A ToTaL Refund

It was clearly worth it at the time, no refunds for you.

No, you cannot. (Well, you can write up whatever you like, but that doesn't mean it has any weight) You cannot absolve yourself from unlawful business practices by stating in a TOS that you reserve the right to practice unlawful business practices. I repeat, you cannot absolve yourself from wrongdoing. The law is the law. You can't legally break the law by writing yourself a letter saying you can break the law. All a TOS does is stipulate what you are getting with said product and how you can use said product. You can't sell a game then lock me out of it for no reason and be immune from liability if I want my money back. If I'm paying for something the seller must provide a reasonable quality service unless they explicitly stated BEFORE purchase that the product is unreliable and you buy it with the reasonable expectation that it may not work. Unless being so laggy that you cannot do PVP, raids, etc. is stipulated as part of the deal it isn't even a conversation. And again even if it did it's too late. The product has been purchased. It's used at the point you get to a TOS. You can't spring a trap AFTER the purchase and expect any court to accept it. You can't be sold a car and AFTER having already paid the money for it be told the engine is crap and may explode on startup. I'm not sure what wacky reality you people come from. So when you decline the TOS who is going to give you that full refund or your open used game whose codes are compromised?

If a player purchased a 12 month subscription the day before the patch and now isn't afforded a reasonable gaming experience they are within their rights to demand a refund fro the unused time. They would have to issue a new TOS stating that your lag issue isn't their problem and those who decline will still be owed that refund.

There is no card to play. A TOS will not be used as a defense. And I'm not talking about people feigning ignorance on who clicked it. The point I'm making is that a minor could click the button. A minor cannot consent to any contract (not that a TOS is a binding contract).

But going off of what you said, hypothetically...
At this function APAC players are quitting regardless. So EA can delete the account all they want. They just better issue that refund while they're at it. And since the account is "compromised" I guess they need to refund every dime spent, even prior to the serve change as the entire history of the account and ALL purchases ever made are fraudulent, right?

So is taking a dump in one of those pay to enter toilets. Still leaves you shorter on funds and with an empty feeling inside.

From the moment you purchase the game, it states, right on the box and on their website, that the game is an internet-based game, as well as a dynamic game. This means that you willingly purchased a game that you are welll-aware may be impacted based on your internet service, the distance from the servers - every possible issue that the internet has ever had, and even some that haven't been discovered yet. As a dynamic world, you also willingly purchased a game that, due to the dynamic nature, may include a world that can be altered based on other people playing, it can be patched weekly, it can be buggy, or the whole system can be completely overhauled, including the game engine, if they so choose (see EQ for an example of that). This is the experience that you voluntarily chose to participate in. If you have a problem with the internet, then complain to Bob Dole or whoever invented the internet. If you have a problem with dynamic games, stick to solely single player games.

The fact still remains that by playing for even 1 second, you made that decision on your own, and decided to continue to make the decision over and over and over until you invested the time you currently have. The fact that you were able to play with less lag for the duration you have is wonderful, but it was never guaranteed by anyone at any point time.

And yes, any company can make any TOS they want for their products, as long as it is within the law. And adhering to someones enjoyment is so subjective that there is no way the federal govt will be able to inact a law that forces companies to require everyone to enjoy their product, or get sued. Speaking of enjoyment, some people still enjoy SWTOR even with 200ms ping or higher. They get what they want out of the game, and continue to log in. So your personal opinion about the type of service you are getting is not the standard opinion for the industry, nor will it ever be the accepted standard, because there are billions of possible opinions of what is a "reasonable swtor experience." You're simply living in the fantasy world if you truly believe your opinion will stand up in court.

As for making the purchase, and reading the TOS after purchase, there are other ways around that as well. I believe the TOS are available online for people who wish to read them prior to making a purchase. In addition, there are many reviews and demonstration videos on the market that allow people to get a better idea if they may like a specific product or not. Of course, if you choose to purchase it and take that risk, it would behoove you to choose to purchase it from a store that will accept refunds, even on an open registration key product (yes, there are many out there that offer that as one of their products), specifically because it is a subscription-based key, unlike say Windows OS or other games that have a key to install it, and then you have access to the game regardless if you return it.


The TOS isn't a binding contract. It is you giving them permission to retain rights to your account, and any progress you make on your account, and be able to do whatever they want to it , whenever they want. Many private work companies do this also. Employees will often sign a waiver form at the start of employment relinquishing any intellectual property that is generated while employed for the company. The employee has three options before signing - 1) agree to it, 2) request an more favorable amendment if they hold leverage/value over the company, or 3) walk away and get a different job that doesn't require them to give up the intellectual property. So for you, you have the same 3 choices when signing a TOS, though #2 won't apply because consumers are expendable enough to them. So either agree or walk away and find a different game with no TOS agreements.

You could argue the box although that is a stretch as there are no specifics. As needing an internet connection and it requiring a subscription is all my box really states. And that you need to be 13+ to register. Albeit there is absolutely nothing in place to enforce that nor could they enforce any law on a minor anyway. At no point does it ever state, "We reserve the right to provide you with poor service to the extent that our product is practically useless." Not so much a website either. No one is required to view or read anything on a website prior to purchase. And again, you can't state who is well-aware of anything. There is absolutely nothing in place to ensure the purchaser is aware of anything you state. It's a callous as stating "click here if you are 18" ensures minors don't view pornagraphy.

Where is the new TOS to account for the new circumstances? The one stating if you agree to pay for a game in which is so laggy you cannot play for all practical purposes?

People are paying them for a service and EA/Bioware has effectively taken the service away while still collected money for services they aren't providing to a reasonable degree. You're making a strawman. I never said anything about companies having to service any and everyone no matter their geological location or that every player must be happy with the game itself. I have only ever stated that if a player is deprived of the basic ability to effectively participate in the game world and they have already paid in advance, that they need to be refunded. They paid in good faith for a services as they were at the time of purchase. The players effected are going to quit. It's not about doing anything to keep them subbed, happy or playing as you are trying to make it out to be. It's about a company taking people's money and effectively conning them. No business is in their right to charge you for a service that is unreliable to the point of being useless. They took people's money and them effectively took their service away without warning and for no legitimate reason. All of which is perfectly fine if they refund the money.

My server is EH. I've always played on the east coast. I'm fine. This isn't about me.

Honestly, there is nothing on the box or in federal law that requires them to have a good product either. The service is available, it is your personal opinion that it is bad service. And remember, they arent prosecuting you, so they dont care who signs what, since the account is technically their property despite who clicks it.

There was never a TOS that said you were paying for a good game with no lag/latency either.

If you are able to log in, you have the same access to the game that you did before the change. They have fulfilled their requirement, whether you are happy about it or not.

It's objectively bad if you are incapable of effectively participating in game world. Given the nature of TOR as a multiplayer video game, the ability to effectively participate is paramount. There is no getting around it. It's not an opinion. It can be reasonably proven "bad" in a court of law.

What you're trying to say is equivalent to ordering chocolate chip cookies and receiving sugar cookies, but being assured that there is a single chocolate crumb somewhere in each cookie. The bakery says your opinion that this is not a chocolate chip cookie is subjective. I think you know that is not going to hold up and any judge is going to laugh at the bakery and side with the plaintiff. That is why we have actual people judges and not robots; because everything can be "subjective" or can be spinned. But in most case a little common sense will get to the truth of a matter.



That's a strawman. The idea that there is or ever was a guarantee of no latency whatsoever was introduced by you at this time.

The TOS hardly matters anymore. Once they altered their infrastructure the old TOS ceased to matter as the service conditions have changed. Even in there TOS it states "AS IS". It is no longer "AS IS" for anyone who hasn't just installed it. Disagreement would be equivalent to renting a bike "AS IS" and after you pay for it the owner places a lock on the wheels or removes the chain or seat and continuing to argue they are within their rights to keep your money. It is no longer "AS IS" when you made the transaction. By the logic many use here, the bike retail place would not need to issue a refund because they never promised to not put a lock on the wheel. In all honesty the TOS is invalidated after the first patch after any initial gameplay. This is why competent businesses reintroduce their TOS every time they make a change as opposed to a one off thing like SWTOR.



No they haven't. No one paid for the just ability to log in and be incapable of doing anything productive. I think you know that would never hold up. I'm not sure why there are so many shady business practice apologist here.

to all of the usa residents who have no sympathy for the plight of snow white, please understand two key points:

• the latency now experienced by apac players (even from major cities like melbourne) makes the game unplayable-this is actually in breach of australian consumer law, which is far more protective of customers than usa consumer law;

• ea themselves are forced to acknowledge the extent of australian consumer law in their tos, and state that australians are "entitled to a replacement or refund for a major problem".

see ea's full text here.

now, us aussies will probably all agree that a latency of 300ms+ makes the game unplayable, that there was no warning of this change in service, and that the change in service is a major problem. Our perception is that we are actually entitled to a refund under both australian consumer law and ea's own tos.

If a court of law, or the australian consumer ombudsman agree is a different matter entirely.

Otherwise, to those who are showing no empathy towards snow white or the rest of the apac community, i would implore you to do some research and find out just what our problem actually is, but tl;dr we can longer play most elements of the game.

I dont thunk you understand what "objectively" means in this context.

A more accurate cookie analogy would be you joining the cookie club to buy chocolate chip cookies, and they decide that not enough people are buying those cookies to continue producing them, and instead start making a different flavor, which you are unable to tolerate. But before you signed up, they said they may change flavors at any time.

Fact is, you can continue to cry yourself to sleep if you want, but you only have yourself to blame for your decision to invest long-term in a dynamic game. You have no leg to stand on with your attempt to gain something from the change.

The best thing you can do is speak your opinion publically, but expect to get a lot of eyerolls by people who understand/understood what they were spending their money on this whole time.

When it comes to a court judgment I don't think you do. You seem to be under the impression the judge functions as a robot or something that ignores situational context. In your reality bullets and physics would be the only inmates in jails when it comes to gun crimes.



That's not more accurate. That's not even the same thing. 1.) You already bought your membership to the chocolate cookie club with the logical expectation of chocolate cookies before any so-called "agreement" ever came into play. 2.) You never agreed that they could stop using edible ingredients which effectively make it impossible to eat them at all.

You analogy would be something like changing the classes (5.0). As oppose to what I'm speaking of which is rendering the entire game effectively unplayable to a player base, while still taking their money. You people can't seem to keep it on topic. You always have to insert a different scenario. Is it because you can't make an argue against the actual subject matter being presented?



Cry for what? It doesn't effect me. I'm an east coast player on an east coast server. So your move to attack me personally because you can't counter my actual statements falls flat. The game itself and rather it changes isn't the issue. Bioware can make whatever changes they want. People will just quit and move on. But effectively denying players an acceptable quality of service while taking their money is a different story. It's the lack of refund that is the issue. Try to stay on topic and off the strawman arguments, OK?

EA is subject to the applicable laws. They can't write themselves a note stating they are outside the law. Their own TOS which you guys like to flaunt says as much. If they are sued they will not be able to hide behind some statement they themselves concocted. The law is either on their side or it isn't. TOS or no TOS.