test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Tactical Marketing and False Advertising?
warbird001
Member Posts: 246 Arc User
I have noticed a specific pattern with Cryptic regarding new ships that I find somewhat disturbing.
Whenever a new ship is released via lockbox or the Z Store, the stats of that vessel are horrifically overpowered in order to make the vessel desirable. However a couple of months later, Cryptic preform a stealth nerf of the class which is rarely included in the patch notes and is only noticed by the player flying the ship, a few examples spring to mind...
- Atrox Carrier
- Akira Carrier
- Galaxy Retrofit...
What I have to ask is, why does Cryptic do this? I am sure that its "buyer's beware" in the US but in the UK, there are trade laws that prevent false advertising and misleading products. So why have Cryptic been allowed to get away with this for so long, especially if it involves the use of a real money to obtain zen?
I honestly thought, this kind of false advertising is illegal in most countries.
This is not a flame... just a question? Doesn't this leave Cryptic liable to be sued on grounds of false advertising. I know it does under EU trade laws, even if they are an American based company.
Whenever a new ship is released via lockbox or the Z Store, the stats of that vessel are horrifically overpowered in order to make the vessel desirable. However a couple of months later, Cryptic preform a stealth nerf of the class which is rarely included in the patch notes and is only noticed by the player flying the ship, a few examples spring to mind...
- Atrox Carrier
- Akira Carrier
- Galaxy Retrofit...
What I have to ask is, why does Cryptic do this? I am sure that its "buyer's beware" in the US but in the UK, there are trade laws that prevent false advertising and misleading products. So why have Cryptic been allowed to get away with this for so long, especially if it involves the use of a real money to obtain zen?
I honestly thought, this kind of false advertising is illegal in most countries.
This is not a flame... just a question? Doesn't this leave Cryptic liable to be sued on grounds of false advertising. I know it does under EU trade laws, even if they are an American based company.
Post edited by warbird001 on
0
Comments
Well first off I'd say they're protected by the whole "Cryptic has the right to change anything at any time" part of the ToS.
It's not really false advertising either. You got exactly what they said you were going to get when you bought it. Even if the stats change it's still the same ship, being sold for the same price.
I doubt that they're nerfing them for any nefarious purpose. They simply have nothing to gain by doing so. It's not like they nerf the Atrox and then offer a upgrade kit for it that costs Zen to buy.
No but one could argue that they are nerfing ships when they stop generating maximum income for Cryptic, once most people have bought the ship, they won't be generating maximum income from that ship anymore so they reduce it down again. Its rather underhanded, I think.
Plus if they have nothing to hide, why "stealth nerfs" and not including them in the patch notes?
I have always been buyer beware with stuff they sell, and everyone else should be too.
True but I doubt their TOS allows them to get away with out and out fraud which this is kinda close to, to be honest. They shouldn't be allowed to get away with these actions in the first place.
2) So long as Cryptic changes the descriptors in their marketplace to coincide with any changes made to a physical product, it's not false advertising.
3) EULA more than likely contains a "subject to change" clause.
4) They don't want things to challenge Lobi and Lockbox items so a few stupid people will expend absurd amounts of money to get their hands on "the bestest stuffs".
And what exactly do you think they gain by doing so? If you believe this is some sort of underhanded deal, then they must be gaining something out of it. So what exactly are they getting out of the deal?
Nerfing the ships isn't going to increase or decrease their profits. So what exactly is it you think they gain by doing so?
That may be true but its still technically fraud and its not ethically sound business practices either. They gain income from present ships as more powerful then they intend them to be in the future and then put the ship stats down when that ship isn't as popular anymore. So they are using that to gain profit.
Does nobody else see a problem with this level of exploitation?
You're making the quaint mistake that logic has anything to do with legal definitions.
That may be true however it is still incredibly shady and underhanded and really shows that Cryptic in a really bad light. Just because a piece of paper says they can exploit their customers doesn't make it right..
I'm sorry are you a lawyer? If so they perhaps you can make this claim, otherwise you really can't say if it's fraud or not, not by any sort of legal definition.
I see once more, this is nothing more then another of your "Cryptic is a bunch of puppy kicking, baby eating, evil beings" post. Honestly as much as you seem to hate STO and Cryptic why in the world are you even here?
There is a point where you have to sit back and realize you're playing a game.
When you get to the point where you are thinking about suing because they nerfed something in the game...you might need to take a break from the game.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
There is a line between trying to make an extra bit of money and blatant manipulation of their player base.
Shady and underhanded assumes that you know that they intended to exploit and deceive. Let's see you prove that legally. All you're doing is placing labels and interpreting intent without any proof of it. You talk about law, but you clearly don't understand how law works.
Also, most games with microtransactions are this way. This isn't just Cryptic. If you have a problem, then you need to address the industry trend as a whole.
I see a problem with buying ships just to be the bestest r0x0r. I buy ships for their design/slot layouts and those things never change. It's pretty naive to think any ship will forever stay the strongest in whatever capacity. If they don't nerf the ship, they'll instead release something new that is better. It's a video game and it happens all the time, in any actively developed game there is. Time for a reality check.
Of course, a warning outside of the TOS would be nice. Something on the description of the ship itself saying "this project is subject to change" but I guess you would argue you don't have to even do that.
Again with the labels and no substance. If you call what you're speaking common sense, I'd rather have LEGAL SENSE(you know...that kind of sense that might actually get something done?).
That's the sole reason most countries are so screwed up. Too much legal sense, not enough "common sense".
Ummmm...I'd actually say it's the opposite. There's too little sense about what the laws actually are which cause posts like these to pop up. You assume common sense == legal sense. I'm sorry, but your common sense isn't the only one out there, but laws apply to everyone in its jurisdiction.
(which by the way, boarders on the edge of Libel, also an illegally criminal offense.)
(EDIT to correct spelling)
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Uuummm.....I haven't noticed any nerfs, stealth or otherwise. Could you elaborate? As in what the nerfs were? Some of us don't really see it.
There are the initial adjustments (done in the first 3 or so weeks after the release) -- but that's come to be expected unfortunetly , as Cryptic QA is a ... , yeah .
However if they were doing this on purpose ...
Actually all the Fleet Ships could qualify as an "upgrade kit" ... -- and guess what , one that you (or someone else) has to use Zen to buy .
If the were doing this , they'd be playing on the simple notion that many players share : "I need a good T5 ship" , which to many translates to "I have to get the next best thing " .
It's unfortunate , but knowing how many "retired" Galors and Marauder's ppl own (but don't play with anymore) -- well , the latter notion certainly exists .
Which is why it is pointless to seek assurance of the legality or illegality of something in the game on the game's forums .
You will get neither expert advice , nor unbiased opinions .
If you have money to burn and evidence to back up your claims , go consult a lawyer . Consulting does not mean suing . It just often means torched money's .
Take a look at the last line in the promotional article :
http://sto.perfectworld.com/blog/?p=809331
Cryptic are more careful then they used to be .
But then again it could be argued that you are not obligated to read the commercial to buy on the Z-store .
So already we resort to ad hominid attacks. Because if anyone disagrees with you they're a fanboi, and can be disregarded. Every post you make is filled with various amounts of bile for Cryptic, it's clear you are one of the haters and come here and make these posts to take shots at Cryptic and STO.
Also as others have pointed out, accusing someone of Fraud is something that you can be sued over.
Yes because clearly only you are capable of such a thing... :rolleyes: I'd say you're one of those people who think you know how the law works. But I'm pretty sure you don't actually care, you just wanted to post more venom aimed at this game.
Everything in the game is subject to change, that is clearly laid out in more then one place. I'm not sure what part of everything you don't get.
Sure, but there's no Fleet Atrox. My point is that if they were nerfing ships like the Atrox, or Odyssey and then offering a retrofit for those ships in the c-store then perhaps there's a point to the OP's drivel.
If I'm not mistaken, the legal term you're trying to reference is Libel, IE: Defamation, not Liable, IE: Responsible.
My bad... early morning typing without checking my spelling, blues..
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
True , but it's only a matter of time IMHO .
Heck I might pick one up if there were one w/better stats . The damn thing's gorgeous !
I'm curious as well , as I'm not sure if the OP is talking about initial adjustments by Cryptic or adjustments done months down the line (once a ship no longer sells well) .
Nerfs and buffs for everything come and go in any game you play. Changing the stats of a ship cannot be considered fraud. Look at me and tell me I'm a Cryptic fanboi. *collective laughter*
Al Rivera hates Klingons
Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert
All cloaks should be canon.
Here however, I'm not sure where these nerfs are being applied(or when) to said ships. I own the Gal-X and it's terrible, but it was terrible when I bought it so....that's kind of on me. I don't own an Atrox so can't speak on that one. If we were talking about tangible goods here I imagine there would be a statute of limitations somewhere but doubt that applies to anything virtual.
Can you give any more details on this, like exact stats that were changed and when? Can we see a comparison?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
The o3 - Killed you good
I'm betting he has as much proof that the Atrox and other ships mentioned have been stealth nerfed, as that one guy who claimed that accolades passives were stealth nerfed.