You are not going to get much traction using your current argument. The terms of service agreement that you go along with just by ordering the game or buying anything from Ubisoft digitally, allow for Ubisoft to change it at will, as you only have a license to use the product, you do not actually own anything. It's the whole reason they can release a game as unfinished as this, and constantly update it without our permission.
You may be able to get somewhere with the fact that some of their in game menus refer to activities in the game that cannot be accomplished, ie guaranteed assassination working on ALL enemies.
The only other option I see is to get a court to nullify the agreement by ruling that Ubisofts conduct was unconscionable. A ruling such as that would allow the court to force Ubisoft to either fix what had been done, or make restitution. I really dont see the diamond slot issue being much use here, sure it's down right infuriating, but they issued a release about, and notified the community at large about changes, and furthermore it does not alter the base game enough to violate an end user license agreement (EULA).
The only action I see thus far by Ubisoft that may be deemed unconscionable by a court may be their level scaling. There were multiple interviews and press releases stating that this would not be a feature in Valhalla, yet without even warning us, they placed it in the game, fundamentally altering the playing experience of anyone who bought it before December 14th. If you bought it at launch, this is not the same game you played on day one.
But even after saying all this, EULAs are so broadly written that it is almost impossible to get a company to issue refunds, or make changes, because they hold all the cards. Even CD project red was not deemed unconscionable by a court, they were shamed into providing refunds by the public and corporate partners. Until digital ownership laws are updated to reflect the current times, its buyer beware, or just dont play their game.
mtx are not subject to the same stipulations as the base game, they are a separate entity sold as an addition to the game, not as part of the game.For Ubisoft to legally be able to change the stats on an already purchased armor they would have to make it clear in the store that the statistical value can be changed at any time which they did not do.Writing an article after people have already purchased the item doesn't release them from that obligation.They didn't just change the diamond to regular runes they also lowered the stats which makes the item far less useful to the player.This is a shameful move on Ubisofts part.If you need a technical term it's called fraud by wire or telegraph, which even in these minor terms means selling an item to a player and then lowering the value without any warning.If Ubisoft were giving these items for free then they are well within their rights to change them as they please.However, when people have already paid for the item with an expectation of performance then Ubisoft has an obligation to offer people a refund for having changed the statistics of the product.If you bought a month of netflix for 20 dollars that included everything,then a week later they said well we're only going to give you have the services, you know full well you'd be wanting a refund, you wouldn't let them get away with that nonsense, why should Ubisoft get away with it ?
@rincewind2981 Just because something is written in a TOS doesn't make it legally binding. If a company commits a crime then it void's their TOS. False Advertisement is a crime. You're not legally allowed to sign away your rights.
When it comes to changes in the game, yes they can change anything they want as long as said content wasn't a direct selling point. ( Like saying the game has multiplayer, and the mode is never added). The reason why they have no ground to stand when it comes to the microtransactions is because they are a separate purchase. You can't change an items features that are advertised after the product is purchased.
If you look in the helix store you will see that the item's preview shows the item's slots in the images. That makes it an advertised feature. To top it off, the day they released the Gothic set was the same day they started to nerf other exclusive armors slots and didn't disclose the changes in their publicly released patch notes.
The fact that they admitted that they were planning to change the slots and still listed the item in their shop rather than delaying it for the changes first shows this was their intention in the first place.
That being said, they can get away with changing the items as long as they give, at the very least, the Helix credits back to the players who purchased the gear or give the option for a helix refund.
Until then, they can easily be held liable.
They could always fight the charges in court and who knows, maybe even win, but the fact that they are fighting such a thing rather than making things right with the people who support you would be a PR nightmare.
Let's unpack a couple of things, the argument you brought about is legal in nature, we will get to this, your moral stance on the other hand is spot on, Ubisoft should offer refunds when they change a product, altering something so fundamentally after purchase is screwed up, but with many things, morality does not always line up with legality.
Now, back to the matter at hand.
First, Terms of Service agreements may be one thing, but we are not talking about Tos agreements, we are talking EULAs, which are legally binding. There are whole sectors of digital copyright laws devoted to these, and they are always in corporate favor. Before buying any product digitally you agree to be bound by them. Ask Ubisoft for your end user license agreement, they will be happy to show it to you.
Second, even though I said product in the above paragraph, you have actually not purchased a product, that armor that you claim you have bought is not a product. You have only bought a license to use a piece of their intellectual property, they can change that intellectual property, in any way, up to and including deletion of said product. The only way this comes out as a bait and switch, is if they alter the intellectual property between time a purchase and download, and even then youd only be eligible for a refund, at that, there is still no crime.
I get it, it's a raw deal, for all of us, but as we only buy access to something they own, they will always control what it is, even to the detriment of our sense of fun. I wish you the best in your endeavour, if it works out for you, it works out for us all. Keep arguing, I just dont think it's going to get you anywhere.
I just went over Ubisoft's EULA and I still see nothing that lets them justly do what they did.
First, here is a LINK to the EULA that I am getting my information from so you can see for yourself.
9. CHANGES TO THIS EULA OR TO THE PRODUCT.
UBISOFT reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to revise, update, change, modify, add to, supplement, or delete certain terms of this EULA for security,
legal, best practice or regulatory reasons. Such changes will be effective with or, as applicable, without prior notice to You.
You can review the most current version of this EULA by clicking on the “EULA” link located on the Product or on ubi.com.
You are responsible for checking this EULA periodically for changes. If any future changes to this EULA are unacceptable to You or cause
You to no longer be in agreement or compliance with this EULA, You may terminate this EULA in accordance with Section 8 and must immediately
uninstall the Product and destroy all copies of the Product. Your continued use of the Product following any revision to this EULA constitutes
Your complete and irrevocable acceptance of any and all such changes.
You can't legally demand that a customer has to destroy the product that they legally purchased. This goes against your basic owner's rights. This wouldn't hold up in court in the slightest.
10.3 No Waiver. No failure or delay by UBISOFT (or its licensors) to exercise any right or remedy provided under this EULA or by law
shall constitute a waiver of that or any other right or remedy, nor shall it preclude or restrict the further exercise of that or
any other right or remedy. No single or partial exercise of such right or remedy shall preclude or restrict the further exercise of that
or any other right or remedy. Waiver of a right or remedy may be considered to have taken place only after signing of a written statement to
this effect by UBISOFT or by the User.
We, the consumer, have never entered a written agreement with Ubisoft that allows them to waiver our rights in regards to property ownership. This falls into "Goods and Services" and as much as Ubisoft wants their product to be considered as a service, it will never legally be considered a service. A service is like an online membership. Just because you pay once doesn't mean you have access to the game's online service for ever. The fact that we aren't expected to pay for the same DLC item once makes it a Goods.
and now the bombshell.
THIS EULA IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE EXTENT AUTHORISED BY LAW.
As I mentioned you can't legally give away your rights in an EULA or a TOS. It has to be a written and signed contract.(and even then that isn't 100% legally binding in certain cases) Granted, consumer rights isn't world wide but in the U.S. we have the Consumer Bill of Rights and in Australia we have the ACCC.
The EULA does mention that before someone can sue them they must file a claim at HERE first to try to work out the issue away from the public's eye. ( Because what they are doing is scummy and a PR nightmare.)
Well done foxhound, and I only looked at Federal Consumer Laws,but Federal laws are binding,Ubisofts policies are not,for example, a store has a "no refund" policy,Now that covers the store if the product is whats described on the box,but say you get a fan which says it has 3 speeds on the box you open it,there are only two,the store has to give a refund because the product is not what was described.Every policy in every store in every state is subject to those laws.Nicely researched on that foxhound!
Congratulations, many of your arguments would be compelling, and cogent, if you in fact OWNED anything in the transaction you had with Ubisoft. They get away with all this because you did not purchase a product, your purchased a license to use something. Something that is under the sole discretion of Ubisoft.
If you bought the game digitally, or purchased any additional content, they can revoke your license at their discretion, period.
If you bought it in physical form, while you may have access to the game that is on your physical media, Ubisoft can stop you from upgrading it, purchasing additional content, or connecting to any of their servers.
You are stuck on the idea of ownership, you didn't buy Assassins creed Valhalla, you dont own it, you bought a license to use it, for the term that Ubisoft sees fit to allow it.
You didn't buy an armor pack, you dont own it, you bought a license to use an armor pack, for the term that Ubisoft sees fit to allow it.
So long as they dont do something so completely beyond the pal, as to be deemed unconscionable by a court of law, you are stuck with their way or the highway.
Well when you're right you're right.
UBISOFT may modify the Product for any reason or without any specific reason, at any time and at its entire discretion, in particular for technical reasons such as updates, maintenance operations and/or resets to improve and/or optimize the Product. You agree that the Product may install or download the modifications automatically. You agree that UBISOFT may stop to support previous versions of the Product upon availability of an updated version. UBISOFT’s channel partners and associated service providers shall have no obligation to furnish any maintenance or customer support with respect to the Product. UBISOFT also reserves the right to amend the Rules of Conduct set out in Section 1 to place limits on the use of the Product.
Well the moment they change my purchase and don't offer me a helix refund will be the moment I no longer support them and will go out of my way to tell everyone willing to listen not to support the company. Hopefully the ACCC gets picked up around the world and hold corporations that manipulate its customer base accountable.
@duskdragon56496 Not even just the Helix store. Their entire game. What that clause in there TOS means is that they can legally sell you a broken game and if you don't agree to their TOS then you're not allowed to update the broken game with the fixes that should have been in the game before it was shipped.
Comes to show you that if a company can get away with releasing a broken and can get away with not fixing it if you don't accept their terms of service.
Pretty sure they would lose in court if they sell a broken product that isn't fixed and refuse to give you a refund or fix it just because you refuse to sign their TOS. ( But that's a whole other can of worms)