@Bioware, there's still time to remedy Early Access...

[Pagy]

It's 12.99/month.

money im not comfortable giving bw.

 

especially considering it's really 39$ they are charging for a 5hour quest and zero endgame content

[Illustratedkid]

Question: Did the lapse happen on any of the four days you were required to be a sub? If not, and you don't have early access, I would contact CS right away.

 

 

Amen:o

[GripenWard]

Was there anything in that statement that implied you could be eligible for early access after Aug 11th? Again the statement is quite clear to me. But the whole point of the T&C was to explain it to anyone who had questions.

 

So if you misunderstood it, but didn't bother to read the rest of the page and look at the FAQ you have no one to blame but yourself.

 

To be explicitly clear, my only issue is with the emails I received after the eligibility window had passed telling me that if I renewed my sub I'd have early access. That statement was blatantly false and so constitutes false advertising. My position is that bioware should have removed any and all early access verbiage from KoTFE email marketing to non-subscribers after the eligibility deadline had passed. It is also my position that Bioware should have continued to use early access verbiage to subscribed players in marketing emails to remind them that they needed to stay subbed to get that perk.

 

When speaking specifically about false advertising, each advertising mechanism is taken on it's own. It doesn't matter that the KoTFE site had the eligibility terms on it, the email marketing did not, and that was deceitful as a user could bypass the KoTFE page entirely and resub based on the false email claim.

 

Now our second issue is the page itself. You (and lots of others) claim to interpret their verbiage one way. Many other people interpreted it another way. That means the language was sufficiently ambiguous to allow for multiple interpretations - hence the verbiage was either unfortunately poor, or purposefully ambiguous. The fact that they specifically use a present tense verb in the verbiage makes me feel like the second case is true - but I have no proof of that so it's all conjecture.

 

I hope that helps clarify my own personal position since I think the multiple replies and quotes muddied it.

[X_Vindictuz_X]

To be explicitly clear, my only issue is with the emails I received after the eligibility window had passed telling me that if I renewed my sub I'd have early access. That statement was blatantly false and so constitutes false advertising. My position is that bioware should have removed any and all early access verbiage from KoTFE email marketing to non-subscribers after the eligibility deadline had passed. It is also my position that Bioware should have continued to use early access verbiage to subscribed players in marketing emails to remind them that they needed to stay subbed to get that perk.

 

When speaking specifically about false advertising, each advertising mechanism is taken on it's own. It doesn't matter that the KoTFE site had the eligibility terms on it, the email marketing did not, and that was deceitful as a user could bypass the KoTFE page entirely and resub based on the false email claim.

 

Now our second issue is the page itself. You (and lots of others) claim to interpret their verbiage one way. Many other people interpreted it another way. That means the language was sufficiently ambiguous to allow for multiple interpretations - hence the verbiage was either unfortunately poor, or purposefully ambiguous. The fact that they specifically use a present tense verb in the verbiage makes me feel like the second case is true - but I have no proof of that so it's all conjecture.

 

I hope that helps clarify my own personal position since I think the multiple replies and quotes muddied it.

 

I agree, its also been proven that the ToS never has a leg to stand on in court and peoples right to to not be scamed by shady tactics trumps this.

 

"Too many companies/lawyers treat website Terms of Service (TOS) as boilerplate agreements that no one reads. Many companies simply put a link at the bottom of the homepage. This approach continues to prove ineffective, as courts are more frequently refusing to enforce TOS absent properly drafted terms and a requirement that the user read and/or affirmatively accept the terms. In a recent 9th

Circuit Appeal, the court ruled against Barnes&Noble stating that “where the link to a website’s terms of use is buried at the bottom of the page or tucked away in obscure corners of the website where users are unlikely to see it, courts have refused to enforce the browse-wrap agreement.”-socialgameslaw

Edited October 21, 2015 by X_Vindictuz_X

[cagthehack]

IT'S IRELLAVANT. It shouldn't have even been on the site past august tenth. Why should people see what they can't have? They simply should have had a message on the qualified sub holder's account page telling them not to unsub till oct 19th to keep their early access. OR they should have had a better model for early access altogether which is my argument.

 

QFT. "Early Access" should not have even been on the site past Aug 10. It's misleading. Also I would think BW would want to make returning subs happy? I mean, it's not like this game doesn't need subs. Pissing off the new/returning subs for any reason is just bad business.

[Vyzare]

Arguing one way or the other doesn't change the fact that EA, through poor wording has annoyed a fair few people.

Am I annoyed at myself for misreading the text as well? Yes, most certainly. However, when a company causes me to be annoyed at myself I'm almost also certainly annoyed at them as well. Being unhappy with a company that provides an unnecessary service is not exactly the best way to keep me paying for said service.

[brutin]

Arguing one way or the other doesn't change the fact that EA, through poor wording has annoyed a fair few people.

 

It was not poor wording. it was exactly the wording they wanted. It was marketing-ese. It was all technically true but designed to leave a different impression if you only read the headline and didn't read all the details.

[VanorDM]

To be explicitly clear, my only issue is with the emails I received after the eligibility window had passed telling me that if I renewed my sub I'd have early access.

 

Ok, let's look at that. Do you have an email that you got after aug 11th that stated you were eligible for early access if you subscribed on that day?

 

I got an email on sept 23rd that said "Last Chance for Nico’s Duster" But nothing prior to that so they may of been purged.

 

So if you can paste something from an email after aug 11th saying you could get early access then I'll agree that EA is guilty of deceptive marketing.

 

My position is that bioware should have removed any and all early access verbiage from KoTFE email marketing to non-subscribers after the eligibility deadline had passed.

 

I'd agree, but again, none of my emails actually say anything about early access. But maybe I'm missing some.

[Pagy]

It was not poor wording. it was exactly the wording they wanted. It was marketing-ese. It was all technically true but designed to leave a different impression if you only read the headline and didn't read all the details.

i dont believe that at all tho as this misunderstanding is to their financial detriment.

 

confusing players doesnt lead to more purchases, it led to people subbing less. so their ambiguity cost them potential revenue.

[Vyzare]

It was not poor wording. it was exactly the wording they wanted. It was marketing-ese. It was all technically true but designed to leave a different impression if you only read the headline and didn't read all the details.

 

Call it misleading wording then. Either way it directly resulted in angry consumers, which aren't likely to stay subbed. EA is turning all their franchises toxic, for me I think this is the straw that'll drive me to totally avoid anything with an EA tag in the future.

 

People can defend the wording all they want, but it won't change the fact that is has upset people and upset consumers aren't going to give up more money. It was a quick cash grab they were after, and they succeeded. They know that they'll keep their diehard fans, as they'll apparently argue with upset people about why they shouldn't be upset. I'll be spending my money elsewhere though.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Vyzare

[X_Vindictuz_X]

Ok, let's look at that. Do you have an email that you got after aug 11th that stated you were eligible for early access if you subscribed on that day?

 

I got an email on sept 23rd that said "Last Chance for Nico’s Duster" But nothing prior to that so they may of been purged.

 

So if you can paste something from an email after aug 11th saying you could get early access then I'll agree that EA is guilty of deceptive marketing.

 

 

 

I'd agree, but again, none of my emails actually say anything about early access. But maybe I'm missing some.

 

 

give it a rest you've proven your a whiteknight already

[VanorDM]

give it a rest you've proven your a whiteknight already

 

Don't like it, don't read my posts. Ignore is pretty easy here. Or do like I do and report posts like yours. But one thing I will not do is let someone like you control what I post.

Edited October 21, 2015 by VanorDM

[brutin]

i dont believe that at all tho as this misunderstanding is to their financial detriment.

 

confusing players doesnt lead to more purchases, it led to people subbing less. so their ambiguity cost them potential revenue.

 

You don't put an asterick and then put the full details elsewhere if you want everybody to be clear on what is needed.

 

It may come back to bite them, but I do think it was done intentionally to avoid returning players waiting until Oct 27th to re-sub.

 

I do have early access so it doesn't affect me, but I can easily see how people could be confused by the wording.

[X_Vindictuz_X]

Don't like it, don't read my posts. Ignore is pretty easy here. Or do like I do and report posts like yours. But one thing I will not do is let someone like you control what I post.

 

wow cry more lol

[VanorDM]

wow cry more lol

 

Please keep it coming, maybe I'll be able to report you enough to get you banned.

[Pagy]

I do have early access so it doesn't affect me, but I can easily see how people could be confused by the wording.

absolutely it's confusing, this thread is proof enough.

 

but still, it wasnt a bait and switch...this poor wording cost them earlier subs for sure. personally i wouldn't have subbed 3 months to get early access, but im sure some would if they understood the terms correctly.

[Sathid]

The wording was not poor and it was discussed here,in game,on many sites etc for months.

 

I say the Mods here start deleting all these posts and leave one,these people and i mean 90% because i bet there is maybe 10% of that (just being kind here) that may have a valid excuse,the rest will complain about anything,these are the people that hold you up in lines etc in life.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Sathid

[VanorDM]

absolutely it's confusing, this thread is proof enough.

 

All this thread really proves is some people read what they wanted it to say. Which isn't to say it couldn't of been more clear, but it was not anywhere as confusing as some people seem to believe.

 

this poor wording cost them earlier subs for sure.

 

I would debate that. Clearly a lot of people subscribed at some point between Aug 11th and Oct 19th thinking they'd get early access. So if anything they gained subs this way.

 

The only way they'll lose subs, is if people who subed for early access cancel their subs, but wouldn't of done that anyway.

Edited October 21, 2015 by VanorDM

[brutin]

Call it misleading wording then. Either way it directly resulted in angry consumers, which aren't likely to stay subbed. EA is turning all their franchises toxic, for me I think this is the straw that'll drive me to totally avoid anything with an EA tag in the future.

 

People can defend the wording all they want, but it won't change the fact that is has upset people and upset consumers aren't going to give up more money. It was a quick cash grab they were after, and they succeeded. They know that they'll keep their diehard fans, as they'll apparently argue with upset people about why they shouldn't be upset. I'll be spending my money elsewhere though.

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending them. I agree it was misleading. My only point is I don't think it was accidental or just a poor choice of words. They chose their words carefully to leave an incorrect impression on people if they didn't read all the details.

 

This is common for EA though. They do crazy things though. I remember when they got into an issue because of a clause in the origin agreement that if you didn't log into your origin account for 2 years they could delete it AND all games you had purchases. They had to back off that one.

[nimmerstil]

... I've been sorting through storage and haven't played yet.

I feel your pain

[nimmerstil]

It's not trolling when you can't be inclined to read a faq

It is trolling when you've been explained how the wording could easily be interpreted in a different way then you read it.

[Pagy]

I would debate that. Clearly a lot of people subscribed at some point between Aug 11th and Oct 19th thinking they'd get early access. So if anything they gained subs this way.

you're thinking quantity, not duration. i subbed last week thinking i'd get it. if it really mattered to me, they would have had my sub in aug.

[X_Vindictuz_X]

Please keep it coming, maybe I'll be able to report you enough to get you banned.

 

Do you think your the only person who can report lol?

[nimmerstil]

It was quite simple, if you qualified for ALL FOUR AWARDS, then you got early access - period.

 

I understood that too (and got it cheap), but I can also see how people might have understood something different from the text.

 

 

If you guys could not understand the insane amount of information that was literally shoved in your face in huge, bold letters, banners, emails, web site, live streams, etc. etc. infinity, then you DEFINITELY should NOT be allowed on the internet unsupervised.

 

The problem is all that inconsistent information. If the information about the requirements to qualify for Early Access had been restricted to the Terms & Conditions then it would have been much, much clearer.

 

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have another character to start through the story.

Enjoy. I found early access brought me SoR early, so i'll start with that first

[LexonLightsaber]

Ok, let's look at that. Do you have an email that you got after aug 11th that stated you were eligible for early access if you subscribed on that day?

 

I got an email on sept 23rd that said "Last Chance for Nico’s Duster" But nothing prior to that so they may of been purged.

 

So if you can paste something from an email after aug 11th saying you could get early access then I'll agree that EA is guilty of deceptive marketing.

 

 

 

I'd agree, but again, none of my emails actually say anything about early access. But maybe I'm missing some.

 

All the emails direct you to here http://www.swtor.com/fallen-empire/rewards, even the ones that were sent out on the 19th. When you get directed to that page you see early access in bold along with whatever they say you were getting, why does someone have to read further. this is a marketing ploy by bioware plain and simple, this has been proving by now regardless of the disclaimers!