News Lifetime Expansion Pass Holders - Update!

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
No, your explanation is just lacking, and we have to show you why again.

This is what you bought: https://web.archive.org/web/20150902125322oe/https://www.frontierstore.net/games/elite-dangerous-cat/elite-dangerous-horizons-lifetime-expansion-pass.html

This didnt include any specific timeline or information description at all for any of its future elements, or a promise to provide such timelines or info, except the vanilla base game and Horizons (known at the time of your purchase).

Everything else is just actual wishfull thinking on your part I am afraid. I sympathize with your interest in having more info now (who wouldn´t), but that is not what we bought.

In addition to that, since then there has also been actually new information about upcoming LEP content, been shared several times, that you have presumably chosen to ignore.
I consider this deal to be like an informal loan, you might not set an specific date for its reimbursement but after a while you might get grouchy on the long wait, at that time you'll begin to ask, when?, why?, are you sure?, more delays?, I'm I even getting my money back?

For all I know, FD haven't done anything illegal, that doesn't necesarily mean that their actions are deemed appropiate.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
I consider this deal to be like an informal loan, you might not set an specific date for its reimbursement but after a while you might get grouchy on the long wait, at that time you'll begin to ask, when?, why?, are you sure?, more delays?, I'm I even getting my money back?
Slightly disagree. It is very different to say "Can I have a loan from you? I will pay it back to you roughly in [insert arbitrary time frame]" than saying "Can I have a loan from you? I do not know when I ll return it, and there is even a chance I never will"

For all I know, FD haven't done anything illegal, that doesn't necesarily mean that their actions are deemed appropiate.
No one has debated if FDEV actions may be legal or illegal here though. I guess that is a bit of a strawman that you like to bring to this discussion, and I can see why.

That certain FDEV actions (or any other game developer´s actions in history for that matter) may be considered inappropriate by some is a daily ocurrence. No really big news there.

What we are discussing here as of late are the merits of some of the justifications put forth for those considerations.
 
Last edited:
Slightly disagree. It is very different to say "Can I have a loan from you? I am not sure when I will pay it back but I will" than saying "Can I ahve a loan from you? I can not guarantee I will pay it back"



No one has debated if FDEV actions may be legal or illegal here though. I guess that is a bit of a strawman that you like to bring to this discussion, and I can see why.

That certain FDEV actions (or any other game developer´s actions in history for that matter) may be considered inappropriate by some is a daily ocurrence. No really big news there.

What we are discussing here as of late are the merits of some of the justifications put forth for those considerations.
It isn't a strawman argument, it's an analogy. Your introducing the idea of a legal issue is a strawman argument - one that none of us are making and one that would be against the forum rules to discuss.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
It isn't a strawman argument, it's an analogy. Your introducing the idea of a legal issue is a strawman argument - one that none of us are making and one that would be against the forum rules to discuss.
I did not introduce the idea of the legal issue, Gregg did. And it is not an analogy precisely because it is a strawman brought in to justify lack of propriety. Alas, one does not need to establish legality/illegaility of an issue in order for a debate on propriety to take place. Especially if it is not illegal. It is a complete moot point
 
Last edited:
I did not introduce the idea of the legal issue, Gregg did. And it is not an analogy precisely because it is a strawman.
Viajero, Gregg used the term as a comparison with how it comes across (ie legal but poor). You are niggling over minutiae that is irrelevant and discounting it - that's what a strawman argument is.
 
Slightly disagree. It is very different to say "Can I have a loan from you? I will pay it back to you roughly in [insert arbitrary time frame]" than saying "Can I have a loan from you? I can not guarantee when I ll return it, and there is even a chance I never will"
I'm pretty sure anyone who bought a LEP is expecting a return of investment, anyhow, a loan that is not returned is not a loan, it's a scam.

No one has debated if FDEV actions may be legal or illegal here though. I guess that is a bit of a strawman that you like to bring to this discussion, and I can see why.
Your last post was effectively telling us that FD was under no legal obligation to deliver a return of investment, that's why I brought it up, FD aren't obligated.

That certain FDEV actions (or any other game developer´s actions in history for that matter) may be considered inappropriate by some is a daily ocurrence. No really big news there.
Some of us have higher expectations, it's fine if you like to wait for a couple of years while watching delays on the delays without effective communication.

What we are discussing here as of late are the merits of some of the justifications put forth for those considerations.
True, that's why talking about obligations is irrelevant.
 
Let me give another analogy of what I mean by not being obligated but expecting it:

When you go to an expensive restaurant and order a meal, you expect the meal to come with a dish, to be brought to your table, to have a good customer attention (not having to chase the waitress to order) and to not wait over an hour for your meal to be presented.

None of that is written in the ticket of your purchase nor is it included in the menu yet it's expected and if not present in a restaurant, you might not return or raise a complain with the manager.
 
I'm pretty sure anyone who bought a LEP is expecting a return of investment, anyhow, a loan that is not returned is not a loan, it's a scam.
leppers who paid $80 broke even with horizons.
leppers who paid $150 will more or less break even when 'new era' launches.
leppers who paid $195 will need to count with a couple of dlc on top of that.

expecting much else just isn't reasonable, but if that holds then it just can't be called a scam (except colloquially ;) specially if you are specially fed up with these pervasive and cheap marketing practices)

if new era is a success, though, then they can start actually 'profiting'. say ... 2022?

good for them, it will have been a very long investment, with a lot of good faith. not only in that frontier would eventually deliver, but tn that they would actually like and have purchased what would be delivered. ymmv.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero, Gregg used the term as a comparison with how it comes across (ie legal but poor). You are niggling over minutiae that is irrelevant and discounting it - that's what a strawman argument is.
Not really Riverside, it is not an analogy precisely because it is a strawman brought in to justify lack of propriety. Alas, one does not need to establish legality/illegaility of an issue in order for a debate on propriety to take place. Especially if it is not illegal. In other words it is also a complete moot point.


A loan that is not returned is not a loan, it's a scam.
It was you who brought in the term "informal loan". The actual LEP conditions we are discussing here had very specific language by FDEV all throughout the time they were available with regards to the guarantees (or rather the lack thereof) on the future content, here an example from Newsletter 29 back in 2014:

"This means that if we are as successful as we hope to be, you will still be benefiting from the fantastic early support you gave us for a long time to come"

And of course, no dates at all.

The delivery of future LEP content was and still is contingent on the product commercial viability from the developer point of view, and with no guaranteed deadline.

Since then FDEV has actually delivered one paid for update, Horizons. And more recenlty FDEV has also now confirmed the release of the next paid update estimated for next year.

Your last post was effectively telling us that FD was under no legal obligation to deliver a return of investment, that's why I brought it up, FD aren't obligated.
Indeed, we agree (Horizons has been delivered though). Subject to the commercial viability of the product from FDEV´s point of view.

Some of us have higher expectations, it's fine if you like to wait for a couple of years while watching delays on the delays without effective communication.
That some may have different expectations is perfectly fine of course. What we are discussing here as of late are the merits of some of the justifications put forth to explain those expectations.

As for communications for upcoming content, there is this (among other comms): https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/important-community-update-01-03.479122/

True, that's why talking about obligations is irrelevant.
And yet some here are justifying refund considerations on the basis of certain perceived obligations not being met.
 
Last edited:
No legal obligations from Frontier, obviously. LEP owners took a gamble, and they lost.

Moral of the story is when you bet on Frontier, you lose.
The company is doing well, they can still deliver or return the LEP value not redeemed. There is no gamble, only a frustratingly protracted dot dot dot while we wait for FDev to decide what to do.
 
It was you who brought in the term "informal loan". The actual LEP conditions we are discussing here had very specific language by FDEV all throughout the time they were available with regards to the guarantees (or rather the lack thereof) on the future content, here an example from Newsletter 29 back in 2014:

"This means that if we are as successful as we hope to be, you will still be benefiting from the fantastic early support you gave us for a long time to come"

And of course, no dates at all.

The delivery of future LEP content was and still is contingent on the product commercial viability from the developer point of view, and with no guaranteed deadline.

Since then FDEV has actually delivered one paid for update, Horizons. And more recenlty FDEV has also now confirmed the release of the next paid update estimated for next year.
ED is commercially viable ATM, FD is thriving. Why would they not be able to deliver what is/was expected from the LEP?

And as I said, no dates doesn't justify such a massive wait.

Indeed, we agree (Horizons has been delivered though). Subject to the commercial viability of the product from FDEV´s point of view.
ED is commercially viable, otherwise they'd have stopped development.

That some may have different expectations is perfectly fine of course. What we are discussing here as of late are the merits of some of the justifications put forth to explain those expectations.
It's simple, you buy a LEP because you expect to profit from it, buying a LEP itself is an expectation.

And yet some here are justifying refund considerations on the basis of certain perceived obligations not being met.
It's called a complain Viajero.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
ED is commercially viable ATM, FD is thriving. Why would they not be able to deliver what is/was expected from the LEP?
Hey, I fully agree. I also think ED is doing reasonably well as a product and will probably continue to be developed and supported for quite some time.

This is also precisely one of the reasons why I think some of concerns raised really have not much basis. Especially those going to the extreme of justifying LEP refund options.


And as I said, no dates doesn't justify such a massive wait.
Well, that is just an opinion among many on the matter of time, and I respect yours.

Either way I do not think it justifies misplaced discussions about refunds or certain perceived obligations not met.

It's simple, you buy a LEP because you expect to profit from it, buying a LEP itself is an expectation.
I agree on that front indeed and I am all for FDEV giving us more info on upcoming content.

But I do not think it justifies misplaced discussions about refunds or certain perceived obligations not met.


It's called a complain Viajero.
Asking for more info on upcoming content is perfectly ok, and I actually support it. I can understand why FDEV may not comply with the level of detail some would like, but I will be the first one to welcome any new info.

But asking for LEP refunds or demanding delivery on the basis of incorrectly understood obligations or guarantees is not a complaint, is just a mistake.
 
Last edited:
Since nothing has materially changed in over three years I will be happy to have my account reverted back to the regular Horizons beta level and have the value not redeemed refunded.
good luck with that!

dunno, i completely understand you. then i guess for each one who feels this way, there's also a lepper without remorse. myself i actually considered getting a lep. those were different times, i was very hyped with the game but somehow i decided to remain in control of my spending, even if that meant paying a little more. but i could perfectly have gone with it, if you're even considering spending 150€ on a game then 150€ are definitely not a problem.

however i really can't see you going through with this one. you have a point but is it really such a big deal? it's a good game, we'll have some more fun soon(tm), i'll be around when new era hits in some form or another, maybe it's brilliant maybe it's crap, then you can bite your toes off, but for now ... life is beautiful! i swear!!
 
good luck with that!

dunno, i completely understand you. then i guess for each one who feels this way, there's also a lepper without remorse. myself i actually considered getting a lep. those were different times, i was very hyped with the game but somehow i decided to remain in control of my spending, even if that meant paying a little more. but i could perfectly have gone with it, if you're even considering spending 150€ on a game then 150€ are definitely not a problem.

however i really can't see you going through with this one. you have a point but is it really such a big deal? it's a good game, we'll have some more fun soon(tm), i'll be around when new era hits in some form or another, maybe it's brilliant maybe it's crap, then you can bite your toes off, but for now ... life is beautiful! i swear!!
Yep, I like the game, I only want more of it (and not less). I just want to know what's going on, but after this long with this little news or progress (actions would speak louder than words, but in the absence of actions I'm looking for words) I'm happy to extend the compromise of a refund for the value not redeemed, no hard feelings. The refund is plan B.

The problem comes from people taking umbrage that some have the temerity to expect something after this long. It is ridiculous and the ongoing utter lack of proactive communication on this & so many other issues is disgraceful behaviour for a direct to customer company.
 
Hey, I fully agree. I also think ED is doing reasonably well as a product and will probably continue to be developed and supported for quite some time.

This is also precisely one of the reasons why I think some of concerns raised really have not much basis. Especially those going to the extreme of justifying LEP refund options.
The concern is that after much finantial sucess and a lot of time, FD hasn't delivered. That and also the rarity of communications.

Well, that is just an opinion among many on the matter of time, and I respect yours.

Either way I do not think it justifies misplaced discussions about refunds or certain perceived obligations not met.
As I said, any product comes with perceived obligations, they are called expectations.

But I do not think it justifies misplaced discussions about refunds or certain perceived obligations not met.
When you don't like a product, you can ask for a refund, it may be granted or not. You are looking for something that doesn't exist.

Asking for more info on upcoming content is perfectly ok, and I actually support it. I can understand why FDEV may not comply with the level of detail some would like, but I will be the first one to welcome any new info.

But asking for LEP refunds or demanding delivery on the basis of incorrectly understood obligations or guarantees is not a complaint, is just a mistake.
A complaint may not need to be only about obligations but expectations. I find it amusing that you keep bringing up this obligation thing.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
The concern is that after much finantial sucess and a lot of time, FD hasn't delivered. That and also the rarity of communications.
That statement does not make much sense. Firstly so far Horizons has been delivered. And either way, in order to be able to confirm a "non delivery", you would first need to establish the timelime, i.e. you deliver something at a certain time. Which in this case is open ended, throughout the whole life of the product by definition.

The rarity of the communications is in the eye of the beholder I am afraid, but on that regard I think this one in combination with this one in particular, among many others, is quite telling and reasonable.

As I said, any product comes with perceived obligations, they are called expectations.
Perceived obligations and guarantees, especially if they are incorrectly understood, as it seems to be the case in numerous posts here, can not be argued as the basis for, say, refunds. I mean, you can argue, but you would be wrong, i.e. a mistake.

When you don't like a product, you can ask for a refund, it may be granted or not. You are looking for something that doesn't exist.
I think I have already commented on that before. You can ask indeed, in this case and any other. Even if, as in this instance, there is no obligation or guarantee that justifies the refunds rationally. I personally would love to see Riverside refunded. It does not necessarily mean he has any actual real grounds to justify it other than misunderstanding, or misrepresenting, those obligations and guarantees.

A complaint may not need to be only about obligations but expectations. I find it amusing that you keep bringing up this obligation thing.
A complaint that seeks refunds without any basis on a previously offered guarantee or undertaken obligation is not really a complaint, it is just a demand. Everyone is entitled to those, no hard feelings. But you should not be too upset, or at the very least not too surprised, if not corresponded.

Misrepresenting/misunderstanding those guarantees or obligations is the main element and common denominator for most of the "complaints" here, hence why it is important to keep bringing it up.

Having said all that, I personally support any kind of demand for more information or urging FDEV to deliver earlier rather than later. Cant think of many that would not. But let´s call it what it really is. Demands. And let´s not try to rationalize it as a complaint through misunderstood guarantees or obligations. Just own it for what it is, a demand. No more, no less.
 
Last edited:
If I were to address specific comments, this would be a long long post. So I'll sum up all I'm going to say ....
Not all LEP holders bought the LEP as an investment expecting a return on that investment. Not all LEP holders see it as an investment. I'd even say only some or a few LEP holders see as an investment they expect to make a profit on.

It might surprise some people posting in this thread, but many of us who have LEPs were backing the game during the kickstarter and we were graciously gifted the LEP from Frontier. Those in this area almost certainly do not see it as an investment. Then you have those who purchased their LEPs separately, and yes some of them may be expecting to make a profit, and some may not.

I have zero sympathy for anyone with an LEP complaining that they didn't get their money's worth. Those that do, are not helping this community, they are only interested in their own affairs.

In my opinion, obviously. (yes obligatory disclaimer because I am sure someone will complain if I don't state it's only an opinion)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom