test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Compensation

1356

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    And yet you believe I shouldn't recieve it?

    I don't support Pre-order and LTS people getting compensation either, no. Nor do I believe it is correct to do so, given your transactions have been completed and satisfied to the fullest.
    Where exactly have they said this? O is this another "inference" out of thin air?

    They said it when we went through this routine the last time. They're not going to give people money for their pre-order and LTS bonuses. Go look up the threads.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    I don't support Pre-order and LTS people getting compensation either, no. Nor do I believe it is correct to do so, given your transactions have been completed and satisfied to the fullest.



    They said it when we went through this routine the last time. They're not going to give people money for their pre-order and LTS bonuses. Go look up the threads.

    Last time?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Last time?

    Yeah, when the pre-orders and the mirror universe uniforms came to the C-store. There was a huge debate. You were part of it. It ended with the Devs saying they were not compensating people because they consider the items bonuses in addition to the purchases, not part of the purchases.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    Yeah, when the pre-orders and the mirror universe uniforms came to the C-store. There was a huge debate. You were part of it. It ended with the Devs saying they were not compensating people because they consider the items bonuses in addition to the purchases, not part of the purchases.

    The Galaxy X wasn´t part of a purchase either, it was a free gift. :)

    I also like to point out the funny fact that the word gift means poison in german. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Ashur1 wrote:
    The Galaxy X wasn´t part of a purchase either, it was a free gift. :)

    I also like to point out the funny fact that the word gift means poison in german. :D

    Exactly my point, thank you.

    Btw, really?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Exactly my point, thank you.

    Btw, really?

    Yes, since i am german i should know...on the other hand....the cannon/canon issue comes to mind. :)

    It´s even pronounced the same.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:

    They have. Repeatedly. The answer is "no."

    Cpt.William2 have you looked up the other threads to find out what the answer was?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Ashur1 wrote:
    The Galaxy X wasn´t part of a purchase either, it was a free gift. :)

    Not really, when you actually think about it. The transaction in the case of the Gal X was specifically for the Gal X. The transaction in the case of an LTS was for the LTS, not the Lib Borg.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    Not really, when you actually think about it. The transaction in the case of the Gal X was specifically for the Gal X. The transaction in the case of an LTS was for the LTS, not the Lib Borg.

    I thought the transaction was about loosing 5 friends.... err i mean getting 5 friends to play the game ? :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cpt.William2 have you looked up the other threads to find out what the answer was?

    There are thousands, possibly millions of threads on the forums, and most likely around a few hundred dealing with the C-Store, it would take a long time to search through all of them for a Dev post regarding it. And considering I was involved with many of them during the debate, I don't recall ever seeing the Dev's address this.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    Not really, when you actually think about it. The transaction in the case of the Gal X was specifically for the Gal X. The transaction in the case of an LTS was for the LTS, not the Lib Borg.

    No, the transaction was between the 5 friends and Cryptic, the gifts were all free. As the Dev's pointed out, the Gal-X was just a gift, just like the pre-orders were just a gift, but recieve no compensation.



    (Sorry for Double Post)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    No, the transaction was between the 5 friends and Cryptic, the gifts were all free. As the Dev's pointed out, the Gal-X was just a gift, just like the pre-orders were just a gift, but recieve no compensation.



    (Sorry for Double Post)

    There was a separate series of transactions between the five friends and Cryptic.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    krako wrote: »
    I bought all of the 'exclusives' you mentioned, and feel I am owed no compensation from Cryptic.

    I understood fully - at the time I purchased those pre-order items - that their 'exclusive' nature was limited to the ability to have early access to them. I'm sorry that others did not comprehend this.


    Quoted for truth and likewise. Now now please lock this thread as it has been done ad nauseam elsewhere.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    There was a separate series of transactions between the five friends and Cryptic.

    Then technically, everything was free for the RAF, the CP, the Galaxy-X, the Holo Boff, the Holo Tribble, and the Titles, were all absolutely free. So, they should have been owed nothing, they paid nothing, Cryptic gave it to them. But no, Cryptic gave them compensation, they should give the rest of us compensation.
    krako wrote: »
    I bought all of the 'exclusives' you mentioned, and feel I am owed no compensation from Cryptic.

    I understood fully - at the time I purchased those pre-order items - that their 'exclusive' nature was limited to the ability to have early access to them. I'm sorry that others did not comprehend this.

    Good for you, I used my experiences with other companies (exclusives staying exclusive) to deal with Cryptic. Unfortunately, Cryptic is the only company I have ever dealt with that has called it "Exclusive" then changed it several months later.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Then technically, everything was free for the RAF, the CP, the Galaxy-X, the Holo Boff, the Holo Tribble, and the Titles, were all absolutely free. So, they should have been owed nothing, they paid nothing, Cryptic gave it to them. But no, Cryptic gave them compensation, they should give the rest of us compensation.

    Two wrongs don't make a right. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    Two wrongs don't make a right. :)

    Sometimes they do. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Sometimes they do. :D

    Not this time. :cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    Not this time. :cool:

    Absolutely this time, you mistakenly offer one person compensation, you offer it to everyone. :cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Absolutely this time, you mistakenly offer one person compensation, you offer it to everyone. :cool:

    I can't imagine why you would do that. Particularly when the situations were different.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Now one thing to keep in mind is that Crypitc made it plain in their Pre-Order FAQ that these items would eventually show up in the C-Store, so there were never any claims that these items would remain 'exclusive' for life.

    Plus there is this little bit of legalese in the 'Terms of Use' Statement...
    10. Ownership/Selling of the Account or Virtual Items. Cryptic does not recognize the transfer of Accounts. You may not purchase, sell, gift or trade any Account, or offer to purchase, sell, gift or trade any Account, and any such attempt shall be null and void. Cryptic owns, has licensed, or otherwise has rights to all of the content that appears in the Game. You agree that you have no right or title in or to any such content, including the virtual goods or currency appearing or originating in the Game, Cryptic Points or any other attributes associated with the Account or stored on the Service ("Game Assets"). Cryptic does not recognize any Game Assets transfers executed outside of the Game or the purported sale, gift or trade in the "real world" of anything related to the Game. Accordingly, you may not sell Game Assets for "real" money or otherwise exchange items for value outside of the Game. Any such sale or exchange is a material breach of this Agreement for which Cryptic may (but is not obligated to) immediately suspend or terminate your account.

    * YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO CLAIM, RIGHT, TITLE, PROPRIETARY OR OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN ANY OF THE GAME ASSETS REGARDLESS OF ANY CONSIDERATION OFFERED OR PAID IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE GAME ASSETS; AND
    * CRYPTIC SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER FOR THE DESTRUCTION, DELETION, MODIFICATION, IMPAIRMENT, HACKING OF OR ANY OTHER DAMAGE OR LOSS OF ANY KIND CAUSED TO ANY OF THE GAME ASSETS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DELETION OF GAME ASSETS UPON THE TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT.
    So its difficult to make claims of 'exclusive' ownership of a in-game item, when you never had legal ownership to begin with... And lets face the facts here. People purchased multiple retail copies of STO, not because they wanted to 'invest' in a feature that could increase in value over time. They bought them (just like I did) so that they could play with their toys early instead of waiting for them to become available by some other means...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    I can't imagine why you would do that. Particularly when the situations were different.

    Only slight differences.

    Essentially:

    Person A got Reward X. Reward X given Away, gets CP

    Person B got Reward Y. Reward Y given away, should get CP
    Now one thing to keep in mind is that Crypitc made it plain in their Pre-Order FAQ that these items would eventually show up in the C-Store, so there were never any claims that these items would remain 'exclusive' for life.

    Plus there is this little bit of legalese in the 'Terms of Use' Statement...

    So its difficult to make claims of 'exclusive' ownership of a in-game item, when you never had legal ownership to begin with... And lets face the facts here. People purchased multiple retail copies of STO, not because they wanted to 'invest' in a feature that could increase in value over time. They bought them (just like I did) so that they could play with their toys early instead of waiting for them to become available by some other means...

    Okay, then why were the RAFers given compensation? Many of us, including me, didn't buy them to "play with them early", I bought them to get a feature I figured would remain exclsuive, based on my experience with every other game I have ever played and the most successful MMO ever, WOW.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I told the Dev this would happen, the trolls cometh.

    We're not trolls, we are the Landing Party. You are hereby permitted to kill the red-shirted member of the group before we vaporize you, steal your resources, take your women and bombard this thread from orbit.

    Scotty, 6 to... I mean 5 to beam up.

    :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    DES_SNIPER wrote: »
    I do not have a problem with Pre-Order items placed in the C-Store. I look at it as, hey I got the item for free with purchse while everyone else has to pay for it.

    MY BEEF is with the fact that not all PRE-ORDER items were placed in the C-Store.

    1) Automated Defense Turrent
    2) Redmatter Capacitor
    3) TR-116 Carbine
    4)...Cant recall off hand....BO I think....

    Anyway, I think it is only fair that if you place SOME Pre-Order items in the C-Store, YOU HAVE TO PLACE THEM ALL!

    Redmatter Capacitor was not a preorder item it comes with the collectors edition.

    Atari is selling the CE for $29.99.

    http://www.atari.com/games/startrek_online_collectors_ed/dvd_rom

    The Automated Defense Turret is not a preorder either it comes with the DDE.

    Atari has that up for $29.99 also.

    http://www.atari.com/games/startrek_online_digital_deluxe_ed/download
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Only slight differences.

    Essentially:

    Person A got Reward X. Reward X given Away, gets CP

    Person B got Reward Y. Reward Y given away, should get CP

    The difference is not that one side got compensation, or that something was "given away", as nothing has been given away.

    The difference is that one person was in the middle of a transaction when the rules changed and the other person had long since completed their transaction.

    As a result, Cryptic chose to make it possible for the first person to complete the transaction with the new rules as well as the old.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    The difference is not that one side got compensation, or that something was "given away", as nothing has been given away.

    The difference is that one person was in the middle of a transaction when the rules changed and the other person had long since completed their transaction.

    As a result, Cryptic chose to make it possible for the first person to complete the transaction with the new rules as well as the old.

    If that were the case only $25 would have been given they were given twice that, as compensation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If that were the case only $25 would have been given they were given twice that, as compensation.

    There is no way to confirm that.

    There is no getting around the fact that one person was in the middle of a transaction and the other's was completed. That is the primary difference here.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    There is no way to confirm that.

    There is no getting around the fact that one person was in the middle of a transaction and the other's was completed. That is the primary difference here.

    Just like there is no way to confirm much of your argument. That is why they are OPINIONS.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Just like there is no way to confirm much of your argument. That is why they are OPINIONS.

    I am not the one arguing to be given something I am not owed. The burden of proof is upon you.

    You first argued that the reason you deserved compensation was because you lost something. You then admitted you did not lose anything, which means you concede your argument does not hold water.

    Then you changed tactics to argue that you deserve compensation because other people received compensation, citing the situations were equal. I have demonstrated they are not equal. You have even agreed that they are not equivalent.

    Those are facts. As such, in my opinion, since you're so obsessed with differentiating between the two, you have failed to prove your case.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    LotD wrote:
    I am not the one arguing to be given something I am not owed. The burden of proof is upon you.

    You first argued that the reason you deserved compensation was because you lost something. You then admitted you did not lose anything, which means you concede your argument does not hold water.

    Then you changed tactics to argue that you deserve compensation because other people received compensation, citing the situations were equal. I have demonstrated they are not equal. You have even agreed that they are not equivalent.

    Those are facts. As such, in my opinion, since you're so obsessed with differentiating between the two, you have failed to prove your case.

    My phrasing of lost was in the sense that it "lost exclusivity" just as the RAFers lost there lost exclusivity.

    You have offered arguments predicated on what the developers intended. When asked where, you stated they were inferences. All of your arguments are based on your opinion, no fact, therefore your argument holds no water. Therefore, you have proven nothing.

    I am not the one trying to make every one who has an opinion or idea shut up, simply because I disagree. Believe me, I am trying to be as patient as possible, but communicating my opinions to people who always see other as wrong can be very frustrating. My constant changing of "tactics" is for the purpose of arguing an idea through words more effectively.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    My phrasing of lost was in the sense that it "lost exclusivity" just as the RAFers lost there lost exclusivity.

    You have offered arguments predicated on what the developers intended. When asked where, you stated they were inferences. All of your arguments are based on your opinion, no fact, therefore your argument holds no water. Therefore, you have proven nothing.

    I am not the one trying to make every one who has an opinion or idea shut up, simply because I disagree. Believe me, I am trying to be as patient as possible, but communicating my opinions to people who always see other as wrong can be very frustrating. My constant changing of "tactics" is for the purpose of arguing an idea through words more effectively.

    *sigh* Why do you always assume that someone disagreeing with you is trying to make you shut up? Did I ever tell you to shut up?

    Have I not continually engaged you with questions and explanations to determine your position, and given you opportunities to present evidence in favor of your argument? Every single time I debate you, you conflate facts with opinions and then tell me I'm attempting to belittle you or shut you up. If I wanted to belittle you, I would call you names. If I wanted to shut you up, I'd report you for making a duplicate thread on a settled issue. I have done neither of those.

    As I said, the burden of proof is on you. You have offered two things to me as proof:

    1. That you have lost something, and that loss is a violation of your agreement with Cryptic.

    2. That Cryptic has treated you differently despite an equivalent situation.

    I have demonstrated that both are not true with facts, not opinions.

    Because you still have your item, you have not lost anything. At worst, your item has depreciated in value, which is the natural order of things and thereby not a violation of your agreement with Cryptic.

    Because one transaction was completed and the other was not, they are different situations. I gave you potential reasons why the developers chose to react differently to the different situations because you asked. That part is my opinion and I acknowledged as much, but that the situations are different is not. One is a completed transaction, one is not. That is not subject to either of our opinions.

    Now, if you have a #3 to provide, I am happy to hear it.
This discussion has been closed.