Refund everyone who bought an AA launcher

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by JonniTheJuicyJ, Dec 6, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Wasdie

    You waved your rights when you signed the EULA.

    Now if you whine loud enough SoE may give you a refund (I don't care), but they aren't legally obligated. Sony also makes SoE users to agree too an anti-class action law suit protecting them legally from class action lawsuits. They did this after the PS3 was hacked.

    You really signed all of your rights away. That's just how it is.
  2. Cyridius

    PS2 isn't a traditional MMO(Obviously).

    It's an FPS in gameplay mechanics and its weapons have to be balanced as such. As such, numbers matter far more than community feedback(Or NC would be buffed up to godlike status by now).
  3. failbot

    I think there should be some compensation for the people who bought either one(or both) of the lock on rockets if this change goes live.

    Is it their right to drastically change things? Yes.
    Is it fair and smart business? No.
    • Up x 2
  4. Flarestar

    You should probably read up on the history of SOE and their record on gameplay changes. You don't seem to be very familiar with them as a company, and the fact that what their devs tell you is pretty much idle commentary that can, and will, be overruled and invalidated on a regular basis.

    Edit - I should probably clarify this. I'm not saying that SOE is a bad company, or that they make bad games. On the contrary, I have far more love and devotion to their games than I do any other MMO developer out there except maybe CCP. It doesn't change the fact that I trust anything they tell their playerbase about as far as I could throw a whale on Jupiter.
  5. WilsonMG

  6. Wasdie

    I know the history of SoE, I also understand the nature of game companies. They are very dynamic and their personnel changes quite often. If the PS2 devs say they get a lot of their balance from metrics and stats (which this change is clearly a result of), that's how it is.

    You can continue to believe that what they say and what they do are going to be two completely different things, but from what I've seen throughout beta and now in launch says they are sticking to what they've been saying.

    I'm not saying you're wrong for believing that, because in the end it doesn't matter. I'm just saying for PS2 we've seen a lot more transparency than I've ever seen with game development so it's pretty safe to trust them on this.

    They may offer some sort of a refund system for this. I have no idea what they'll do. They have to implement the changes first. I still think people are just overreacting and are all doom and gloom with their crystal balls.
  7. SemperFi

    Removing the ability to dumbfire?!?!?!?
  8. MexelVanMexelen

    Tell me how many times you've died in your vehicle or as a grunt to a dumb fired lock on missile.

    You won't know for sure, I understand. But I would bet lots of SC that it's less than 10 even if you played since day 1 of tech test. It was simply not OP and there's no logical reason to remove it.
  9. MexelVanMexelen

    I simply bought something that worked as advertised. It had worked that way since day 1 of Tech Test. To simply remove it with no justification and no warning is silly and malicious of SOE. Dumb fire was in no way OP.
  10. Mechanought

    "My Anti-Air Weapon is actually an Anti-Air weapon. I want my money back."
  11. Telamon

    contracts are invalid if they violate the law
    which in the UK it apparently does
  12. Telamon

    they are arguing, what "i bought in the description is no longer what i have"
    • Up x 1
  13. Gogandantess

    ****, another vehicle buff? Do you know how hard it is going to be to defend against a mech army now? It is going to be ******* impossible. Just watch as the faction with the most resources steamrolls the opposition every time.
  14. Telamon

    just hide inside biolabs
    • Up x 1
  15. LittleBlackRainCloud

    It's not actually possible to waive rights, Eula or no. It's legal to be bound by contract as long as that contract does not counter the law. And my RIGHT to be fairly treated for the VALUE of the money I trade is PROTECTED.
  16. Mechanought

    The description of the ******* gun is it's title. AA LAUNCHER. AA ******* stands for "Anti-Air". Not "Anti-Air and maybe some infantry and tanks too".

    Their argument is mind-numbingly idiotic.
  17. Calaban

    Would it be fair and smart business to keep weapons how they are? Where is the line? Damage? Rate of fire? Lock on/dump fire mechanics?
    I agree that changes in weapons you just bought are hard to swallow but all those "REFUND!" cryers give me a headache. For me balancing this game (thus making it more fun to play) is just so much more important than not changing stuff like rocket pods or AA launcher in fear of the refund wave.
  18. RF404

    I would say that this statement sums up the problem with the G2A launcher pretty nicely.

    Where would you draw the line for who's entitled to a refund after they make a balance tweak?
    It will most likely be harder to stay alive in vehicles now that people like Deroth suddenly will start switching their G2A launchers for other launchers that are actually intended for and more effective at the G2G role they mainly use their launchers for.
    Would that make me too entitled to get a refund for the SC that I spent on my vehicle weapons?
  19. Telamon

    no downside of refunding station cash, customers are happy, soe keeps their money
  20. failbot

    The weapons are fine the way they are. The lock on requirement would make them too situational and basically useless. Especially the AV one, it's already pretty useless.

    If they advertised that this 500 SC camo will make you glow pink and shoot rainbows out of your *** and 2 weeks later they would remove the rainbows, would it be fair?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.