Support NeoGAF

[erragal]

What are you even talking about? In what domain -- or where in the history of *this* domain -- can a pre-orderer not cancel her or his pre-order before the final product is released?

Because the pre-order was redeemed as a binding early access purchase creating a legal purchasing contract.

It's not a pre-order once you redeem the steam key. Why is that so challenging to understand?

The only spurious point of contention you're holding onto is the developer's sense of artistic integrity preventing them from calling the game 'officially released'. Semantics alone. It is a fully playable, enjoyable, reviewed product. It's already well within a publishable state.

Arguing on semantics is grasping at straws. Once more the individual -had- an opportunity for a refund if the nature of the pre-order fulfillment wasn't to their wishes -or- could have chosen to not redeem the code.

Show me where an unreseemed steam code isn't given a refund and then you have a situation I 100% agree the seller is in the wrong. Unfortunately redeeming a code is a binding sales contract. Read the steam user agreement.

 

[sneaky77]

Because the pre-order was redeemed as a binding early access purchase creating a legal purchasing contract.
.

The preorder gave access to a free beta.. the code is the free beta, not the full release. The contract was made in April when the OP put money on the pre-order.

 

[marrec]

The preorder gave access to a free beta.. the code is the free beta, not the full release. The contract was made in April when the OP put money on the pre-order.

I think, in this case, Early Access has to be defined differently than Free Beta. I've pre-ordered Destiny and thus am entitled to the Beta as defined by Bungie. However if I were to get an actual product that could be redeemed and played indefinitely based on my pre-order I would expect not to be able to receive a refund if I accessed that code or if I decided to ignore it for a year.

 

[HaRyu]

Let's look at the contract of sale for the original guy's purchase.

He paid money for a preorder of a game which came with free beta access, he did not pay for early access which many did at a later date. This is important.
As he had not taken delivery of the item he paid for (this is the game remember, not the beta access which was a free gift as a result of preordering the game) he is entitled to a refund.

He didn't pay for beta. He paid for a game. Whether de downloaded the beta or not has no bearing on his eligibility for a refund on the actual product he ordered.

Was just stating what the UK law entailed (since someone mentioned it). I'm not from UK, just fascinated by it.
However...

Edit

Re 14 day right to refund.

As this is applicable to the final release of the game (which is what he preordered, not the beta) as he hasn't downloaded it yet he would sill entitled to a refund under this act.

More to that 14 day policy for digital dowloads, I've discovered:

Cancellation: Consumers will have a right to cancel a purchase without providing reasons and without liability. There will be a right to cancellation within 14 days from the day after the contract was entered into. If the consumer was not made aware of this right at the time of contracting, but was made aware within the following 12 months, the 14 day period will run from the date of notification. If no notification is provided the customer shall have 12 months from the date that the cancellation right would normally expire (i.e. 14 days plus an additional 12 months) in which to cancel. Importantly, the supply of digital content must not commence until the end of the cancellation period without the express consent of the customer, in which case the right to cancel (described above) will cease. In order to assist suppliers of digital content, the Regulations include model cancellation clauses which can be inserted into contracts with consumers.

The following is not an argument using the UK law as a basis for not giving the reddit guy his money, I'm just fascinated that the wording of the law is just... baffling. This will be straying into off-topic territory, probably, so bear with me here...

The TLDR; version of that, and applying it to the reddit guy:
Assuming he plonked money down in April 2013, maximum wait time would be 12 Months. So, he would have till April 2014 to change his mind, at the latest. Reddit guy unfortunately put in the refund request two months after the fact, in June 2014 (the emails he posted had those dates). Doesn't matter if he downloaded anything at all, as long as 12 months pass, you apparently lose your right to a refund? (That was a serious question, like I said, fascinated/baffled by this law)

And going back to the whole 14-day thing, according to the law, if you live in the UK, and just buy a game, not a pre-order/early access, just an actual, finished game, you're not suppose to actually download anything for 14-days in case you want to change your mind? If you do download anything, you lose the right to a refund?

AGAIN, HAVE TO REITERATE, NOT AN ARGUMENT ABOUT REDDIT GUY, AND NOT SOME ARGUMENT ABOUT THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ALL OVER THE WORLD. Also needs to be pointed out, I don't even know if this guy lives in the UK, and if it even applies to him. I'm just looking at this law concerning Digital Downloads in the UK, and I don't see how it can be considered a benefit at all to the consumer.

 

[Enco]

All have been met

Ah cool.

I don't see the issue then. Early Access issues aside, this customer doesn't seem like he has the right to a refund.

1. He pre-ordered a game and knew that he would get access to the beta when out
2. He got access to the beta
3. He pre-ordered knowing there was no set release date (only an estimated year)
4. All stretch goals were met
5. The 'finished' game is on the way. There was never a guarantee on when that would be
6. It's no longer just a pre-order. He has already played the game (I think?) and had it for months

I don't see the issue at all. You might be unhappy with the speed of development and that's absolutely fine but you know the risks when you get into this kind of stuff.

I regret my pre-order but I wouldn't try to get a refund.

 

[ElFly]

Because the pre-order was redeemed as a binding early access purchase creating a legal purchasing contract.

It's not a pre-order once you redeem the steam key. Why is that so challenging to understand?

The only spurious point of contention you're holding onto is the developer's sense of artistic integrity preventing them from calling the game 'officially released'. Semantics alone. It is a fully playable, enjoyable, reviewed product. It's already well within a publishable state.

Arguing on semantics is grasping at straws. Once more the individual -had- an opportunity for a refund if the nature of the pre-order fulfillment wasn't to their wishes -or- could have chosen to not redeem the code.

Show me where an unreseemed steam code isn't given a refund and then you have a situation I 100% agree the seller is in the wrong. Unfortunately redeeming a code is a binding sales contract. Read the steam user agreement.

Dude did not buy it on early access.

If he got an early access key that does not mean he got a full game.

If the devs are so confident the game is fully playable, and that the version numbers are just arbitrary semantic games, then they should just call the game 1.0, take it out of early access and call it a full game.

Spoiler: they aren't doing that because they know the game is not complete and that it would get savaged in reviews if they did.

 

[Stet]

Is there a list anywhere of missing features or broken game mechanics?

 

[erragal]

The preorder gave access to a free beta.. the code is the free beta, not the full release. The contract was made in April when the OP put money on the pre-order.

Did the consumer inquire about beta access without redeeming a binding steam key? Sounds like they jumped right in rather than look for ways to acquire their beta access.

The other issue is that since you are paying for beta access upon utilizing that beta access you aren't entitled to a refund any longer. Why would you? You paid money and that was part of the package you paid for. Do you believe that if you get beta access you paid for that you shouls be refunded because you decided you didn't like the game?

If anything it makes even more sense that early access was used. It avoids a scenario where someone pays for beta access, plays beta a ton, then claims they deserve a refund because they paid for the full game.

You paid for both. No timeframes were promised. The game is still in development towards a full release. No one has been duped or scammed or misled.

The pre order also clearly states 'estimated 2013' but multiple defenders have stated it was a promise. That's one of the least specific promises ever. Almost as if they ignored the word estimated entirely.

 

[sneaky77]

Ah cool.

I don't see the issue then. Early Access issues aside, this customer doesn't seem like he has the right to a refund.

1. He pre-ordered a game and knew that he would get access to the beta when out
2. He got access to the beta
3. He pre-ordered knowing there was no set release date (only an estimated year)
4. All stretch goals were met
5. The 'finished' game is on the way. There was never a guarantee on when that would be
6. It's no longer just a pre-order. He has already played the game (I think?) and had it for months

I don't see the issue at all. You might be unhappy with the speed of development and that's absolutely fine but you know the risks when you get into this kind of stuff.

I regret my pre-order but I wouldn't try to get a refund.

Beta is not the full game... you can cancel the full game that you preorder at any point before the full release, for any reason.. including being delayed until 2015.

 

[Enco]

Beta is not the full game... you can cancel the full game that you preorder at any point before the full release, for any reason.. including being delayed until 2015.

This isn't so clear cut though.

Normally with a pre-order you don't get a product before release.

In this case the person got an early version of the game.

Not sure what the laws on that are.

 

[Xamtheking]

You paid for both. No timeframes were promised. The game is still in development towards a full release. No one has been duped or scammed or misled.

The pre order also clearly states 'estimated 2013' but multiple defenders have stated it was a promise. That's one of the least specific promises ever. Almost as if they ignored the word estimated entirely.

If it had released in early 2014, no-one would have been made, as few month delays are common.
But 2015 is nowhere near 2013 in terms of what we were told

 

[sneaky77]

This isn't so clear cut though.

Normally with a pre-order you don't get a product before release.

In this case the person got an early version of the game.

Not sure what the laws on that are.

So I cannot cancel my destiny preorder because I played the alpha and the beta access?

 

[erragal]

Dude did not buy it on early access.

If he got an early access key that does not mean he got a full game.

If the devs are so confident the game is fully playable, and that the version numbers are just semantic games, then they should just call the game 1.0, take it out of early access and call it a full game.

Spoiler: they aren't doing that because they know the game is not complete and that it would get savaged in reviews if they did.

No timeframe was guarenteed in the pre-order. He chose to play it as early access but the pre-order (posted in this thread) says only one thing: estimated 2013.

That is not the basis for a refund. Why is he expecting a full release? He also paid for beta access and received it. Was none of his money going towards beta access? Then why didn't he wait until official release to redeem the key?

It's completely irrational.

 

[HaRyu]

Now that I think of it, the only real contract/TOS anyone had for this game at the time, wasn't from Chucklefish, it was HumbleBundle, wasn't it? All business was done through them at the time. I don't think a FAQ or even posts in a forum would constitute an actual legal binding contract.

 

[sneaky77]

That is not the basis for a refund. Why is he expecting a full release? He also paid for beta access and received it. Was none of his money going towards beta access? Then why didn't he wait until official release to redeem the key?

It's completely irrational.

He is expecting a full release because that is what he bought. The beta was free with the preorder for the full game.

You can cancel a preorder before the product cmes out for any reason, at this point the full game is not out, which is what he purchased, therefore, he can cancel.

 

[erragal]

If it had released in early 2014, no-one would have been made, as few month delays are common.
But 2015 is nowhere near 2013 in terms of what we were told

You weren't told anything. It's an estimate. People were complaining about this game in -2012-. The audience of this game has a very vocal impatient playerbase since day one. No amount of goalpost changing avoids the fact that the dates were never ever -ever- hard dates. The word estimate is very plain to most rational humans... it's one filled with guesswork.

 

[Enco]

So I cannot cancel my destiny preorder because I played the alpha and the beta access?

I feel that's different. I get what you're saying though.

With Destiny you know the beta is just something special you're getting and it's not going to update to the final game.

With Starbound the beta is going to update to the final game.

Like I said, it's not so clear and you can't simplify it that easily.

 

[ElFly]

No timeframe was guarenteed in the pre-order. He chose to play it as early access but the pre-order (posted in this thread) says only one thing: estimated 2013.

That is not the basis for a refund. Why is he expecting a full release? He also paid for beta access and received it. Was none of his money going towards beta access? Then why didn't he wait until official release to redeem the key?

It's completely irrational.

Estimated 2013.

We are halfways through 2014 and there's talk of the game being released in 2015.

I think "estimated 2013" was completely, clearly missed.

Just because he made use of the free part of the preorder does not mean the preorder has been fulfilled.

Again, if the devs thought the game was complete -thus fulfilling the preorder- it'd be out of early access.

 

[Xamtheking]

You weren't told anything. It's an estimate. People were complaining about this game in -2012-. The audience of this game has a very vocal impatient playerbase since day one. No amount of goalpost changing avoids the fact that the dates were never ever -ever- hard dates. The word estimate is very plain to most rational humans... it's one filled with guesswork.

Yes, like I said earlier, no-one would have been mad if it released in early 2014
We knew 2013 was an estimate
But Chucklefish wasn't giving us an estimate
They were giving us something to make us happy at the time

 

[TunaMarshmallow]

Because the pre-order was redeemed as a binding early access purchase creating a legal purchasing contract.

It's not a pre-order once you redeem the steam key. Why is that so challenging to understand?

The only spurious point of contention you're holding onto is the developer's sense of artistic integrity preventing them from calling the game 'officially released'. Semantics alone. It is a fully playable, enjoyable, reviewed product. It's already well within a publishable state.

Arguing on semantics is grasping at straws. Once more the individual -had- an opportunity for a refund if the nature of the pre-order fulfillment wasn't to their wishes -or- could have chosen to not redeem the code.

Show me where an unreseemed steam code isn't given a refund and then you have a situation I 100% agree the seller is in the wrong. Unfortunately redeeming a code is a binding sales contract. Read the steam user agreement.

I.
Didn't.
Redeem.
A.
Steam.
Code.
And.
According.
To.
What.
The.
Developer.
Has.
Said.
I.
Could.
Not.
Receive.
A.
Refund.

Edited to add: Either you didn't mean to reply to me, or you've read approximately zero of my posts in this thread.

 

[Morokh]

Is there a list anywhere of missing features or broken game mechanics?

Their roadmap seems vaguely accurate : http://playstarbound.com/roadmap/
But some things on that list are present but in a basic form even if they are stated at 50%.

All the kickstarter-like goals are not in, an they reworked others like combat from scratch for the second time already (first time balance wise the day after Beta launched, now they are working on changing mechanics)

As I said before other things coming from player feedback and new ideas have also been implemented / started.

Beta is not the full game... you can cancel the full game that you preorder at any point before the full release, for any reason.. including being delayed until 2015.

Once again, not with how Valve handles Early access as they even warn you in the early access FAQ that a game purchased that way may never end up finished.

But there has been exceptions in some rare cases and they have offered refunds when they decided themselves to remove said games from the platform.

 

[tranciful]

The contract was made in April when the OP put money on the pre-order.

Can you post a link to this "contract" so we can actually see the real terms instead of having this silly argument based on what people think words should mean?

 

[erragal]

He is expecting a full release because that is what he bought. The beta was free with the preorder for the full game.

You can cancel a preorder before the product cmes out for any reason, at this point the full game is not out, which is what he purchased, therefore, he can cancel.

The beta wasn't free. It was included in what you paid for. That's marketing jargon to trick silly people into thinking they're getting something for nothing.

He does still have access to the full release when it occurs. Since it's not yet been released and no specific timeframe was promised they've fulfilled all expectations of the purchase.

I would suggest that before you redeem binding steam keys you read the steam user agreement in detail and if you are unhappy with the terms you contact the dev before redeeming the key.

Then id also suggest not waiting 8 months to bring up an issue. That is not what we'd call a 'good faith' effort to resolve the issue. Considering software products are licenses it implies a bad faith attempt to get a refund based on disliking the purchase.

The world does not refund you when you don't like what you paid for. Being able to trick people into paying for something they don't like is what 'consumerism' is built on. If yoy don't enjoy a product then move on.

The overall cost also really highlights the oddity of this situation. Who but young, irrational gamers puts this much expectation onto a 15$ purchase? Have you never even bought a dinner you found to be 'ok'? The entire premise is completely skewed.

 

[blitzcloud]

Well. I bought Dayz. It was early access. And even knowing that it's under-delivering so much it makes me want a refund every time I see the name on my game list.

Remember when selling a beta was not even a thing? Then they were bundled with other (less successful) games. Now we pay for TBA alphas.

 

[mclem]

This is one time where I cannot blame the consumer in the least. I can completely see where he's coming from and why he's upset. The way the Starbound devs have gone about this is unusual and patience-testing.

Y'see, from *my* perspective, it feels like the Starbound devs have done things in a fairly logical manner given what software development is like these days.

I think part of the way this is interesting is how it highlights an interesting difference between the crowdfunding model and the publisher model. In this situation with the publisher model, it would absolutely be understood and accepted that the funds the publisher had already put in were sunk costs; they could supply more funds and/or time to get the thing finished, or abandon the project; refunds were absolutely out of the question, since as developers we'd already spent the money.

With crowdfunding, though, the individual contributions are small, it's concievable that an individual crowdfunder could have their contribution returned in its entirety. But given that the purpose of crowdfunding is to alleviate risk by spreading it over a large number of people, allowing an individual contributor to return that risk to the developer at an arbitrary time does set an awkward precedent; suddenly the security that's the very selling point of crowdfunding falls apart. Sure, for one or two funders, it's not a problem - but what if there's a sudden cascade? What if suddenly there's a few thousand dollars not in the budget that you'd already earmarked for something?

There's a reason, I think, that Starbound established an explicit time for people who took issue with the changeover to lodge a complaint and get a refund - they'd planned for it in advance and were going to adjust scope accordingly based on how bad the budget was hit - it was an expected loss, not an arbitrary unplanned 'death-by-a-thousand-cuts' one.


So... I think the person who placed the preorder is broadly in the right, here. But I think he's in the right not because he's automatically in the right, but because Starbound didn't outline terms particularly well at the time (I'm assuming there's not a clearer T&Cs of preordering that I haven't seen). It's more a "Gotcha!" claim than something I'd regard as a reasonable beef.

If it were me: I'd feel disgruntled, but I also wouldn't claim a refund, because I think that runs counter to the reasons I'd have placed the order in the first instance.

 

[Vlade]

If you call it a pre-order, you are giving the expectation that you can withdraw the order. Valve should give the money back. If they don't, I think customers could pursue this and get their money back. If that takes the money back from the dev, so be it. It literally has nothing to do with the state of the game.

 

[Xamtheking]

Well. I bought Dayz. It was early access. And even knowing that it's under-delivering so much it makes me want a refund every time I see the name on my game list.

Early Access =/= Preorder
EA can screw you over, and Valve says that even

 

[Moral Panic]

He preordered a game, the game is not out, give him his money back. Simple.

 

[erragal]

I.


Edited to add: Either you didn't mean to reply to me, or you've read approximately zero of my posts in this thread.

Show me the direct email where you requested a refund, sent them your unredeemed code copy, and they stated they couldn't revoke the code and refund you?

If you have that response from them then post it. I'd love to see it. I also imagine they'd respond quite quickly to that bad PR.

 

[blitzcloud]

Early Access =/= Preorder
EA can screw you over, and Valve says that even

I know, i mentioned it because of the under-deliver of what was initially promised. Which means essentially dontbelievehislies.jpg

 

[Xamtheking]

Show me the direct email where you requested a refund, sent them your unredeemed code copy, and they stated they couldn't revoke the code and refund you?

If you have that response from them then post it. I'd love to see it. I also imagine they'd respond quite quickly to that bad PR.

You do understand he likely bought it through Humble Bundle, right?
Humble Bundle does not do refunds with Steam Keys EVER AFAIK.

 

[HaRyu]

You do understand he likely bought it through Humble Bundle, right?
Humble Bundle does not do refunds with Steam Keys EVER AFAIK.

It also says in the HumbleBundle TOS that they do not offer refunds for games that are delayed.

 

[TunaMarshmallow]

Show me the direct email where you requested a refund, sent them your unredeemed code copy, and they stated they couldn't revoke the code and refund you?

If you have that response from them then post it. I'd love to see it. I also imagine they'd respond quite quickly to that bad PR.

The dev's post in this thread says:

Just to address the original point, the original estimate for release was 2013, but when it became clear this wasn't going to happen we opened up an early access beta to those who pre-ordered, with the full release included in that price. Understandably we offered refunds at the time to those that weren't happy with this, but it's not something we'll do seven months later.[

This says rather clearly that they would not offer a refund to someone in my circumstances. It doesn't say that they would offer a refund to me, given that I've never accepted or redeemed access to the beta. So what on earth are you talking about? (And I'll just ignore that your earlier post showed that you'd not read anything I'd said.)

 

[Xamtheking]

It also says in the HumbleBundle TOS that they do not offer refunds for games that are delayed.

Chucklefish might have seen this coming and that's why it went through HB

 

[erragal]

The dev's post in this thread says:



This says rather clearly that they would not offer a refund to someone in my circumstances. It doesn't say that they would offer a refund to me, given that I've never accepted or redeemed access to the beta. So what on earth are you talking about? (And I'll just ignore that your earlier post showed that you'd not read anything I'd said.)

So you based your opinion off a forum post alone that wasn't responding to your specific situation?

You haven't done a formal request with a well written, detailed email that lays out your circumstances and provides an unredeemed key. That allows them to consider your specific circumstances and provide you a personalized response?

Why not try it? You think they'll say no. The only thing you have to lose is nothing. Otherwise you get your refund.

I'd suggest not being so contentious. It doesn't help. Use semi-formal, polite language and be detailed.

I would love to see their official email response to you in a one to one situation.

Otherwise you're extrapolating a general response to a redeemed steam key from an unknwon source of authority within the company as being a globally applicable policy. Rushing to judgement. Filled with vim and spittle.

 

[TunaMarshmallow]

So you based your opinion off a forum post alone that wasn't responding to your specific situation?

You haven't done a formal request with a well written, detailed email that lays out your circumstances and provides an unredeemed key. That allows them to consider your specific circumstances and provide you a personalized response?

Why not try it? You think they'll say no. The only thing you have to lose is nothing. Otherwise you get your refund.

I'd suggest not being so contentious. It doesn't help. Use semi-formal, polite language and be detailed.

I would love to see their official email response to you in a one to one situation.

Otherwise you're extrapolating a general response to a redeemed steam key from an unknwon source of authority within the company as being a globally applicable policy. Rushing to judgement. Filled with vim and spittle.

How about: because the dev stepped in, read the thread, and provided a response that speaks to my circumstances rather directly. If they unintentionally spoke too broadly, and they'd like to offer a refund to someone in my circumstances, then they can, should, and likely will say so in this thread. They're quite aware that it exists!

That would be quite a fair and reasonable outcome, too, which would remedy most of what people are upset about. So we'll see what they do!

As I've said before, I'm not particularly worried about whether I get a refund, personally. If the game comes out and is good, I'm happy to play it.

 

[erragal]

You do understand he likely bought it through Humble Bundle, right?
Humble Bundle does not do refunds with Steam Keys EVER AFAIK.

Well they obviously did at one point because people got refunds in December/January. So as far as you know doesn't go very far in this instance.

 

[Xamtheking]

words

He can't get a refund.
From Humble Bundle's ToS:

You understand that in some instances Product release dates may be delayed and that release dates and times posted on the Service are only estimates, and you will not be entitled to any refund for a delayed product release date.

 

[erragal]

How about: because the dev stepped in, read the thread, and provided a response that speaks to my circumstances rather directly. If they unintentionally spoke too broadly, and they'd like to offer a refund to someone in my circumstances, then they can, should, and likely will say so in this thread. They're quite aware that it exists!

That would be quite a fair and reasonable outcome, too, which would remedy most of what people are upset about. So we'll see what they do!

As I've said before, I'm not particularly worried about whether I get a refund, personally. If the game comes out and is good, I'm happy to play it.

So you were arguing out of spite/contrary opinion?

You still haven't actually found out whether you could get a refund and now you don't want one? Why would the developer respond on a third party board to your specific situation? That's an inane concept...a truly entitled worldview. 'Follow me around and ensure I'm satisfied'.

When you want something you do your best effort to acquire it. Direct formal contact in an official capacity with recorded dialogue between the two parties (letter or email usually suffices...phone calls as well!). Anything else is a supposition by you.

Which is obvious because you backed down and wont actually do a formal refund request.

 

[HaRyu]

Well they obviously did at one point because people got refunds in December/January. So as far as you know doesn't go very far in this instance.

He can't get a refund.
From Humble Bundle's ToS:

You understand that in some instances Product release dates may be delayed and that release dates and times posted on the Service are only estimates, and you will not be entitled to any refund for a delayed product release date.

Before you two start arguing, the people who got refunds got them directly from Chucklefish themselves. I doubt anyone has even attempted to try and get a refund from HumbleBundle first.

On the other hand, attempting to get a refund from HumbleBundle wouldn't work.

 

[TunaMarshmallow]

So you were arguing out of spite/contrary opinion?

You still haven't actually found out whether you could get a refund and now you don't want one? Why would the developer respond on a third party board to your specific situation? That's an inane concept...a truly entitled worldview. 'Follow me around and ensure I'm satisfied'.

When you want something you do your best effort to acquire it. Direct formal contact in an official capacity with recorded dialogue between the two parties (letter or email usually suffices...phone calls as well!). Anything else is a supposition by you.

Which is obvious because you backed down and wont actually do a formal refund request.

Let me break this down for you very, very simply.

1. I preordered. I've never wanted or used any pre-release software. I've been annoyed that the game has been delayed so many times and that dates have been missed. But, as I said in my first thread, I gave up on caring six months ago. I have never asked for a refund, nor have I ever planned to ask for one.

2. In this thread, I was shocked to see a developer say something which directly and unquestionably indicates that they would refuse a refund request to someone in my position. I asked them for clarification in this thread, but none has been forthcoming. If they do clarify and say that I would be offered a refund, I'd be happy to see that. It would make a lot of sense. If they say nothing, I'd assume that their earlier stated view can be taken at face value.

3. The majority of my posts in this thread have been in discussion with people who think that the developer has no reason to refund me. This means that most of the discussion has nothing to do with whether the developer actually would refund my pre-order (though what they said directly indicates that they would not). Instead, the discussion has centered on a normative question: whether the developer should offer refunds to someone in my situation. These are completely separate issues. As I said multiple times, the question I'm interested in is not what the law requires, nor what any particular developer would/wouldn't actually do, but instead on best practices.

4. Your post is a mixture of hot air and insults. I have no idea who you are. But more than half of what you've said to me in this and earlier posts suggests that you're writing in bad faith and that you have no interest in reading what I've actually written. So, with all due respect, maybe you should just stop talking to me.

 

[Labrys]

 

[Stitch]

They've said that they're working on customizable controls 8 months ago.

It's still not possible to customize the controls...

 

[LurkerPrime]

They've said that they're working on customizable controls 8 months ago.

It's still not possible to customize the controls...

These things.. they take time. For Cuddlefish Cuttlefish Scuttlefish the Starbound dev, this means essentially...

 

[mclem]

He preordered a game, the game is not out, give him his money back. Simple.

I think there's one interesting question that's a corollary to this: At what point is a game regarded as 'out'? Scope changes, plans change, different considerations are made; a game is not a discrete thing. Heck, we can take this to an absurd extreme:

Is Diablo 2 a complete game? Was Diablo 2 a complete game on 26th October 2011? There was a patch the following day. Is the patched version *more* complete? If there's a patch tomorrow, does that retroactively make the game as it stands today incomplete?

Can World of Warcraft fans demand a refund on their The Burning Crusade expansion purchase because the Dance Studio still isn't in the game?

The initial release of Doom was actually labelled '0.99'. Does that mean it's incomplete?

So the question becomes: Do we try to lock down a definition of 'a complete product' and run the risk of setting up legal obstacles in the future for some quite conventional practices? Or do we accept that development of an artistic product will always be inherently somewhat fluid and there is an implicit acceptance of that in making such a purchase?

 

[Xamtheking]

I think there's one interesting question that's a corollary to this: At what point is a game regarded as 'out'? Scope changes, plans change, different considerations are made; a game is not a discrete thing. Heck, we can take this to an absurd extreme:

Is Diablo 2 a complete game? Was Diablo 2 a complete game on 26th October 2011? There was a patch the following day. Is the patched version *more* complete? If there's a patch tomorrow, does that retroactively make the game as it stands today incomplete?

Can World of Warcraft fans demand a refund on their The Burning Crusade expansion purchase because the Dance Studio still isn't in the game?

The initial release of Doom was actually labelled '0.99'. Does that mean it's incomplete?

So the question becomes: Do we try to lock down a definition of 'a complete product' and run the risk of setting up legal obstacles in the future for some quite conventional practices? Or do we accept that development of an artistic product will always be inherently somewhat fluid and there is an implicit acceptance of that in making such a purchase?

I stopped taking you seriously when you said Diablo 2 came out in 2011

 

[NervousXtian]

I think at this point, if you bought the pre-order... did nothing with any of it.. didn't take them up on the offer of a refund back when the offered it.. and only now.. now you think you should be refunded?

I don't think at this point you are entitled to one.

I get people are frustrated.. but welcome to the world of EA. For every successful EA.. there seems to be 2 in some kind of limbo/waiting.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Seems mostly like a reddit witchhunt by some dude who really wants his money back.

Yep. The game is very good and stable and rich with content as it is.

 

[mclem]

I stopped taking you seriously when you said Diablo 2 came out in 2011

I did not say that; A patch came out then.

The point is: Is a game only complete at the point development stops on it? If not, then we need another metric.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

I did not say that; A patch came out then.

The point is: Is a game only complete at the point development stops on it? If not, then we need another metric.

well, considering the dev said that the game isn't finished, I think that would point to the uncompleted checkbox.