Page 22 of 36 FirstFirst ...
12
20
21
22
23
24
32
... LastLast
  1. #421
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    I see you have gone back for a few edits and additions. Nothing changes on my end, they are just accusations at this point, and it is not for me, or you, to draw any conclusions about the validity of those accusations - that is for the court to figure out.
    Being used as evidence is different than an accusation. The accusation is that it's a systemic problem. The evidence is that those things happened.

  2. #422
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    I see you have gone back for a few edits and additions. Nothing changes on my end, they are just accusations at this point, and it is not for me, or you, to draw any conclusions about the validity of those accusations - that is for the court to figure out.
    That's all a legal issue - good thing I'm not on the jury because simply due to the amount of people coming forward I'm already at a "guilty". We're in the court of public opinion, however, so it's easier to play arm-chair without any repercussions. If the legal system says it didn't happen, all of these people speaking with supposed first-hand experience of this are lying, to you?

    I guess the point I'm trying to make, is that yes if one person comes forward it's very difficult to make a determination on the claim without overwhelming evidence. Two people, same, but once you start getting into three and beyond... it's pretty difficult to think everyone could be lying (and all the stories are made up), especially if some of them don't have a care in the world regarding any monetary gain (i.e. no incentive to lie).

    I'm curious, where do you stand on Bill Cosby? I mean, ~50 women claimed he did things. The legal system actually convicted him of doing things. Hell, he even admitted to doing things. But he's free on a technicality. So, did he do things or no? Legally, he did not. Realistically, we all know he did. That's the point.

  3. #423
    Alex Klontzas<------ this fucking cunt wow all that is going on at blizzard and he wants to throw a finger at the community smfh

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    Well, only thing missing was shifting some of the blame to the fans. lol

    What a pathetic company.
    They did in a way lol look at Alex Klontzas twitter post.

  4. #424
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gorefiend View Post
    I truly believe this is the end of WoW's life. I mean seriously as both a long time member of this sub and scrolling through all the "wow is dead/dying, this will kill wow etc." I think for real this time.
    Same here. 9.0 around late Feb was the last time I played Retail. Been playing TBC but after what has been going on...and after that Wow Dev just now tried to deflect and blame the players for the sexual harassments and probably full on sexual assaults that have been going on at Activision for so long now.
    I'm done with classic now as well. I refuse to give these people my money/support. Their game in retail is terrible and has been for some time now to be honest.
    They monetized TBC because of how successful Vanilla was.

    Their content and game have been suffering because of a dangerous work environment. And you'll notice how they use the word "systemic" over and over as if to try and pull a race card somehow and to try and push some form of wokeness. And let's be honest...when you see a major corporation pushing the woke card...it's because they have some huge skeletons in their closet. And this is a global thing.

    I've spent YEARS seeing people claims that this game or that game would be the death of WoW...and I ALWAYS knew it was bs. The saying of course was always that the only game that could kill WoW....was WoW itself. And buddy....WoW at this point is done for and it killed itself.
    I can't believe that asshole actually had the nerve to blame players on Activisions rape work environment. What scum he is.

  5. #425
    Quote Originally Posted by Ihavewaffles View Post
    did you just confuse japan with saudi-arabia? women have not jobs in japan, lol??
    good example actually, japan is quite like saudi arabia in many regards

  6. #426
    Sorry, I care more about my money being wasted than some stranger across the globe getting their ass grabbed/getting told to make a sandwich or whatever. I think most people do, if they're being completely honest, which they wont be.

  7. #427
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    I'm sure there's a legal doc out there showing otherwise, but the overwhelming majority of players pay a subscription not just for the ability to login. It's implied you are paying for updates, patches, etc.
    I had a thread a few weeks ago asking if anyone could find an official statement or literally anything from Blizzard that explained why the sub fee existed.

    It’s basically just full of people shitting on me for even asking and making up their own conclusions. Long story short no one could find anything. Blizzard just asked it and people paid it and made up their own logic as to how it’s justified.

    But, one person found in the Eula that it’s for access to the game. You’re seemingly not actually paying for anything other than access to the game for your sub, despite the common implications it pays for new content, etc. Why do you pay for access? Everyone has an opinion, but no one seems to officially know.

    So it’s plausible you’re 90% paying for Bobby’s next new yacht, 5% paying to fund new content they need to make anyway to keep people paying for access, and 5% towards keeping the lights on at Blizzard with your sub.
    Last edited by Mojo03; 2021-07-27 at 03:35 AM.

  8. #428
    Quote Originally Posted by Laubman View Post
    I paid for my six month sub an hour before this got to light

    (I don't even feel angry I'm just... not surprised.)
    The fact that you are still doing 6 month subs at this point is just mind-boggling.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Video Games View Post
    I mean with phase 2 going on the ptr next week, this obviously isn't affecting everybody there.
    That's because phase 2 is still 14-15 year old content. The only thing they need are ptr's for bug tests.

  9. #429
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    I'm sure there's a legal doc out there showing otherwise, but the overwhelming majority of players pay a subscription not just for the ability to login. It's implied you are paying for updates, patches, etc.
    It's assumed, not implied. The sub is to access the service, nothing more.
    Beware the indigenous, crippled libertarian!
    Thanks for the ad-hominem, it supports your inability to support your argument.

  10. #430
    coke-fiend metzen out there spitting bullshit after being caught with is pants down, searching for his own name on the twitter post that contained the accustations.

    Asif he wasnt in on it. If there's anyone i could totally see doing the shit they are accused of, it would be metzen and friasabi.

  11. #431
    Quote Originally Posted by Mojo03 View Post
    I had a thread a few weeks ago asking if anyone could find an official statement or literally anything from Blizzard that explained why the sub fee existed.

    It’s basically just full of people shitting on me for even asking and making up their own conclusions. Long story short no one could find anything. Blizzard just asked it and people paid it and made up their own logic as to how it’s justified.

    But, one person found in the Eula that it’s for access to the game. You’re seemingly not actually paying for anything other than access to the game for your sub, despite the common implications it pays for new content, etc. Why do you pay for access? Everyone has an opinion, but no one seems to officially know.

    So it’s plausible you’re 90% paying for Bobby’s next new yacht, 5% paying to fund new content they need to make anyway to keep people paying for access, and 5% towards keeping the lights on at Blizzard with your sub.
    Oh, you totally are paying sub fees in MMO's for (legally) access to the game. It's implied you are paying for updates, changes, fixes, etc. It's been that way since the beginning of subscription fees for online games.

  12. #432
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Oh, you totally are paying sub fees in MMO's for (legally) access to the game. It's implied you are paying for updates, changes, fixes, etc. It's been that way since the beginning of subscription fees for online games.
    Try suing them if they ban you, or if you're unhappy with the content. They'll happily parade the EULA that you agreed to in front of the magistrate.
    Beware the indigenous, crippled libertarian!
    Thanks for the ad-hominem, it supports your inability to support your argument.

  13. #433
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    I like Metzen and Morhaime, but tbch you are implying they accept the fact they knew about things and did nothing to stop them? Hell, you're not even implying it, they are basically saying as much.

    "Sorry I killed your soul, please don't be mad".
    They literally said we are sorry we failed you.
    Saying sorry does not mean we knew and did nothing, it means that they should have known and taken steps to stop it.

    Saying sorry to someone when a member of their family dies doesn't mean that you are the one that killed them.

  14. #434
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Wheelchair Casino View Post
    It's assumed, not implied. The sub is to access the service, nothing more.
    Legally, correct. However, since the dawn of Ultima Online, it's been implied the subscription fee is for accessing the game and updates, fixes, etc.

    Unless of course, you then believe they are delivering patches, updates, bug fixes, etc for free, out of the kindness of their hearts?

  15. #435
    Quote Originally Posted by Mojo03 View Post
    I had a thread a few weeks ago asking if anyone could find an official statement or literally anything from Blizzard that explained why the sub fee existed.

    It’s basically just full of people shitting on me for even asking and making up their own conclusions. Long story short no one could find anything. Blizzard just asked it and people paid it and made up their own logic as to how it’s justified.

    But, one person found in the Eula that it’s for access to the game. You’re seemingly not actually paying for anything other than access to the game for your sub, despite the common implications it pays for new content, etc. Why do you pay for access? Everyone has an opinion, but no one seems to officially know.

    So it’s plausible you’re 90% paying for Bobby’s next new yacht, 5% paying to fund new content they need to make anyway to keep people paying for access, and 5% towards keeping the lights on at Blizzard with your sub.
    I have a question. What does your internet or phone provider charge you monthly for? They don't 'produce more internet'. They might upgrade the service from time to time to maintain competitiveness, widen their coverage area, or cut down on people complaining. If they stopped altering the service and left it as is they wouldn't suddenly make it free.

    If you buy a game digitally. Where does that money go? Producing your individual copy cost nothing. They might have already stopped supporting the game and made back their original investment. Yet they still charge you possibly full price even.

    Company's don't break down where all the money they make from their customer's individual purchases goes. You buy world of warcraft, and you pay for the ability to play it. The requirement of a subscription to play has been on the box since forever. I don't get how this is some crazy concept.

    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Legally, correct. However, since the dawn of Ultima Online, it's been implied the subscription fee is for accessing the game and updates, fixes, etc.

    Unless of course, you then believe they are delivering patches, updates, bug fixes, etc for free, out of the kindness of their hearts?
    It is their choice to use the funds to do it. They are not obligated to do so. If a patch gets delayed or the like, they aren't going to give you a refund.

  16. #436
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Wheelchair Casino View Post
    Try suing them if they ban you, or if you're unhappy with the content. They'll happily parade the EULA that you agreed to in front of the magistrate.
    Unsure where being banned or being unhappy with the content comes in?

  17. #437
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Legally, correct. However, since the dawn of Ultima Online, it's been implied the subscription fee is for accessing the game and updates, fixes, etc.

    Unless of course, you then believe they are delivering patches, updates, bug fixes, etc for free, out of the kindness of their hearts?
    There's incentive to produce content that retains subscribers, sure. But you're not guaranteed anything beyond access to the game.
    Beware the indigenous, crippled libertarian!
    Thanks for the ad-hominem, it supports your inability to support your argument.

  18. #438
    Quote Originally Posted by Walkerbo View Post
    They literally said we are sorry we failed you.
    Saying sorry does not mean we knew and did nothing, it means that they should have known and taken steps to stop it.

    Saying sorry to someone when a member of their family dies doesn't mean that you are the one that killed them.
    Of course it doesn't mean you killed the family member. But then you must be saying they are just pandering to the outrage? Why would you apologize for something you *should have* known, but didn't? Do you typically apologize for not knowing something?

  19. #439
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Unsure where being banned or being unhappy with the content comes in?
    Because if you were paying for updates if the updates were not up to snuff you could theoretically demand a refund.

    If its just 'access to servers', they provided the service. Whether you use it or enjoy it is up to you.

  20. #440
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    Unsure where being banned or being unhappy with the content comes in?
    Examples of reasons you'd try to argue an entitlement to anything beyond access to the game service.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Myradin View Post
    Because if you were paying for updates if the updates were not up to snuff you could theoretically demand a refund.

    If its just 'access to servers', they provided the service. Whether you use it or enjoy it is up to you.
    Bingo. It's how they cover themselves legally.
    Beware the indigenous, crippled libertarian!
    Thanks for the ad-hominem, it supports your inability to support your argument.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •