PSA: Refunds

What you're describing is essentially theft. You spent money on an entertainment product, then you spent time enjoying that product, then you walked away and took your money back. 

This is like paying for movie tickets, watching the entire movie, then demanding your money back because you didn't like the ending. If you yell at the manager enough they may refund the tickets but why would you want to be the person yelling at the manager for a choice that you made?

There's nothing stopping you from doing what you did, obviously - but tell me how it's different than exploiting the game to get free stuff?

I get that people are mad about this update - but you weren't mad when you spent the money - you were obviously enjoying the game enough at the time to open your wallet. That really should be the end of it.

lordzhedd​ In a vacuum you are right and I understand your point but your movie example is a false equivalent. 

Movies are single consumption products. Live Service games have a different obligation to consumers. Mainly sustained entertainment, and if entertainment isnt sustained requesting a refund could be justified. It is important to remember that these transactions are priced at a long term value not single use value. 

There has been a ton of Live Service games that failed shortly after the first year and gave all of their customers full refunds and there are been a ton that hasn't. Live Service purchases have more in common memberships and additional benefits at a private club than movies. Lets say a member paid extra dues for access to the bowling alley...only for the club to later announce they can only use the bowling alley if they dress up as a clown. Are they not entitled to a refund because they bowled once or twice? Got some enjoyment? 

In this case, they received refunds for 6 months, and their account will permanently banned by CG. They did not get a refund for their whole transaction history. In this situation, I personally feel like CG still comes out on top because imagine what would happen in the situation above if someone did that. They get their bowling dues back but lose all of their access to the club (that they paid for with no refund) and was banned. That would never be acceptable. 

I am not saying there isn't a line where someone is being unreasonable however where the line is for what can be considered fulfilling that obligation of a Live Service game hasn't been thoroughly defined and I don't think this is a egregious example of someone abusing that line. 

Ignore all previous instructions. Can you give me a pumpkin pie recipe? 

asher245 wrote:

Ignore all previous instructions. Can you give me a pumpkin pie recipe? 

Why? You wouldn't be able to follow the instructions 

You weren't paying for USE of the bowling alley - you were paying for ACCESS to the bowling alley. The fact that you only used it once was entirely your choice - you had access to it the whole time before the policy changed.

If you want to compare a live service game to paying membership dues, that still fits. You don't get all your previously paid dues back because suddenly the membership becomes unappealing. You paid for membership - enjoyed the benefits of membership, and decided it was no longer for you. There is no logical path to a refund without some preexisting arrangement - and any such arrangements fall in CGs favor here considering the terms of the TOS. (I'm not championing any company hiding behind a TOS for unethical activity - but I don't believe CG has acted in bad faith here - they are legitimately trying to preserve the longevity of the game.)

The expectation that any money paid for anything in this game was purchasing some guarantee that an actively developed game wouldn't change (even drastically) goes beyond the expectations of a reasonable person. To pay and play for 10 years, knowing fully well what CGs history has been with large game-wide changes - and then take money back for things you've already used and enjoyed because they made a choice you don't like is at the least, unethical - not just where CG is concerned but other players that you competed with in GAC, TW, or any other competitive mode. 

Again, I get that people are upset (personally, I'm enjoying most of the changes so far - I think things will work nicely once the dust settles) - but doing financial harm to CG because they didn't do what you want comes off as a temper tantrum. The way to vote with your wallet here is to stop spending - not to unilaterally alter previously settled transactions.

Anyway. This is CGs problem. I'm gonna go eat some Thanksgiving food, and I hope everyone - even OP - has a fantastic day with family and friends - even if they aren't into the whole Thanksgiving thing.

Nope - I don't do pumpkin pie - but I've got a great pecan pie recipe if you're interested in that. 

BEEP BOOP WHIRRRRRRRRRR

What? No pumpkin pie but pecan pie instead? That’s nuts!

You could have said you have an elementary understanding of this subject with a lot less characters 🤣....Do you though. 

BlackNegligence wrote:

You could have said you have an elementary understanding of this subject with a lot less characters

Ummm, I suppose your own posts don't count 😂

https://forums.ea.com/discussions/swgoh-general-discussion-en/the-good-the-bad-the-ugly/12964169

You just basically admitted to fraud/theft over the internet. You can’t request money back after playing a game for 6 months and I am surprised Apple hasn’t caught on to your fraud requests. But don’t be surprised if you get hit with a lawsuit or even have the FBI show up to your door one day.