The Star Citizen Thread v 4

[Backer42]

So there you go guys, forget about refunds because the delivery date is subject to change, as per their ToS.
Which means, they're allowed to never release this "game" and you can't do anything about it.

The reason why such shenanigans don't hold up in court, is because the due date is as important for the delivery as for the payment. Without deadlines we can't legally determine if someone has fulfilled his end of a contract.

CIG is basically doing the same thing like every defaulter does: telling his creditors you he's gonna pay soon. Legally nobody cares about that.

 

[Voivod]

That would be hard to proof, since cig already deliver something (Even if people here hardly tried to negate this).

Star Citizen: already delivers something

 

[ianw]

So do you think they will? Because that implies that they need to provide some form of "delivery date" even if they keep re-writing it, and currently they no longer seem to want to publicise a release date because having a dead-line is too stressful for them.

Honestly CIG, (they) need to stop selling ships! By all means, if (they) believe the "Alpha" stands up on it's own merits charge people for accounts and let people buy multiple access if they want to "donate". The ship selling annoys me, it plays into addictions and it is P2W no matter how (they) frame it. This game now has one of the largest budgets ever and as it approaches being the most expensive game ever developed that's a title you don't wan't hanging over you if your cash was raised by members of the public. It's going to attract more and more media attention and scrutinisation and YES high profile criticism and no amount of labeling it as "poor little noble poppies" will be enough. It's a games company selling virtual assets for years to invest in a great sounding concept, that isn't noble - they aren't curing cancer or something.

I think at this point they'll just carry on doing whatever they think they can get away with - they started battening the hatches down a long time ago now.

They have people's money - possession is nine tenths of the law and all that. And a lot of people simply won't bother with all the refund/chargeback perceived hassle just like they don't bother reading T&Cs (guilty) when they just want to get their hands on the latest build or login to the website or whatever.

The ship sales don't really seem to be doing it for them anymore either - not compared to historical performance and yes - the whole P2W thing - as someone elsewhere commented - can you imagine CIG trying to balance that in a scenario where the loudest voices are 10s of thousands of dollars in?

As I've said before on here I think the most likely outcome is they'll continue stumbling along - barring any disasters that aren't currently visible to the public - and the best people can hope for is something a bit meh that by that time will have already been done by the glut of space related games suddenly looming on the horizon. Certainly from the point of view of the general buying public if not the specialists.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

Yeah, lets just ignor that there is something else to download on the cig side... ^^

So you think that this is a way how responsible people in gaming industry should do the job from now on?Are you serious?So I can ask for a money on KS to make and deliver the game that I advert as this and that....get a large sum of $ and after few years I simply deliver the product that me and my pals made in few days of work that does not correspond to the anything that I was saying few years back?

 

[Neo-ST]

Yeah, lets just ignor that there is something else to download on the cig side... ^^

Dude...c'mon. Take that blindfold off your eyes and try to behave like a reasonable adult.
There is no _GAME_ currently, only a messy, buggy tech demo with a few levels to try out. (do they still call it a pre-pre-pre alpha now? Or a pre-pre-alpha? Or a pre-alpha? Or just alpha?)
Let's not even get into how it's not what they promised to be.

If I wanted a modern Freelancer with fancy graphics, I wouldn't have backed this project up, but I did, you know why?
Because I fell for CR's sweet talk and false promises. The market (and we) also desperately needed a proper space sim. It was all like a dream come true, a joyful event and even hard to believe. I backed it without thinking twice. In a way, they took advantage of us.

All looked well for some time, but things changed after the KS period. Now I think of KS period as proving grounds for CR, as a tool for him to see the interest from gamers.
In the beginnings the interest, of course, exploded and he moved out of constraints of KS into his own domain with his own rules (RSI platform) which turns out to be fertile ground for gray economy and legal nightmares.

Moving out of KS is a double edged sword, for consumers (us), because it can be both good and bad at the same time. Good because the project can get expanded and funded even further, bad because KS rules no longer apply (developer needs to finish the game within the deadline or refunds need to be provided), but instead company's own rules do. In this case, they can continue "developing" the game indefinitely while raking in money at the same time, without ever delivering a complete product at all.
"Complete" by definition means it's done, funding is no longer needed and the product is publicly available for purchase through regular channels.

 

[bitstorm]

The answer is here.

Spoiler

http://i.imgur.com/jrNYjlC.jpg

So there you go guys, forget about refunds because the delivery date is subject to change, as per their ToS.
Which means, they're allowed to never release this "game" and you can't do anything about it.

If you do indeed want a refund, surely it's as clear cut as you paid them money to deliver a complete product by a certain date, assuming you bought in on the old TOS, they are now 18 months past that date.

I mean I'm no expert on UK law but surely it's that clear cut? So if you want a refund then regardless of what they tell you, you are in fact entitled to one?

Sure some people will accept the release date shifting then being removed entirely but I would have thought there's no requirement for you to do so. Within reason of course but c'mon, 18 months is a fair window.

The June 1st TOS thing for me is a bit of a distraction, I mean sure it probably strengthens your claim but I would have thought you'd be entitled to a refund even if that wasn't there.

IANAL.

There's always Citizen's Advice, be honest with them though.

Also the http://www.consumer-ombudsman.org/ who can probably help and will mediate on your behalf (I think it's free), but I would exhaust your options communicating with CIG yourself before going down that route. (would say avoid snipes in comms, keep it professional and straight forward).

I'd also say if you genuinely want a refund you're probably going to have to push a bit, lots of customers will just roll over so of course it's in CIG's interest to tell you they can't refund initially.

There's some more general info here : http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/small-claims-court

Not necessarily suggesting small claims court but more that link has lots of good general advice on how you probably should be dealing with this if getting a refund is your goal.

I'd also say about posting all discussion here, it might be a good idea, it might not I don't know, but I'm pretty sure CIG eyes will be on this thread given Derek's presence here.

Also try to ignore the "pledge" narrative, you bought a completed game to be delivered within a designated time window, you bought something, you didn't get it, and 18 months on you still haven't got it. CIG is not a charity, you paid VAT.

 

[Clawhammer]

Dude...c'mon. Take that blindfold off your eyes and try to behave like a reasonable adult.
There is no _GAME_ currently, only a messy, buggy tech demo with a few levels to try out. (do they still call it a pre-pre-pre alpha now? Or a pre-pre-alpha? Or a pre-alpha? Or just alpha?)
Let's not even get into how it's not what they promised to be.

Iam sorry, but what iam saying is fact, the stuff is there. What you are saying is your personal opinion. You think it is a buggy tech demo? Ok, fine for you. But other people have a different opinion about that. How should we weight that? Are you wrong or the others? No one can say that, even me. All i do is saying that stuff is there and iam right with that.

 

[Truga]

That would be hard to proof, since cig already deliver something (Even if people here hardly tried to negate this).

Uhhh? What have they delivered?

There's a game, that's broken and buggy that you can download, but even CIG is saying that is not the final product, so obviously they haven't delivered what people have paid for yet.

 

[Voivod]

All i do is saying that stuff is there and iam right with that.

So what you're saying is that 4 years later the "stuff that is there" compared to what was supposed to be here, is enough for people not to ask for refunds?
Just out of curiosity, do you hold every other developer to the same standard?
If SC was an EA game, would you say the same thing if 4 years later they gave you the 2.4 PTU instead of the game they promised?

 

[Skizomeuh]

Iam sorry, but what iam saying is fact, the stuff is there. What you are saying is your personal opinion. You think it is a buggy tech demo? Ok, fine for you. But other people have a different opinion about that. How should we weight that? Are you wrong or the others? No one can say that, even me. All i do is saying that stuff is there and iam right with that.

Following your logic, all of this can end in a Clash of clan clone, or CIG can decreet 2.4 is MVP, all would be perfectly fine.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If I wanted a modern Freelancer with fancy graphics, I wouldn't have backed this project up, but I did, you know why?.

Well the more I see how SC is going, the more I doubt they'll achieve to make something on par with Freelancer.

 

[hairychris]

Yeah, but isn't this exactly why CR keeps Freyermuth on retainer? Journalists, rival developers, disgruntled backers, you name it, Freyermutth is like the attack dog to Chris Roberts' James Montgomery Burns.

It's really bizarre. I can't remember the last time a game development studio sicced a lawyer on some third party and was considered "the good guys" for doing so.

The problem is that Freyermuth is a company director, not a lawyer on retainer. This means that he isn't covered by the usual client/lawyer relationship.

If you want a lawyers opinion on why him sending threats is a really bad idea thing I recommend reading this: https://popehat.com/2015/10/04/in-space-no-one-can-hear-you-threaten-lawsuits/

 

[bitstorm]

If SC was an EA game, would you say the same thing if 4 years later they gave you the 2.4 PTU instead of the game they promised?

Lol, be serious. =p

 

[ianw]

If you do indeed want a refund, surely it's as clear cut as you paid them money to deliver a complete product by a certain date, assuming you bought in on the old TOS, they are now 18 months past that date.

I mean I'm no expert on UK law but surely it's that clear cut? So if you want a refund then regardless of what they tell you, you are in fact entitled to one?

Sure some people will accept the release date constantly being broken but I would have thought there's no requirement for you to do so. Within reason of course but c'mon, 18 months is a fair window.

The June 1st for me is a bit of a distraction, I mean sure it probably strengthens your claim but I would have thought you'd be entitled to a refund even if that wasn't there.

IANAL.

There's always Citizen's Advice, be honest with them though.

Also the http://www.consumer-ombudsman.org/ who can probably help and will mediate on your behalf (I think it's free), but I would exhaust your options communicating with CIG yourself before going down that route. (would say avoid snipes in comms, keep it professional at straight forward).

I'd also say if you genuinely want a refund you're probably going to have to push a bit, lots of customers will just roll over so of course it's in CIG's interest to tell you they can't refund initially.

There's some more general info here : http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/small-claims-court

Not necessarily suggesting small claims court but more that link has lots of good general advice on how you probably should be dealing with this if getting a refund is your goal.

I'd also say about posting all discussion here, it might be a good idea, it might not I don't know, but I'm pretty sure CIG eyes will be on this thread given Derek's presence here.

Also try to ignore the "pledge" storyline, you bought a completed game to be delivered within a designate time window, you bought something, you didn't get it, and 18 months on you still haven't got it. CIG is not a charity, you paid VAT.

Looking at it from an external pov it seems they just fob people off for as long as they can while they find out which version of the stitch up contract they're on from whence they can determine the level of stitchiness.

Then they continue to fob until the client shows they have a trump card - for example it seems Australia is CIG ToS proof anecdotally.

They try and argue that going for a chargeback is a misuse of chargeback so the only option left to someone who is being knocked back is to call their bluff and push the chargeback button and see what happens.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Using chargeback is de facto accusing the vendor of at least non-delivery and at worst fraud. From a previous occupation, anyone that used chargeback was permanently banned from ever having use of the product or service once their refund was given.

So anyone going and successfully getting a chargeback would have a very hard time ever getting back into SC if it ever releases commercially, as they would put a block on your personal details and card.

That might be perfectly satisfactory given the current situation. Thought it best to at least inform

 

[bitstorm]

Using chargeback is de facto accusing the vendor of at least non-delivery and at worst fraud. From a previous occupation, anyone that used chargeback was permanently banned from ever having use of the product or service once their refund was given.

So anyone going and successfully getting a chargeback would have a very hard time ever getting back into SC if it ever releases commercially, as they would put a block on your personal details and card.

That might be perfectly satisfactory given the current situation. Thought it best to at least inform

Well you could just rebuy with Paypal surely?

 

[Zyll Goliat]

So what you're saying is that 4 years later the "stuff that is there" compared to what was supposed to be here, is enough for people not to ask for refunds?
Just out of curiosity, do you hold every other developer to the same standard?
If SC was an EA game, would you say the same thing if 4 years later they gave you the 2.4 PTU instead of the game they promised?

What really make me sick is if you remember how ClownRoberts was mocking the EA and other big company's in a way how they threat us-gamers?¿Dear lord....just look at them now....a bunch of CLOWNS.....

....Roberts Circus Industries that's how they suppose to call themselves.........

 

[ianw]

Using chargeback is de facto accusing the vendor of at least non-delivery and at worst fraud. From a previous occupation, anyone that used chargeback was permanently banned from ever having use of the product or service once their refund was given.

So anyone going and successfully getting a chargeback would have a very hard time ever getting back into SC if it ever releases commercially, as they would put a block on your personal details and card.

That might be perfectly satisfactory given the current situation. Thought it best to at least inform

That's fair enough - though realistically if anyone really wanted to get back in it doesn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility to have a friendly third party buy on their behalf.

From a practical pov.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Well you could just rebuy with Paypal surely?

I bought something with Paypal earlier and it said something about a 6 months deadline - which of course becomes entirely impractical if the delivery date is beyond 6 months.

CIG aren't doing anyone any favours so I'd say if there is a nuclear option legally available why not use it?

ETA - I just realised your post said rebuy - not refund - making my answer nonsensical. Apologies.

 

[kilvenny]

It is fair to say CIG have delivered something, whether that something matches up to the kickstarter and stretch goals that exist is a matter of opinion. The only real arbiter is a judge making a ruling. Till then CIG cannot refund because to do so would be setting a precedent and implying fault. Unless enough people complain or someone stumps up the cash to go direct to the courts this will bumble on as it is.

If you look at those stretch goals they are going to make interesting reading to a judge and provide plenty of scope for discussion.

 

[Barking_Mad]

True enough. My experience of a decade working for a truly global brand is that there are levels of kafka-esque lunacy only possible when you are at the mercy of a different office and time zone being able to provide you with key data / continuity.

It can occasionally result in your entire day being reduced to waiting around repeatedly messaging the other sites in increasing desperation; only to finally be informed that your contact is OoO and nobody can cover their desk!

Yes, I guess it can be a bit swings and roundabouts - guess it depends on what you have them doing? I'd imagine in some instances it's relatively straightforward and advantageous (perhaps in terms of art creation?) but in programming terms there's a whole load of other stuff that can be really messed up if you have crap project management.

 

[bitstorm]

That's fair enough - though realistically if anyone really wanted to get back in it doesn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility to have a friendly third party buy on their behalf.

From a practical pov.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



I bought something with Paypal earlier and it said something about a 6 months deadline - which of course becomes entirely impractical if the delivery date is beyond 6 months.

CIG aren't doing anyone any favours so I'd say if there is a nuclear option legally available why not use it?

Well I mean more the rebuy.

I'm thinking if you'd gone to the trouble of chargeback, and then subsequently bought back in, you'd only do that once your confidence level was high enough you knew it'd be delivered. Fool me once, shame on... shame on you. Fool me... um you can't get fooled again - sort of thing.

Or even rebuy once it's actually released (madness!). =p

But yeah I think charging back from Paypal like you say not as clear cut as with a credit card.

edit: oh you edited!