Cryptic hit rock bottom when it comes to STO and CO. But when it comes to giving money back I know Cryptic pulls through on that part. Might as well call them before you do anything drastic that could possibly hurt you in the long run.
A company would have to specifically say something falsely that could be determined in black or white as being false for you to be able to get your money back without the risk of Cryptic going back after your money. If what they say is in any shade of grey then you can't. When companies say product A is better then product B for example they can instantly say that is just an opinion so the issue is done. I am getting a bit tired of the gamers who don't think before buying anything and then cry until they get their money back (without realizing that could change back against them. For example most banks/credit cards will now give you the money back while they investigate the issue. This does NOT mean that you have won yet and several months later when they finish investigating they can take the money back out of your account without any notice. So don't think you've already achieved it). Commercials and infomercials go far beyond anything that you read at the star trek site and guess what? They all fall within the law. Stop being niave and then blaming everyone else in the world.
Another example of "FFS DONT TRY AND MAKE THE COMPANY PAY FOR ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU SHOULD BE AFRAID OF WHAT COULD
HAPPEN TO YOU."
In England, we have companies that do this for small money lending companies and energy and gas companies. Repo men etc. Except these guys aren't actual repo men, they're just people who park outside your house with a large truck and claim they're going to take away all your possessions. They can't. They're banned from doing it. And, yet, they'll try and bully and hustle you into thinking that you're going to lose everything if you question why your bills have shot up in price, or why they charged you at this year's prices for last year's bills.
They try and muddle legal right and wrong in an attempt to get themselves the maximum profit and smelling clean, and what people end up having is no cash and not knowing where to go for legal advice. It's actually one of the major problems with the UK's legal system today.
This poster is pretty much on the same level as those guys, as all he's trying to do is discourage people from taking their legal rights and USING them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buyer's_remorse - Really, go read it. The game was sold under false pretenses, as it implies that you can have some effect on the nature of the universe ( Including discovering "new races", there're what? Three in the game? And "altering the future of Star Trek"? My arse you can. ), whilst it is merely a static universe, with players having no effect on it, even for themselves. EDIT: The buyer's remorse thing kind of proves you have no clue what you're talking about, really.
It proves nothing, and as I said previously, I disagree.
No, it was not sold under false pretenses, you do have some effect on the nature of the universe, the effect you have just wasn't what you expected it to be.
False expectations and misguided spite are not a suitable reason to file a chargeback, and linking me to wikipedia is a poor way to try and defend your position, as it only serves to show just how little you have to go on in terms of justifying your own actions. I know full and well what buyers remorse is, frankly there are quite a few cases of it in this very thread, regardless of whether or not you agree with the context in which I used the term.
My opinion on the subject has been made perfectly clear, I don't have anything further to add to the discussion that has not already been said by myself or others who share my opinion, so I'll kindly bow out now.
I read your reply both to me and to dawnherald. What you've contested and said is not a matter of opinion, there's nothing to disagree with. Also take note from your reply to me; i never stated that STO was sold under false pretences, i said that things in general can't be sold under false pretences and chargeback exists to make sure this doesn't happen.
To issue a chargeback is not fraudulent unless you are doing it for personal gain or to harm the merchant. The chargeback MAY be illegitimate (ie. wrong, the chargeback is not fair) and that's really for an intermediary or the law to decide, but that's not fraud.
Also i might add, it isn't buyer's remorse if someone feels like they have been cheated or lied to. That's within the definition of the term. If someone has a specific gripe about the product then it isn't buyer's remorse.
I never order games unless the company offers a 100% money back guarantee or a refund no questions asked. After playing STO open beta..I got a feel for what the game wouldn't be and cancelled my pre-order with Amazon.com no problem.
I'm a huge Trek fan and it's very disappointing which direction Cryptic wanted to go...basically a dumbed down space combat simulator game. If they drastically change the game in the future I'll definitely check it out again...but I'm not holding my breath.
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
Originally posted by SnarlingWolf A company would have to specifically say something falsely that could be determined in black or white as being false for you to be able to get your money back without the risk of Cryptic going back after your money. If what they say is in any shade of grey then you can't.
Care to explain further? If Im interpreting this correctly, youre insinuating that Cryptic would be able to make a case w/ the Credit Card company to re-charge the money? If thats what you meant, thats 100% false. A merchant can only defend a chargeback accusation. If they win, the customer can still re-issue the same chargeback for up to 3 months, 3 times (though, most issuing banks will require some form of new evidence). A merchant (Cryptic) can never challenge a chargeback decision after it has gone in the favor of the customer. Their only recourse is take the person to small claims court (in the US) which would cost them more in legal fees then its worth.
So, saying theyll come after you is just fear mongering and false.
Please stay on topic and refrain from attacking other posters.
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I mean players in general.
Jpizzle, I meant that its cowardly to bypass going through cryptic entirely and going straight to the credit card issuer. Its bad for business on more then just cryptics end. Theres nothing more I'd like to see then players get exactly what they want out of a game. I feel there just aren't enough limitations in place so that MMO companies are protected. I'm no fan of cryptic or SV but if you bought the game, and you've played the game for a couple weeks and then decided you didn't like it.. it should be much different then playing the game for 3 days and saying you didn't like it.
Thats what really gets me. Its like, you go through an entire meal, and when your plates empty you tell the waiter that the food was horrible and expect a refund. If they deny you, then you get your credit card company to dispute it because you just don't want to pay for it. I just think it should be fair on both ends for fairness' sake.
Please stay on topic and refrain from attacking other posters.
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I mean players in general.
Jpizzle, I meant that its cowardly to bypass going through cryptic entirely and going straight to the credit card issuer. Its bad for business on more then just cryptics end. Theres nothing more I'd like to see then players get exactly what they want out of a game. I feel there just aren't enough limitations in place so that MMO companies are protected. I'm no fan of cryptic or SV but if you bought the game, and you've played the game for a couple weeks and then decided you didn't like it.. it should be much different then playing the game for 3 days and saying you didn't like it.
Thats what really gets me. Its like, you go through an entire meal, and when your plates empty you tell the waiter that the food was horrible and expect a refund. If they deny you, then you get your credit card company to dispute it because you just don't want to pay for it. I just think it should be fair on both ends for fairness' sake.
I agree mostly. But, in the case you listed, Cryptic should be responisble to appease the customer. If I played for 3 weeks, and found the game wasn't what I was looking for, I'd call Cryptic, request that they proate the amount spent vs. the 3 weeks (since a box buys the game and a month) and if they weren't willing to work with me. Boom. My credit card comapny will give it all back to me.
It shouldn't be just 'buyer beware'. It's something that the evolution of payment gateways and card services protects consumers for. While convieince is a big part, that 7-13% you pay also entitles you to protexction.
Edit: in the case of a Lifetime Subscription, I'd request they give me my money back, minus 1 month. Again, if they won't work with me. Boom.
But yes, not asking the merchant first is (in my opinion) less then fair. Also, I didn't think you were calling me cowadrly specifically.
Players can, in fact, do nothing to alter the Empire's size.
Believe it or not, they're entitled to a certain amount of poetic license when marketing their game. If a movie poster says a film is going to "change your life," and at the end you don't feel your life has been changed, the movie theater isn't going to refund your money, and I'd love to hear your conversation with the bank when you try to charge back the cost of a ticket. "But my life isn't changed at all!"
For that matter, I'd love to hear the exchange over the very subject you mention.
Outsourced customer service rep in a cubicle in India: "How may I help you today?"
You: "I'm supposed to be able to alter the size of the Klingon empire, but really it's just a lot of PvP!"
Outsourced customer service rep in a cubicle in India: ". . ."
Like the above poster said, why are you so angry about a game you've clearly not played?
Actually the life is changed because at 1.5 -2 hours preiviously they were $7.50 richer..the loss of wealth is a life changing experience.
A company would have to specifically say something falsely that could be determined in black or white as being false for you to be able to get your money back without the risk of Cryptic going back after your money. If what they say is in any shade of grey then you can't.
Care to explain further? If I’m interpreting this correctly, you’re insinuating that Cryptic would be able to make a case w/ the Credit Card company to re-charge the money? If that’s what you meant, that’s 100% false. A merchant can only defend a chargeback accusation. If they win, the customer can still re-issue the same chargeback for up to 3 months, 3 times (though, most issuing banks will require some form of new evidence). A merchant (Cryptic) can never challenge a chargeback decision after it has gone in the favor of the customer. Their only recourse is take the person to small claims court (in the US) which would cost them more in legal fees then it’s worth.
So, saying “they’ll come after you” is just fear mongering and false.
Try reading the whole post.
Most CC and banks will now give back the money to the customer WHILE the investigation is underway. So as a customer who does this, AKA the OP, you could think you won because you instantly got your money back. The company can fight this and once the investigation goes their way, which is because of the paragraph you quoted, that money will be taken back out of your account or recharged on the card.
The funny thing about small claims court as well is yes they wouldn't do it over $50. However companies like this tend to already keep lawyers on staff so it doesn't actual cost them anything to ever attempt something like that. Also I'm betting they could also probably put any expenses that it took to get the money back as part of the money they are going after if they wanted to do small claims court which they wouldn't ever do.
My whole original post was showing that just because he got his money back doesn't mean he's won yet and he could still get that money taken back away. Also there is a good chance of that happening because Cryptic didn't actually do anything wrong. It takes a while for the bank and company to talk it over so it might be a month or two until his money disappears again. The bank/CC is also not required to either tell you the final ruling or explain how they came to it, so that money could just pop out without him realizing what it is.
It's ridiculous for people to fight for their money back because they don't know how to properly read what a product offers. It's also getting old hearing all these self righteous posters on the site who think every matter should be called through a credit card company or sueing the company. There is a severe lack of reality to some of the posts on here.
Originally posted by SnarlingWolf It's ridiculous for people to fight for their money back because they don't know how to properly read what a product offers. It's also getting old hearing all these self righteous posters on the site who think every matter should be called through a credit card company or sueing the company. There is a severe lack of reality to some of the posts on here.
Please stay on topic and refrain from attacking other posters.
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I mean players in general.
Jpizzle, I meant that its cowardly to bypass going through cryptic entirely and going straight to the credit card issuer. Its bad for business on more then just cryptics end. Theres nothing more I'd like to see then players get exactly what they want out of a game. I feel there just aren't enough limitations in place so that MMO companies are protected. I'm no fan of cryptic or SV but if you bought the game, and you've played the game for a couple weeks and then decided you didn't like it.. it should be much different then playing the game for 3 days and saying you didn't like it.
Thats what really gets me. Its like, you go through an entire meal, and when your plates empty you tell the waiter that the food was horrible and expect a refund. If they deny you, then you get your credit card company to dispute it because you just don't want to pay for it. I just think it should be fair on both ends for fairness' sake.
I agree mostly. But, in the case you listed, Cryptic should be responisble to appease the customer. If I played for 3 weeks, and found the game wasn't what I was looking for, I'd call Cryptic, request that they proate the amount spent vs. the 3 weeks (since a box buys the game and a month) and if they weren't willing to work with me. Boom. My credit card comapny will give it all back to me.
It shouldn't be just 'buyer beware'. It's something that the evolution of payment gateways and card services protects consumers for. While convieince is a big part, that 7-13% you pay also entitles you to protexction.
But yes, not asking the merchant first is (in my opinion) less then fair. Also, I didn't think you were calling me cowadrly specifically.
Good, because it wasn't you specifically,
However, thats what I mean though, as far as an MMO goes, your experience in game to determine the games worth to you is based on your time spent. If you play 2 weeks but spend 200 hours in game, then I think that would be more then a sufficient amount of time to deny a refund. Then again, a player that only gets to play 20 hours in 2 weeks, then they would be just barely able to know whether or not the game lives up to their standards.
Me personally, I can play a game for 2 - 10 hours and get a pretty good feel on whether or not I like it. If I were a company (and I was a type of "developer" once) and someone got a refund on money paid to me after extensively using my product, I wouldn't be happy at all with that outcome, especially if they didn't even let me know there was an issue or try to work with me.
Actually, the TRUE bottom line is this… Regardless if you think it’s morally sound or not, the option is there to anyone that feels slighted by the purchase. One’s personal opinion varies on the level of what constitutes being “mislead” on a purchase, and therefore leaves the chargeback guidelines as a very broad and open interpretation. It’s done intentionally by the issuing banks. It’s not Capitol One’s job to keep Cryptic’s customers happy. It’s Capitol One’s job to keep Capitol One’s customer’s happy. Thus, you can leave it up to your own personal preference if you feel Cryptic’s tactics are just or not, but regardless: the option to issue a chargeback is there, and it’s a risk that Cryptic fully understands when accepting Visa, MasterCard, Amex and Discover. The must be confident enough in their product to fully be aware that people are not required to accept what they sell. Just like any other company. Make no misgivings that they don’t understand the full impact of taking credit cards over the net. If they truly didn’t want to agree to the terms of service of their merchant provider, they could always try a “direct withdrawn” from people’s personal checking through ACH software. They’d lose a ton of business and it’s not fiscally sound, but it’s an option. Just like the customers’ option to issue a chargeback.
Exactly. Quite frankly the people accusing other people of whining because they aren't satisfied with the product they purchased is one reason we have substandard products in the first place.
Every consumer should be aware of their rights and privileges when buying anything from a company, and that includes the option to not pay for, and n ot use, the product they find substandard. That all includes video games.
Your mentality is different, but, it doesn't make the OP wrong in any shape or form.
If he doesn't feel he got the value for his money, why should he just accept the product? If Cryptic is not willing to give any unsatified customer they're money back, then that customer has the right to go to there card holder and say "this isn't what I wanted".
Just like any other business based mostly on accepting the terms & conditions of credit cards.
See, when I went over this same thing about Mortal Online, everyone said, OH it was in beta, it wasn't released, etc. etc. and you know what? they had a point, the game wasn't released, they just made a bad decision, but the developers were too stupid to cover their ass or be responsible. Now heres a released game, stable, with most people having box in hand, or special items in game already or whatever, and they don't like it so they want their money back. I stand firm on the fact that this is ridiculously childish. I just disputed something on my credit card yesterday, and going through the dispute reasons with the credit card company "I didn't like it" wasn't one of the choices I was able to choose for dispute.
Thats all this ends up being, and if you had any sense at all, you wouldn't buy the game on release if you were going to just turn tail and give up because its not to your liking. Going through the credit card company is also extremely cowardly. Most of the time, and even cryptic has in the past, had their customer support refund charges based on customer dissatisfaction. If you spoke with them and told them you were considering disputing the charge due to false advertising, they would've probably given your money back as they did for players of champions online.
Instead you go straight to the credit card company, and I honestly hope cryptic disputes those charges.
My roommate once bought a video game that we had been waiting years for. We greatly enjoyed the last game of the series, and we were waiting for this game with baited breath. He bought the game on release day, it cost him $65 or so. He brought it home where we all crowded around his computer as he installed it and booted that game up for the first time.
And it turned out that that game, Master of Orion 4, was utter and complete crap. My roommate was pretty much heart-broken. He played the game for about 45 minutes, trying to see if it got any better, but it was just a bad game through and through.
Are you saying he didn't deserve his money back? He was thoroughly unsatisfied with his purchase to the point of bitter disappointment. Why shouldn't he have been allowed to return that game? Should the company keep his money for a video game he didn't enjoy or even keep playing?
Your mentality is different, but, it doesn't make the OP wrong in any shape or form.
If he doesn't feel he got the value for his money, why should he just accept the product? If Cryptic is not willing to give any unsatified customer they're money back, then that customer has the right to go to there card holder and say "this isn't what I wanted".
Just like any other business based mostly on accepting the terms & conditions of credit cards.
See, when I went over this same thing about Mortal Online, everyone said, OH it was in beta, it wasn't released, etc. etc. and you know what? they had a point, the game wasn't released, they just made a bad decision, but the developers were too stupid to cover their ass or be responsible. Now heres a released game, stable, with most people having box in hand, or special items in game already or whatever, and they don't like it so they want their money back. I stand firm on the fact that this is ridiculously childish. I just disputed something on my credit card yesterday, and going through the dispute reasons with the credit card company "I didn't like it" wasn't one of the choices I was able to choose for dispute.
Thats all this ends up being, and if you had any sense at all, you wouldn't buy the game on release if you were going to just turn tail and give up because its not to your liking. Going through the credit card company is also extremely cowardly. Most of the time, and even cryptic has in the past, had their customer support refund charges based on customer dissatisfaction. If you spoke with them and told them you were considering disputing the charge due to false advertising, they would've probably given your money back as they did for players of champions online.
Instead you go straight to the credit card company, and I honestly hope cryptic disputes those charges.
My roommate once bought a video game that we had been waiting years for. We greatly enjoyed the last game of the series, and we were waiting for this game with baited breath. He bought the game on release day, it cost him $65 or so. He brought it home where we all crowded around his computer as he installed it and booted that game up for the first time.
And it turned out that that game, Master of Orion 4, was utter and complete crap. My roommate was pretty much heart-broken. He played the game for about 45 minutes, trying to see if it got any better, but it was just a bad game through and through.
Are you saying he didn't deserve his money back? He was thoroughly unsatisfied with his purchase to the point of bitter disappointment. Why shouldn't he have been allowed to return that game? Should the company keep his money for a video game he didn't enjoy or even keep playing?
No I think he deserved his money back. 45 minutes isn't nearly that long, if he wasn't satisfied in 45 minutes then I do think he should have contacted the original seller or the company for a refund.
I'm talking about an extensive period of time that users play these games to decide they don't like it... I tried to explain it in later posts.
Most CC and banks will now give back the money to the customer WHILE the investigation is underway. So as a customer who does this, AKA the OP, you could think you won because you instantly got your money back. The company can fight this and once the investigation goes their way, which is because of the paragraph you quoted, that money will be taken back out of your account or recharged on the card.
So, you're issue is more w/ the morality of it. Which is fine. I don't think anyone should ever be "stuck" with something they feel is subpar to what they were sold on. Regardless of what they did or did not "read". That's my opinion.
But ---
You're spreading falsities here. The Issuing Bank does not give the consumer the money back before the outcome is determined. I work at a merchant service provider. I know. The money is held in limbo by the processor (the merchant's service provider that processes the card, but cannot impend or restrict the Issuing Bank's decision) until adjudication. Most Issuing Banks give 4 weeks, or 20 Business days for the Merchant (Cryptic) to respond.
But, again, you're either not informed, making things up, or trying to scare others w/ misinformation. The Customer is nearly 100% protected in a chargeback case. The worst that can happen is they lose (and likely can't shop w/ the same CC and personal info at the merchant). No extra fees, no smudge on their credit, no black list w/ credit card companies.
Most CC and banks will now give back the money to the customer WHILE the investigation is underway. So as a customer who does this, AKA the OP, you could think you won because you instantly got your money back. The company can fight this and once the investigation goes their way, which is because of the paragraph you quoted, that money will be taken back out of your account or recharged on the card.
So, you're issue is more w/ the morality of it. Which is fine. I don't think anyone should ever be "stuck" with something they feel is subpar to what they were sold on. Regardless of what they did or did not "read". That's my opinion.
But ---
You're spreading falsities here. The Issuing Bank does not give the consumer the money back before the outcome is determined. I work at a merchant service provider. I know. The money is held in limbo by the processor (the merchant's service provider that processes the card, but cannot impend or restrict the Issuing Bank's decision) until adjudication. Most Issuing Banks give 4 weeks, or 20 Business days for the Merchant (Cryptic) to respond.
But, again, you're either not informed, making things up, or trying to scare others w/ misinformation. The Customer is nearly 100% protected in a chargeback case. The worst that can happen is they lose (and likely can't shop w/ the same CC and personal info at the merchant). No extra fees, no smudge on their credit, no black list w/ credit card companies.
Not spreading falsities or do I care where you pretend to work.
I had an issue with a fradulent charge from a web-site. I contacted my bank. They gave me the money back instantly while they were investigating it. I could use that money, it was in no state of limbo at any point.
At some point along the investigation the website convinced the bank the charge was valid. The Bank then sided with the website and removed the money back from my account (was over a month later).
You are misinformed and think you know more then you do.
So to reiterate:
Most banks/CC companies will instantly give the money back while investigating.
Later when the investigation is finished the bank/CC company can retake the money/recharge the account.
The bank/CC company never has to tell you when it sided with the company or you. It also is not required to give you an explanation of why.
My method for quickest cancellation of really bad over hyped shitty games.....I don't buy them. Knowledge is power.
What about all those naive Star Trek fans who've never played an MMO before and then seeing all the fanboy rantings of how this game would be the next reincarnation of Gene Roddenberry? (i.e. STOked podcast, I've even seen reviews on YouTube talking about how awesome STO would be.)
My method for quickest cancellation of really bad over hyped shitty games.....I don't buy them. Knowledge is power.
What about all those naive Star Trek fans who've never played an MMO before and then seeing all the fanboy rantings of how this game would be the next reincarnation of Gene Roddenberry? (i.e. STOked podcast, I've even seen reviews on YouTube talking about how awesome STO would be.)
Again...Knowledge is power...evolution..the food chain will weed out the weak...I just like to watch and laugh.
It's better to lurk in forums and be thought a fool...than to endlessly "Quote" and remove all doubts.
After you crack the seal it is yours period. Do you really believe this is how the world works? That if you don't like a video game for whatever reason after playing it that you are entitled to a refund? If you really think the answer is yes you had very bad parenting and you will probably make less than $150,000 a year.
He absolutely did NOT deserve a refund. After you crack the seal it is yours period. Do you really believe this is how the world works? That if you don't like a video game for whatever reason after playing it that you are entitled to a refund? If you really think the answer is yes you had very bad parenting and you will probably make less than $150,000 a year.
What I don't like about your plan is the fall back that will hit consumers, if to many people act in the manner you are. When ever the consumer finds a way to cheat the system, which that is what you are doing. It comes back to bite the rest of us in the ass. Inflation of prices and stupid regulations, are what result from this type of action. In trying to "get what's yours" you risk making things tougher for everyone.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Malickie It comes back to bite the rest of us in the ass. Inflation of prices and stupid regulations, are what result from this type of action. In trying to "get what's yours" you risk making things tougher for everyone.
...like they may start charging for content gaps, instead of releasing small amounts of new content on a semi-regular basis?
... oh wait. CO: Viboria Bay. To late, they're already mistreating their player base.
I think all in all people just wait for a trial to play the game to see if you like it. It will save you alot ot bank hasssle, typing here, and possible breaking of one of the 10 commandments! LOL!
(DDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to Cpt Kirk!)
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care. Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
Comments
Cryptic hit rock bottom when it comes to STO and CO. But when it comes to giving money back I know Cryptic pulls through on that part. Might as well call them before you do anything drastic that could possibly hurt you in the long run.
Another example of "FFS DONT TRY AND MAKE THE COMPANY PAY FOR ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU SHOULD BE AFRAID OF WHAT COULD
HAPPEN TO YOU."
In England, we have companies that do this for small money lending companies and energy and gas companies. Repo men etc. Except these guys aren't actual repo men, they're just people who park outside your house with a large truck and claim they're going to take away all your possessions. They can't. They're banned from doing it. And, yet, they'll try and bully and hustle you into thinking that you're going to lose everything if you question why your bills have shot up in price, or why they charged you at this year's prices for last year's bills.
They try and muddle legal right and wrong in an attempt to get themselves the maximum profit and smelling clean, and what people end up having is no cash and not knowing where to go for legal advice. It's actually one of the major problems with the UK's legal system today.
This poster is pretty much on the same level as those guys, as all he's trying to do is discourage people from taking their legal rights and USING them.
It proves nothing, and as I said previously, I disagree.
No, it was not sold under false pretenses, you do have some effect on the nature of the universe, the effect you have just wasn't what you expected it to be.
False expectations and misguided spite are not a suitable reason to file a chargeback, and linking me to wikipedia is a poor way to try and defend your position, as it only serves to show just how little you have to go on in terms of justifying your own actions. I know full and well what buyers remorse is, frankly there are quite a few cases of it in this very thread, regardless of whether or not you agree with the context in which I used the term.
My opinion on the subject has been made perfectly clear, I don't have anything further to add to the discussion that has not already been said by myself or others who share my opinion, so I'll kindly bow out now.
I read your reply both to me and to dawnherald. What you've contested and said is not a matter of opinion, there's nothing to disagree with. Also take note from your reply to me; i never stated that STO was sold under false pretences, i said that things in general can't be sold under false pretences and chargeback exists to make sure this doesn't happen.
To issue a chargeback is not fraudulent unless you are doing it for personal gain or to harm the merchant. The chargeback MAY be illegitimate (ie. wrong, the chargeback is not fair) and that's really for an intermediary or the law to decide, but that's not fraud.
Also i might add, it isn't buyer's remorse if someone feels like they have been cheated or lied to. That's within the definition of the term. If someone has a specific gripe about the product then it isn't buyer's remorse.
I never order games unless the company offers a 100% money back guarantee or a refund no questions asked. After playing STO open beta..I got a feel for what the game wouldn't be and cancelled my pre-order with Amazon.com no problem.
I'm a huge Trek fan and it's very disappointing which direction Cryptic wanted to go...basically a dumbed down space combat simulator game. If they drastically change the game in the future I'll definitely check it out again...but I'm not holding my breath.
Currently playing SWTOR and it's MUCH better than it was at launch.
Care to explain further? If Im interpreting this correctly, youre insinuating that Cryptic would be able to make a case w/ the Credit Card company to re-charge the money? If thats what you meant, thats 100% false. A merchant can only defend a chargeback accusation. If they win, the customer can still re-issue the same chargeback for up to 3 months, 3 times (though, most issuing banks will require some form of new evidence). A merchant (Cryptic) can never challenge a chargeback decision after it has gone in the favor of the customer. Their only recourse is take the person to small claims court (in the US) which would cost them more in legal fees then its worth.
So, saying theyll come after you is just fear mongering and false.
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I mean players in general.
Jpizzle, I meant that its cowardly to bypass going through cryptic entirely and going straight to the credit card issuer. Its bad for business on more then just cryptics end. Theres nothing more I'd like to see then players get exactly what they want out of a game. I feel there just aren't enough limitations in place so that MMO companies are protected. I'm no fan of cryptic or SV but if you bought the game, and you've played the game for a couple weeks and then decided you didn't like it.. it should be much different then playing the game for 3 days and saying you didn't like it.
Thats what really gets me. Its like, you go through an entire meal, and when your plates empty you tell the waiter that the food was horrible and expect a refund. If they deny you, then you get your credit card company to dispute it because you just don't want to pay for it. I just think it should be fair on both ends for fairness' sake.
I agree mostly. But, in the case you listed, Cryptic should be responisble to appease the customer. If I played for 3 weeks, and found the game wasn't what I was looking for, I'd call Cryptic, request that they proate the amount spent vs. the 3 weeks (since a box buys the game and a month) and if they weren't willing to work with me. Boom. My credit card comapny will give it all back to me.
It shouldn't be just 'buyer beware'. It's something that the evolution of payment gateways and card services protects consumers for. While convieince is a big part, that 7-13% you pay also entitles you to protexction.
Edit: in the case of a Lifetime Subscription, I'd request they give me my money back, minus 1 month. Again, if they won't work with me. Boom.
But yes, not asking the merchant first is (in my opinion) less then fair. Also, I didn't think you were calling me cowadrly specifically.
Believe it or not, they're entitled to a certain amount of poetic license when marketing their game. If a movie poster says a film is going to "change your life," and at the end you don't feel your life has been changed, the movie theater isn't going to refund your money, and I'd love to hear your conversation with the bank when you try to charge back the cost of a ticket. "But my life isn't changed at all!"
For that matter, I'd love to hear the exchange over the very subject you mention.
Outsourced customer service rep in a cubicle in India: "How may I help you today?"
You: "I'm supposed to be able to alter the size of the Klingon empire, but really it's just a lot of PvP!"
Outsourced customer service rep in a cubicle in India: ". . ."
Like the above poster said, why are you so angry about a game you've clearly not played?
Actually the life is changed because at 1.5 -2 hours preiviously they were $7.50 richer..the loss of wealth is a life changing experience.
And how do you know the OP did not play?
Care to explain further? If I’m interpreting this correctly, you’re insinuating that Cryptic would be able to make a case w/ the Credit Card company to re-charge the money? If that’s what you meant, that’s 100% false. A merchant can only defend a chargeback accusation. If they win, the customer can still re-issue the same chargeback for up to 3 months, 3 times (though, most issuing banks will require some form of new evidence). A merchant (Cryptic) can never challenge a chargeback decision after it has gone in the favor of the customer. Their only recourse is take the person to small claims court (in the US) which would cost them more in legal fees then it’s worth.
So, saying “they’ll come after you” is just fear mongering and false.
Try reading the whole post.
Most CC and banks will now give back the money to the customer WHILE the investigation is underway. So as a customer who does this, AKA the OP, you could think you won because you instantly got your money back. The company can fight this and once the investigation goes their way, which is because of the paragraph you quoted, that money will be taken back out of your account or recharged on the card.
The funny thing about small claims court as well is yes they wouldn't do it over $50. However companies like this tend to already keep lawyers on staff so it doesn't actual cost them anything to ever attempt something like that. Also I'm betting they could also probably put any expenses that it took to get the money back as part of the money they are going after if they wanted to do small claims court which they wouldn't ever do.
My whole original post was showing that just because he got his money back doesn't mean he's won yet and he could still get that money taken back away. Also there is a good chance of that happening because Cryptic didn't actually do anything wrong. It takes a while for the bank and company to talk it over so it might be a month or two until his money disappears again. The bank/CC is also not required to either tell you the final ruling or explain how they came to it, so that money could just pop out without him realizing what it is.
It's ridiculous for people to fight for their money back because they don't know how to properly read what a product offers. It's also getting old hearing all these self righteous posters on the site who think every matter should be called through a credit card company or sueing the company. There is a severe lack of reality to some of the posts on here.
Irony, thy name is SnarlingWolf.
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a personal attack, I mean players in general.
Jpizzle, I meant that its cowardly to bypass going through cryptic entirely and going straight to the credit card issuer. Its bad for business on more then just cryptics end. Theres nothing more I'd like to see then players get exactly what they want out of a game. I feel there just aren't enough limitations in place so that MMO companies are protected. I'm no fan of cryptic or SV but if you bought the game, and you've played the game for a couple weeks and then decided you didn't like it.. it should be much different then playing the game for 3 days and saying you didn't like it.
Thats what really gets me. Its like, you go through an entire meal, and when your plates empty you tell the waiter that the food was horrible and expect a refund. If they deny you, then you get your credit card company to dispute it because you just don't want to pay for it. I just think it should be fair on both ends for fairness' sake.
I agree mostly. But, in the case you listed, Cryptic should be responisble to appease the customer. If I played for 3 weeks, and found the game wasn't what I was looking for, I'd call Cryptic, request that they proate the amount spent vs. the 3 weeks (since a box buys the game and a month) and if they weren't willing to work with me. Boom. My credit card comapny will give it all back to me.
It shouldn't be just 'buyer beware'. It's something that the evolution of payment gateways and card services protects consumers for. While convieince is a big part, that 7-13% you pay also entitles you to protexction.
But yes, not asking the merchant first is (in my opinion) less then fair. Also, I didn't think you were calling me cowadrly specifically.
Good, because it wasn't you specifically,
However, thats what I mean though, as far as an MMO goes, your experience in game to determine the games worth to you is based on your time spent. If you play 2 weeks but spend 200 hours in game, then I think that would be more then a sufficient amount of time to deny a refund. Then again, a player that only gets to play 20 hours in 2 weeks, then they would be just barely able to know whether or not the game lives up to their standards.
Me personally, I can play a game for 2 - 10 hours and get a pretty good feel on whether or not I like it. If I were a company (and I was a type of "developer" once) and someone got a refund on money paid to me after extensively using my product, I wouldn't be happy at all with that outcome, especially if they didn't even let me know there was an issue or try to work with me.
Exactly. Quite frankly the people accusing other people of whining because they aren't satisfied with the product they purchased is one reason we have substandard products in the first place.
Every consumer should be aware of their rights and privileges when buying anything from a company, and that includes the option to not pay for, and n ot use, the product they find substandard. That all includes video games.
No. it isn't.
Your mentality is different, but, it doesn't make the OP wrong in any shape or form.
If he doesn't feel he got the value for his money, why should he just accept the product? If Cryptic is not willing to give any unsatified customer they're money back, then that customer has the right to go to there card holder and say "this isn't what I wanted".
Just like any other business based mostly on accepting the terms & conditions of credit cards.
See, when I went over this same thing about Mortal Online, everyone said, OH it was in beta, it wasn't released, etc. etc. and you know what? they had a point, the game wasn't released, they just made a bad decision, but the developers were too stupid to cover their ass or be responsible. Now heres a released game, stable, with most people having box in hand, or special items in game already or whatever, and they don't like it so they want their money back. I stand firm on the fact that this is ridiculously childish. I just disputed something on my credit card yesterday, and going through the dispute reasons with the credit card company "I didn't like it" wasn't one of the choices I was able to choose for dispute.
Thats all this ends up being, and if you had any sense at all, you wouldn't buy the game on release if you were going to just turn tail and give up because its not to your liking. Going through the credit card company is also extremely cowardly. Most of the time, and even cryptic has in the past, had their customer support refund charges based on customer dissatisfaction. If you spoke with them and told them you were considering disputing the charge due to false advertising, they would've probably given your money back as they did for players of champions online.
Instead you go straight to the credit card company, and I honestly hope cryptic disputes those charges.
My roommate once bought a video game that we had been waiting years for. We greatly enjoyed the last game of the series, and we were waiting for this game with baited breath. He bought the game on release day, it cost him $65 or so. He brought it home where we all crowded around his computer as he installed it and booted that game up for the first time.
And it turned out that that game, Master of Orion 4, was utter and complete crap. My roommate was pretty much heart-broken. He played the game for about 45 minutes, trying to see if it got any better, but it was just a bad game through and through.
Are you saying he didn't deserve his money back? He was thoroughly unsatisfied with his purchase to the point of bitter disappointment. Why shouldn't he have been allowed to return that game? Should the company keep his money for a video game he didn't enjoy or even keep playing?
No. it isn't.
Your mentality is different, but, it doesn't make the OP wrong in any shape or form.
If he doesn't feel he got the value for his money, why should he just accept the product? If Cryptic is not willing to give any unsatified customer they're money back, then that customer has the right to go to there card holder and say "this isn't what I wanted".
Just like any other business based mostly on accepting the terms & conditions of credit cards.
See, when I went over this same thing about Mortal Online, everyone said, OH it was in beta, it wasn't released, etc. etc. and you know what? they had a point, the game wasn't released, they just made a bad decision, but the developers were too stupid to cover their ass or be responsible. Now heres a released game, stable, with most people having box in hand, or special items in game already or whatever, and they don't like it so they want their money back. I stand firm on the fact that this is ridiculously childish. I just disputed something on my credit card yesterday, and going through the dispute reasons with the credit card company "I didn't like it" wasn't one of the choices I was able to choose for dispute.
Thats all this ends up being, and if you had any sense at all, you wouldn't buy the game on release if you were going to just turn tail and give up because its not to your liking. Going through the credit card company is also extremely cowardly. Most of the time, and even cryptic has in the past, had their customer support refund charges based on customer dissatisfaction. If you spoke with them and told them you were considering disputing the charge due to false advertising, they would've probably given your money back as they did for players of champions online.
Instead you go straight to the credit card company, and I honestly hope cryptic disputes those charges.
My roommate once bought a video game that we had been waiting years for. We greatly enjoyed the last game of the series, and we were waiting for this game with baited breath. He bought the game on release day, it cost him $65 or so. He brought it home where we all crowded around his computer as he installed it and booted that game up for the first time.
And it turned out that that game, Master of Orion 4, was utter and complete crap. My roommate was pretty much heart-broken. He played the game for about 45 minutes, trying to see if it got any better, but it was just a bad game through and through.
Are you saying he didn't deserve his money back? He was thoroughly unsatisfied with his purchase to the point of bitter disappointment. Why shouldn't he have been allowed to return that game? Should the company keep his money for a video game he didn't enjoy or even keep playing?
No I think he deserved his money back. 45 minutes isn't nearly that long, if he wasn't satisfied in 45 minutes then I do think he should have contacted the original seller or the company for a refund.
I'm talking about an extensive period of time that users play these games to decide they don't like it... I tried to explain it in later posts.
So, you're issue is more w/ the morality of it. Which is fine. I don't think anyone should ever be "stuck" with something they feel is subpar to what they were sold on. Regardless of what they did or did not "read". That's my opinion.
But ---
You're spreading falsities here. The Issuing Bank does not give the consumer the money back before the outcome is determined. I work at a merchant service provider. I know. The money is held in limbo by the processor (the merchant's service provider that processes the card, but cannot impend or restrict the Issuing Bank's decision) until adjudication. Most Issuing Banks give 4 weeks, or 20 Business days for the Merchant (Cryptic) to respond.
But, again, you're either not informed, making things up, or trying to scare others w/ misinformation. The Customer is nearly 100% protected in a chargeback case. The worst that can happen is they lose (and likely can't shop w/ the same CC and personal info at the merchant). No extra fees, no smudge on their credit, no black list w/ credit card companies.
So, you're issue is more w/ the morality of it. Which is fine. I don't think anyone should ever be "stuck" with something they feel is subpar to what they were sold on. Regardless of what they did or did not "read". That's my opinion.
But ---
You're spreading falsities here. The Issuing Bank does not give the consumer the money back before the outcome is determined. I work at a merchant service provider. I know. The money is held in limbo by the processor (the merchant's service provider that processes the card, but cannot impend or restrict the Issuing Bank's decision) until adjudication. Most Issuing Banks give 4 weeks, or 20 Business days for the Merchant (Cryptic) to respond.
But, again, you're either not informed, making things up, or trying to scare others w/ misinformation. The Customer is nearly 100% protected in a chargeback case. The worst that can happen is they lose (and likely can't shop w/ the same CC and personal info at the merchant). No extra fees, no smudge on their credit, no black list w/ credit card companies.
Not spreading falsities or do I care where you pretend to work.
I had an issue with a fradulent charge from a web-site. I contacted my bank. They gave me the money back instantly while they were investigating it. I could use that money, it was in no state of limbo at any point.
At some point along the investigation the website convinced the bank the charge was valid. The Bank then sided with the website and removed the money back from my account (was over a month later).
You are misinformed and think you know more then you do.
So to reiterate:
Most banks/CC companies will instantly give the money back while investigating.
Later when the investigation is finished the bank/CC company can retake the money/recharge the account.
The bank/CC company never has to tell you when it sided with the company or you. It also is not required to give you an explanation of why.
morals of this story.
DO NOT PREORDER & DO NOT BUY BEFORE YOU TRY
will save you alot of hassles.
What about all those naive Star Trek fans who've never played an MMO before and then seeing all the fanboy rantings of how this game would be the next reincarnation of Gene Roddenberry? (i.e. STOked podcast, I've even seen reviews on YouTube talking about how awesome STO would be.)
What about all those naive Star Trek fans who've never played an MMO before and then seeing all the fanboy rantings of how this game would be the next reincarnation of Gene Roddenberry? (i.e. STOked podcast, I've even seen reviews on YouTube talking about how awesome STO would be.)
Again...Knowledge is power...evolution..the food chain will weed out the weak...I just like to watch and laugh.
It's better to lurk in forums and be thought a fool...than to endlessly "Quote" and remove all doubts.
The best way of getting your money back is dont rushing to spend it on any mmorpg that comes out but instead waiting a little and see how it develops.
Are you saying he didn't deserve his money back?
He absolutely did NOT deserve a refund.
After you crack the seal it is yours period. Do you really believe this is how the world works? That if you don't like a video game for whatever reason after playing it that you are entitled to a refund? If you really think the answer is yes you had very bad parenting and you will probably make less than $150,000 a year.
lol @ you.
What I don't like about your plan is the fall back that will hit consumers, if to many people act in the manner you are. When ever the consumer finds a way to cheat the system, which that is what you are doing. It comes back to bite the rest of us in the ass. Inflation of prices and stupid regulations, are what result from this type of action. In trying to "get what's yours" you risk making things tougher for everyone.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
...like they may start charging for content gaps, instead of releasing small amounts of new content on a semi-regular basis?
... oh wait. CO: Viboria Bay. To late, they're already mistreating their player base.
I think all in all people just wait for a trial to play the game to see if you like it. It will save you alot ot bank hasssle, typing here, and possible breaking of one of the 10 commandments! LOL!
(DDDDDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to Cpt Kirk!)
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes