has proven consistently wrong with each patch.
At this point there isn't even a coherent flight model, as evidenced by the Gamecom demo.
You would think that would be the first thing you nail down, in a spaceflight based game.
There is a coherent flight model.
Unless you're looking for a different adjective, aka a more subjective one.
I think he's meaning the atmospheric flight model and there's some truth in that.
The actual space flight model is still pants, still far too much strafe jousting, and while it's not flight model related they've not resolved the gimballed weapons in a satisfactory way
I think he's meaning the atmospheric flight model and there's some truth in that.
The actual space flight model is still pants, still far too much strafe jousting, and while it's not flight model related they've not resolved the gimballed weapons in a satisfactory way
People can't realistically expect two perfect flight models, especially when there's so much transitioning, especially with gravity.
It's polish, I'm not worried about it.
Core tech and game mechanics are far more important. Like the jarring jank animations and falling through ships. They can take a year to improve the flight model, I'd rather it be fun to play in first person at the moment.
1st bolded- A good base flight model wouldn't need much adjusting. The core differences between atmospheric and space flight are pretty straight forward. First is that the horizon is defined, second atmospheric resistance, third is gravitational pull. You wouldn't need to change it, just alter the forces acting on the ship.
2nd bolded- The flight model and dynamics are the very core of the game. It's how players will spend most of their time interacting with the game world. It's the #1 players will traverse the game world, interact with other players, and work hardest to acquire and customize. Getting that right or wrong (as it currently is) will make or break the game and the define the longevity of it.
I feel like some of the comments in the latest ATV in the mission section were some direct shots at Elite Dangerous and it's mission design.
That said, at least I can play Elite Dangerous right now...
What are you talking about? delusional much.
This seems to be a known issue and I probably didn't do the research I should have but what's the best method of uninstalling the game? The uninstall.exe deleted the launcher and the uninstall.exe but left all the other game data.
I was surprised to see them down to so few bugs in the last progress report. I know the initial rush was simply recategorizing most of the bugs as no longer "must fix" before release, but being down to 5 is still interesting. I'm curious how buggy it will be at launch / after evocati.
I originally thought we wouldn't see 3.0 before 2018 but I may have to eat crow if it releases in a not-super-buggy state.
Chris Roberts says the current build crashes every 5-10 minutes for 5-6 people in an instance, and says the amount of crashing increases with the number of people in an instance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6y541vKLcY#t=707s
Seriously
Coolio. As usual, regretting not putting in the time to get Evocati status.
Guessing 1 month before its on PTU with all the new bugs they'll find. Does anybody have patch notes?