If I buy a video card today for $100. It gets 100fps in the game I like. Tomorrow a new video card comes out that gets 200fps and the price of the card I bought yesterday drops to $50. That's just my bad, but the card still gets 100fps in the game I like. I still got what I paid for.
Now let's try again.
I buy a video card today for $100. It gets 100fps in the game I like. Tomorrow a new video card comes out for $150 and gets 200fps in the game I like. The price of the card I bought yesterday still drops to $50. I go home and for some reason my card is only getting 50fps instead of 100fps! They sabotaged my card! I bought something that gets 100fps, and now it only does 50. It's broken! Even if the law doesn't permit it, morally I should be able to get a full refund.
In this case you are presenting from the "wronged" person's point of view. They went in thinking that their card would consistently get 100fps, when they shouldn't expect that. If you bought something from the auction house you should expect Blizzard to make balancing changes to the game. Thus your product will fluctuate on performance.
EDIT: That also being said, I'm not sure about the RMAH but the regular auction house all the really expensive items aren't even that good. You can usually get something that isn't Legendary or whatever that is far more effective. So you could either buy the cheaper product and get more for your money or buy the fancy vase that doesn't server any purpose.
If a card gets 100fps today and gets 50fps tomorrow under the same conditions, that is a broken card. If you buy a car with 200 horsepower and it suddenly drops to 100 horsepower, that is a broken car that needs fixing. If the manufacturer or car dealer intentionally sabotaged the product to decrease in performance without that being known at the time of purchase, that is a scam.
If Blizzard needs to fix the balance in their game, they are allowed to do that. But if they sold a specific item with specific stats for cash, then the stats on that item can not change, or they should give full refunds to anyone who purchased that item. If they need to rebalance an item they sold for real money, they can do that by making bad guys harder, but it is wrong to change the stats on the item.
It's really a case of false advertising. Buy this doohickey! It has 1000 thingamabobs. Oh you bought it? Just kidding, only 500 thingamabobs. HAHAHA no refunds.
Assuming you do rule that Blizzard owes the subscriber restitution, do you base that on the service fee Blizzard charged that customer... (for the purchaser... $0), or do you base it on the balance transferred to the other customer (the full amount minus the $1 service fee).
Would Blizzard be able to collect damages against the people that created those transactions then?
15% of the "Blizzard Bucks" value gets sent to Paypal if they cash out... oy...
This is messy...
Also...
If attack speed was a rating instead of a percentage, and they kept the rating but increased the effective amount of rating to get to a particular percentage speed increase... would that still count? You still have an item with the same rating? Is it the effectiveness that counts? In which case you would broaden the lawsuit to encompass a much larger variety of things. Any change of circumstances...
Someone won an Xbox from a competition. That person sold you the Xbox brand new on eBay. You paid for it knowing there is a chance half the games for it will sometimes work. You get it, half the games don't work. You want to sue Microsoft. The other guy is the one with your money.
Yeah this is a tricky situation. Weapons that were previously worth 100-200$ because it had ias are now barely worth 20$. I can see how it made a lot of people angry.
Someone won an Xbox from a competition. That person sold you the Xbox brand new on eBay. You paid for it knowing there is a chance half the games for it will sometimes work. You get it, half the games don't work. You want to sue Microsoft. The other guy is the one with your money.
What? How/why do I know half the games might not work?
What? How/why do I know half the games might not work?
I think he's trying to say that items in these settings have a random value from day to day, patch to patch, as things changing is relatively inherent to the medium. I'm not sure if that's right or relevant here though... it's all very weird.
If Blizzard needs to fix the balance in their game, they are allowed to do that. But if they sold a specific item with specific stats for cash, then the stats on that item can not change, or they should give full refunds to anyone who purchased that item. If they need to rebalance an item they sold for real money, they can do that by making bad guys harder, but it is wrong to change the stats on the item.
While I do think that there are real legal concerns here, there are a couple of important mitigating factors. For one thing, Blizzard themselves aren't the ones "selling" the item, though they do collect a 15% fee. Secondly, I'd guess that Blizzard makes it clear somewhere that you're not really buying an "item" but some set of limited rights and permissions, and that it's implicit in what an "item" is that the stats are subject to change.
Though I don't think these things excuse Blizzard entirely, they are still important.
Someone won an Xbox from a competition. That person sold you the Xbox brand new on eBay. You paid for it knowing there is a chance half the games for it will sometimes work. You get it, half the games don't work. You want to sue Microsoft. The other guy is the one with your money.
What? How/why do I know half the games might not work?
Lets say it's in the fine print. Also:
OWNERSHIP OF LOOT. YOU AGREE THAT: Blizzard owns or has the right to use all of the Loot, as well as all of the characters and content that appears in Diablo. You do not own any of the Loot, characters, or other content that appears in Diablo, and that you have no right or title in or to any of the Loot (other than any license to use any Loot granted to you by Blizzard, which may be revoked by Blizzard at any time), Diablo, or your Account. You are not allowed to sell, trade or somehow transfer Loot, characters, or any other Diablo content outside of Diablo or the Auction House.
You mean $1. Blizzard collects $1 on each transaction. The 15% is the paypal transaction fee to cash out.
No, it isn't that either; the 15% is the transaction fee fee on commodities - I misread this page So, in this case, the relevant fee is indeed $1 as that's the item transaction fee.
If Blizzard needs to fix the balance in their game, they are allowed to do that. But if they sold a specific item with specific stats for cash, then the stats on that item can not change, or they should give full refunds to anyone who purchased that item. If they need to rebalance an item they sold for real money, they can do that by making bad guys harder, but it is wrong to change the stats on the item.
While I do think that there are real legal concerns here, there are a couple of important mitigating factors. For one thing, Blizzard themselves aren't the ones "selling" the item, though they do collect a 15% fee. Secondly, I'd guess that Blizzard makes it clear somewhere that you're not really buying an "item" but some set of limited rights and permissions, and that it's implicit in what an "item" is that the stats are subject to change.
Though I don't think these things excuse Blizzard entirely, they are still important.
Oh, that does make it more interesting. Blizzard is more like a retailer, not the seller. But it's even weirder because they are also in complete control of the item. Even though it is a silly matter to have a legal battle over a digital item, it is a new scenario that needs to be figured out.
The question is simply whether that EULA would actually hold up in court or not.
There is the fundamental questions of whether EULAs hold up or not, but I suspect that question will not be answered here. Instead they will answer all sorts of other questions pertaining to particular clauses in the EULA and not answer the question of EULAs in general.
Even without the EULA, the argument could be made that you're not actually "trading" anything... since they're just switching a couple bits about which inventory slots out of all the inventory slots possesses a thing. That's another part I'm curious about... and don't expect to see solved quite yet.
Even without the EULA, the argument could be made that you're not actually "trading" anything... since they're just switching a couple bits about which inventory slots out of all the inventory slots possesses a thing. That's another part I'm curious about... and don't expect to see solved quite yet.
Even if you aren't trading any physical goods, you are still paying money. If you pay money, that is commerce which can be regulated by the government.
Even if you aren't trading any physical goods, you are still paying money. If you pay money, that is commerce which can be regulated by the government.
In that context, you're somewhat in the Paypal situation. If all you do is allow people to transfer funds, and take a nominal transaction fee...
Now that it can be regulated... I don't think anyone is arguing that it can't.
Even if you aren't trading any physical goods, you are still paying money. If you pay money, that is commerce which can be regulated by the government.
In that context, you're somewhat in the Paypal situation. If all you do is allow people to transfer funds, and take a nominal transaction fee...
Now that it can be regulated... I don't think anyone is arguing that it can't.
They're not the same as Paypal. Even though they are faciliating the financial transaction, they also have the role of being in completely control of the "goods".
Oops, I somehow accidentally originally put this as an edit on Creamsteak's post. Don't know how that happened. Let me know if I broke your post.
This is very weird.
Party A = Blizzard Party B = Seller Party C = Buyer
A runs a database. They have complete control over it. B and C both pay A for limited access to the database. A sets up a system whereby C can pay B with effectively real money, A will take a cut, and then bits in the database will change in a particular way. After this transaction A goes and changes the bits further. If knowledge of that further change had been present beforehand, C would not have agreed to the transaction.
What is there to say, prevent Blizzard from creating tons of OP items to make them sell like crazy (so they get mega rich) and then nerfing them. It might only work a few times, boy who cried wolf. But if this situation is allowed, then that situation is also allowed. And if we have learned anything it's that you can abuse your players like that repeatedly, and only a hardcore minority will care. Tons of people will still play the game, and Blizzard will still make bank.
1. Damaging gear for hits vs. death: penalizes the melee classes, who are going to get hit by definition. That doesn't mean they have less "skill" -- that is the nature of their character. So when they hike up repair costs, ranged classes gain the advantage of having to repair less frequently (thus less cost), based on ideal play of not dying.
2. Skill vs. gear: Try playing with broken gear. You can't. You need at least decent gear, as well as knowing how to utilize your class' abilities and passives in a manner corresponding to your play style.
3. Grinding for gear: D3 doesn't have grinding for gear. It has grinding for loot to auction and $ to buy gear. Most items I pick up are fail. Also you tend to level faster than the drops, which means you'll generally be undergeared relying on drops.
4. Paying money for gear vs. "gold": The people selling good gear are most likely farming Inferno, and satisfied with their own gear. It's possible that they will begin selling good gear only on the RMAH, since they have no need for "gold". Seeing as I am currently unable to survive Inferno long enough to make up for repair costs (I have mid-range level 51-60 gear), I am gold farming Hell & relying on the AH as my ticket to Inferno.
I've been thinking about recouping the $60 on RMAH and then being done with it, until they iron out all this nonsense and the carpet doesn't keep being pulled from under my feet.
You know what solves this entire debate? Don't have RMAH. But at the same time they do have a valid reason for having such a feature and I commend them for trying a new approach within the realm of gaming.
I don't think they actually have a valid reason for it except to make money.
I think the way they rationalize it to themselves it is that if they don't make the money, then Chinese gold farmers will make the money. And them making money is better, safer, and more reliable than players sending their money to shady places.
The fact is that they could easily solve this problem. Make it impossible to exchange items with other players. Another option would be to make it so as you play all the loot that drops is actually useful to you and of appropriate strength. It would be trivially simple to code the game to do that. The fact that they do not do these things is absolute proof that yes, they are just greedy.
I don't think they actually have a valid reason for it except to make money.
And pay to run the servers, patch the game, etc?
Starcraft, Diablo 2, Starcraft 2, and tons of other games by other companies have existed over the years that have all received patches and had servers without charging any fees beyond the initial cost of the game.
They could also just let people run their own servers, like Counter-Strike. It's a deliberate choice to not do these things and choose a path of psychologically exploiting the players for greater profits.
Comments
If Blizzard needs to fix the balance in their game, they are allowed to do that. But if they sold a specific item with specific stats for cash, then the stats on that item can not change, or they should give full refunds to anyone who purchased that item. If they need to rebalance an item they sold for real money, they can do that by making bad guys harder, but it is wrong to change the stats on the item.
It's really a case of false advertising. Buy this doohickey! It has 1000 thingamabobs. Oh you bought it? Just kidding, only 500 thingamabobs. HAHAHA no refunds.
Would Blizzard be able to collect damages against the people that created those transactions then?
15% of the "Blizzard Bucks" value gets sent to Paypal if they cash out... oy...
This is messy...
Also...
If attack speed was a rating instead of a percentage, and they kept the rating but increased the effective amount of rating to get to a particular percentage speed increase... would that still count? You still have an item with the same rating? Is it the effectiveness that counts? In which case you would broaden the lawsuit to encompass a much larger variety of things. Any change of circumstances...
For one thing, Blizzard themselves aren't the ones "selling" the item, though they do collect a 15% fee.
Secondly, I'd guess that Blizzard makes it clear somewhere that you're not really buying an "item" but some set of limited rights and permissions, and that it's implicit in what an "item" is that the stats are subject to change.
Though I don't think these things excuse Blizzard entirely, they are still important.
There's also something to be pointed out that you're not even dealing with real money, but Blizzard Bucks up until you cash out with Paypal.
Also:
So, in this case, the relevant fee is indeed $1 as that's the item transaction fee.
And commodity RMAH transactions are still not enabled.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/06/13/why-diablo-3s-real-money-auction-house-should-not-be-your-summer-job-2/
Now that it can be regulated... I don't think anyone is arguing that it can't.
This is very weird.
Party A = Blizzard
Party B = Seller
Party C = Buyer
A runs a database. They have complete control over it. B and C both pay A for limited access to the database. A sets up a system whereby C can pay B with effectively real money, A will take a cut, and then bits in the database will change in a particular way. After this transaction A goes and changes the bits further. If knowledge of that further change had been present beforehand, C would not have agreed to the transaction.
What is there to say, prevent Blizzard from creating tons of OP items to make them sell like crazy (so they get mega rich) and then nerfing them. It might only work a few times, boy who cried wolf. But if this situation is allowed, then that situation is also allowed. And if we have learned anything it's that you can abuse your players like that repeatedly, and only a hardcore minority will care. Tons of people will still play the game, and Blizzard will still make bank.
1. Damaging gear for hits vs. death: penalizes the melee classes, who are going to get hit by definition. That doesn't mean they have less "skill" -- that is the nature of their character. So when they hike up repair costs, ranged classes gain the advantage of having to repair less frequently (thus less cost), based on ideal play of not dying.
2. Skill vs. gear: Try playing with broken gear. You can't. You need at least decent gear, as well as knowing how to utilize your class' abilities and passives in a manner corresponding to your play style.
3. Grinding for gear: D3 doesn't have grinding for gear. It has grinding for loot to auction and $ to buy gear. Most items I pick up are fail. Also you tend to level faster than the drops, which means you'll generally be undergeared relying on drops.
4. Paying money for gear vs. "gold": The people selling good gear are most likely farming Inferno, and satisfied with their own gear. It's possible that they will begin selling good gear only on the RMAH, since they have no need for "gold". Seeing as I am currently unable to survive Inferno long enough to make up for repair costs (I have mid-range level 51-60 gear), I am gold farming Hell & relying on the AH as my ticket to Inferno.
I've been thinking about recouping the $60 on RMAH and then being done with it, until they iron out all this nonsense and the carpet doesn't keep being pulled from under my feet.
The fact is that they could easily solve this problem. Make it impossible to exchange items with other players. Another option would be to make it so as you play all the loot that drops is actually useful to you and of appropriate strength. It would be trivially simple to code the game to do that. The fact that they do not do these things is absolute proof that yes, they are just greedy.
They could also just let people run their own servers, like Counter-Strike. It's a deliberate choice to not do these things and choose a path of psychologically exploiting the players for greater profits.