Jump to content

Rubarack

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

About Rubarack

  • Rank
    (2) Evoker
  1. Okay, you think there is value in what gold can be used to purchase but there's a clear line between things that cannot be purchased with gold and things that can. The former have value and the latter do not. Ultimately that's the entire point of this new system, allowing people to get valuable content for free was obviously a problem, but the inverse, not allowing people to get valuable content for their money is also a problem. That is definitely true. There's little worse after being aggrieved than people siding with the one who did the aggrieving. I don't think accommodating those different values is so difficult at all. It would have been far easier had they handled this well in the first place but offering an apology and restitution people who have purchased gold but not spent that much on gold or characters or adventures should do it. Ultimately caveat emptor runs both ways and making further expansions will be hard if their customers are working on that principle. At any rate I've gained whatever catharsis I can out of this situation and feel better about it. I'm no happier with Obsidian, that can really only happen if support end up helping but I don't feel nearly so bitter.
  2. You can still buy Treasure Chests, but they still have absolutely zero value. I'm curious why that's where you draw the line. If a store no longer honours gift vouchers that's a problem, but if they let you redeem them for wads of pre-chewed gum it's fine?
  3. So in your mind the fact I spent money and got nothing in return is not a grounds for complaint?
  4. I'm not convinced any of that is true. Most people here seem poitively delighted they burned mobile players. At this point they've proffered no support nor even a basic aploolgy for ripping off mobile purchasers. If support can help then yay, but even being proactive iwould have been damage control.
  5. Working with your example then I'm curious as to whether you think that's acceptible behaviour? First off I'll make a couple of changes because I think without one of them it would have caused city-wide riots and probably bring down the government. 1) Cubits in this case are somehow analogous to travellers checks. It's not applicable to people actually living there. 2) In this case (since it's the one thing you are prepared to accept as lamentable) they actually did place a post on their blog saying down to, lets say rampant forgery, travelers cubits are no longer accepted in stores. Travellers have one month to spend them, after which point they will no longer be accepted at all. Now in this scenario X% of travellers don't read the blog of the Caprica tourist blog. By some odd coincidence it's exactly the same % as don't read Obsidian's Pathfinder blog. That X% lose all the money they had in those travellers checks. Now I'd maintain that that X% is actually very high. Much too high to make this an acceptible response to the cancellation of those travellers cubits in that fashion.
  6. Maybe the rational response to being robbed is to pay your robber for your stuff back. But holy **** is that a weird response. Anyway it's still £24 on ios and no I couldn't. So.. buy it on steam and then link your accounts. And of course you can. Working is easy. I don't know your personal situation, but you seem to be able to operate a keyboard, so if all else fails, one can make money with writing. Work isn't easy, there's still that huge recession on. But especially earning 60 odd pound an hour is a trickier proposition. It's definitely handy to know it works cross buy, albeit only in the one direction.
  7. Maybe the rational response to being robbed is to pay your robber for your stuff back. But holy **** is that a weird response. Anyway it's still £24 on ios and no I couldn't.
  8. I have been reading your posts over the last few days, scratching my head, trying to figure out their logic. The best I can come up with is: You are a member of a secret society of time-travelling assassins, sent back to change the future by boring us all to death. You are so emotionally invested in being right you have now resorted to lying to try to "prove" your point. You did not pay for "items", you paid for gold. The gold is not "absolutely worthless": You can buy seven cards, eleven runes, and seven charms with it, plus the chests, from which you might obtain dozens (hundreds?) of items. Now, you may not *want* those things, but since the gold isn't worthless, this is not theft. The term you are looking for--if you wish to claim Obsidian was intending to cheat you with the change--is "bait-and-switch". If you wish to be particularly hostile, then you might even write "fraud". But it is not theft. Now that you have been proven wrong about the word, will you concede and change your tack? I doubt it, because at this point it's apparent you're more interested in the pleasure of your moral outrage than you are in actually getting what you originally wanted. Because instead of posting in multiple dormant threads, and trying to be right at all costs when you are demonstrably wrong, you could have saved yourself--and us!--a great deal of time by firing off a polite email to support explaining your circumstances and asking if they can convert your gold to the purchase you intended it for at the old gold prices. If they would not, then would be the time to post--in one thread!--here. The fact that you have not done this speaks volumes. If you do not want to be helped, that's your business. Just stop boring us already. If you're not interested in hearing about how Obsidian robbed me, maybe stop reading about it? Rather than reading about it and stretching yourself in absolute knots trying to come up with some description that doesn't make this equivalent to theft? Don't worry though, I'll not bore you further by explaining why being able to trade gold for useless trinkets doesn't change the situation. You know it, I know it, Obsidian know it and everyone reading it knows it. But you're right, I am more invested in the idea that Obsidian and their players realise stealing is wrong than to actually get back the few quid they stole. Though at the moment it's gone beyond that to flat out incredulity that people can convince themselves it isn't.
  9. Can you at least attempt to call a spade a spade here? Sure I have the gold I paid for but changing the terms of the deal so that gold has absolutely no purpose is fundamentally identical to theft. I had money, now I do not have it nor do I have the items I paid for. The money I spent is gone and I got nothing in return. I bought it at a lower price, they didn't give me anything for my money but I can now buy it at a higher price. Theft. Not "handling things poorly" not "miscommunicating price changes" most certainly not "losing the chance to buy at a lower price". Theft. Did they need to change their pricing strategy? Maybe. Is that in the least bit relevant? Nope.
  10. Then you're going to stop using the word "theft" now, correct? Obsidian had/has no way of knowing what you *intended* to use the fake money that you spent real money on. You're pissed that they didn't uphold their end of some bargain...a bargain that only exists in your head. The analogy of the gift card only makes sense if all sides agree to what the gift card was for. Clearly, you're upset and odds are that if I were in your shoes, I would be too. The bigger questions are thus: 1. What is it that you're trying to accomplish here? 2. Is your current course of action *really* the most productive way to make it happen? I, for one, am less inclined to be helpful when someone is acting belligerent toward me and/or accusing me of acting in bad faith when I am not. I have to imagine you're the same way (right?). So, again: really? No I'm not. Outside of supreme pedants the word "theft" describes what Obsidian did succinctly and with enough clarity for practically any English speaking person on the planet. The only reason I'd need to drop it is if I ended up as part of a class-action lawsuit but realistically no. I'm not expecting anything to happen here, people on the Internet aren't going to suddenly use logic and Obsidian aren't going to spontaneously develop a conscience. I'm airing a grievance and sans emotion "I don't approve of you robbing me" just sounds silly. Of course I don't approve of it. The question is "how much?" It's only a few quid after all. It's more a problem of the insult than the injury. I suppose the other point I'm trying to make is "don't support thieves just because they're pleasant and good artists but that's not something I seriously expect anyone to take on board. No-one ever thinks deeper than "Obsidian are goodies, so the things they do must be good"
  11. Really, so if I buy a gift card from a store and come in next week and they say they no longer honour gift cards that's fine because I still have the thing I bought? Legally speaking I recognise Obsidian scammed me rather than robbed me but you SURELY have to see how they feel almost indistinguishable.
  12. I think the fundamental problem Obsidian have with this is in how overproduced PACG is. You get a lot of cardboard for your 55 euros but precious little design.
  13. This literally kills me I'm not a fan of the misuse of literally to mean figuratively but don't you think you're stretching the bounds of pedantry to take issue with "taking money and not providing the promised goods" as being functionally equivalent to stealing?
×
×
  • Create New...