Let Frontier deal with Frontier customer queries please Viajero. You are adding nothing new to the conversation, whereas they can.
News Lifetime Expansion Pass Holders - Update!
- Thread starter Will Flanagan
- Start date
- Status
Let Frontier deal with Frontier customer queries please Viajero. You are adding nothing new to the conversation, whereas they can.
You could report the thread and get it shut down.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
You are posting in the forum, and you seem to often repeat the same flawed arguments. I think any other patron in the forum has the same rights to respond and correct those in the same way as you, and as often.
If you want a discussion with Frontier without opposing opinions or interference, and without the need to repeat yourself, I´d recommend you to take that in private with Frontier, be it at the CS site or via pm. But if you do it here you will need to suffer the corresponding opposing opinions.
Last edited:
And we can do it here too.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed. But then do not complain for others repeating answers to your repeated flawed arguments.
If you do it here you will need to suffer the corresponding opposing opinions.
A thread that has posts added to it. What will they think of next?
I get the irony of my stance, but in a thread about an LEP Update thats virtually necroed for no good reason the thread should be locked until an update worthy of a News pinned thread actually happens. For one second I thought something was happening and found its just the usual, making me right grumpy.
It now seems that any thread you don't deem as useful should be closed. Hmm ...
The other irony is that the thread would die of it's own accord if only people stopped objecting to it not dying of it's own accord.
I must once again apologize, for not buying an LEP.
This, of course, has nothing to do with six decades of watching game companies of every kind fail to deliver what I wanted.
This, of course, has nothing to do with six decades of watching game companies of every kind fail to deliver what I wanted.
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
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"
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:
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
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
Indeed, we agree (Horizons has been delivered though). Subject to the commercial viability of the product from FDEV´s point of view.
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/
And yet some here are justifying refund considerations on the basis of certain perceived obligations not being met.
Last edited:
- Status