General Discussion

Originally posted by Ingrod

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

You do realize that the government can decide what ever they want.  The U.S. governemnt decided that the tomato was a vegatable for tax purposes, even tho it is actually a fruit.

 

For the most people and for culinary purpuoses tomatos are vegetables, vegetables is no a biological tern is a social tern.

Law is mainly a social creation, in most cases for people and laws scientific facts are irrelevant, science cant demostrate or negate the God existence, but many laws are based in the religious people opinions or needs.

You are correct...  Two points here.   1.  The only reason the government ruled that a tomato was a vegetable was to get the taxes from them.  2.  My real point was to show that the government can basically do whatever it want to to.

I would say that laws are completely social creations.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

You do realize that the government can decide what ever they want.  The U.S. governemnt decided that the tomato was a vegatable for tax purposes, even tho it is actually a fruit.

 

The government could tax the real money you make from selling fake money...  Good for the government.

The government could easily make you pay taxes on your monthly sub fee.  And legally, you are supposed to collect taxes on anything you sell.

The U.S government could still say that if you have subscribers living in the US that they own the VP.

On your last part...   You would be surprised what the government would do.  After all thay have done stranger things then this.

You grant far too much power to your government.  Democratic government acts on a mandate from the masses tempered by the law, the constitution, and the rights of citizens.  I will admit that there are dangerous times when the government behaves against its own principles but those changes are never perminant.  They are made with an expiration date attached to them.

 

A deficency within the current rules of law, discovered by the people, would need to arise before the government will act.  They will investigate the matter (and spend a fortune doing it)  They will see what they are allowed to do about the issue with regards to the current laws.  The will create a bill for a new law or an amendment to be voted on.  The bill is voted on by the people you elected.  If it gains a majority vote it is passed onto the sober second thought who is also elected or in some countries appointed by those elected and voted on for a second time.  If it passes them it is brought to the leader and is enacted into law.

There is no deficency within the current rules of law.  Subscription based MMORPGs are not manufacturing virtual products for sale they are providing a service - that is clear.  The government can't step in unless there is something which is unclear.

 

And within the current law, i.e. Tax laws, there is some coverage for taxation on VP.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

You do realize that the government can decide what ever they want.  The U.S. governemnt decided that the tomato was a vegatable for tax purposes, even tho it is actually a fruit.

 

The government could tax the real money you make from selling fake money...  Good for the government.

The government could easily make you pay taxes on your monthly sub fee.  And legally, you are supposed to collect taxes on anything you sell.

The U.S government could still say that if you have subscribers living in the US that they own the VP.

On your last part...   You would be surprised what the government would do.  After all thay have done stranger things then this.

You grant far too much power to your government.  Democratic government acts on a mandate from the masses tempered by the law, the constitution, and the rights of citizens.  I will admit that there are dangerous times when the government behaves against its own principles but those changes are never perminant.  They are made with an expiration date attached to them.

 

A deficency within the current rules of law, discovered by the people, would need to arise before the government will act.  They will investigate the matter (and spend a fortune doing it)  They will see what they are allowed to do about the issue with regards to the current laws.  The will create a bill for a new law or an amendment to be voted on.  The bill is voted on by the people you elected.  If it gains a majority vote it is passed onto the sober second thought who is also elected or in some countries appointed by those elected and voted on for a second time.  If it passes them it is brought to the leader and is enacted into law.

There is no deficency within the current rules of law.  Subscription based MMORPGs are not manufacturing virtual products for sale they are providing a service - that is clear.  The government can't step in unless there is something which is unclear.

 

paragraph 1...  Yeah, that was the way it used to be.  But not any more.  Government does not really follow the mandate of the people...  Only when iit suits their (government) needs.

paragraph 2...  Again that is the way it is supposed to work...  But in reality it does not work that way.  And we both know it.

paragraph 3...  The government can step in any time or place it wants to.  It makes the rules.  Like it or not.  Look at all of the security acts that were passed just after 9/11.  And it depends on how you look at it...  And services can be taxed.  The government can step in and pass any law.  It is then up to someone else to fight it in court as wrong.

Originally posted by Beatnik59

I'd like a bit of regulation, because I'm sick of the scams, wholesale redesigns, and bait and switch that is in this industry: things that the industry cannot and will not regulate on its own.  With digital distribution, I expect the scams to become worse.

The truth is, the MMORPG publishers have us over a barrel, because the software costs us so much up front, and we have absolutely no rights to the software we own, without access to the service we don't own.  The problem is that the MMORPG publishers can turn the things we own into anything they want; including junk we would never want in the first place.  And since they won't allow us to get our money back from that initial software purchse, they have no real incentive to practice restraint.

At the same time, I think players should know what they're getting when they pay for it.  They should also be notified in advance of significant changes to their service, and be given options regarding how they wish to respond to those changes.

So, companies should not be able to say, "buy this great new expansion with new loot for your creature handler and exciting new creatures to tame," and then announce the deletion of the creature handler profession the day after they accept your VISA payment.  That kind of abuse by SOE is what is begging for regulation.

Similarly, the president of SOE said that the combat upgrade game system was "here to stay."  They changed the entire game system later that same year.  Unacceptable.

Also, many people that bought the original game did so in response to ads that encouraged them to "unlock the mystery of the jedi" or something to that effect.  After working on that quest line for 2 years, it was deleted just as many were about to complete it and unlock their long sought after jedi character.

Others who had unlocked their jedi and completed a number of trials etc. to obtain long sought after force powers, had most of those powers deleted, since they didn't fit into the entirely new game system.  Again, completely unacceptable. 

People should not be encouraged to spend money for specific game features or items, only to have them deleted by the service provider at their sole discretion.  This would not be tolerated in any other industry, and it should not be tolerated in MMOs.

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

 

paragraph 1...  Yeah, that was the way it used to be.  But not any more.  Government does not really follow the mandate of the people...  Only when iit suits their (government) needs.

paragraph 2...  Again that is the way it is supposed to work...  But in reality it does not work that way.  And we both know it.

paragraph 3...  The government can step in any time or place it wants to.  It makes the rules.  Like it or not.  Look at all of the security acts that were passed just after 9/11.  And it depends on how you look at it...  And services can be taxed.  The government can step in and pass any law.  It is then up to someone else to fight it in court as wrong.

 

Lets try another angle - an objects owner is the one that has full possession of an object.  Depending on the game, a player does have this (in some games not even this), but only in regards to their fellow players not in regards to the game masters.  Players do not even have full possession of their own characters within the game when it comes to game masters.  Game masters are the agents of the true owners.

The true owners can prove their ownership by simply turning the game off.  Now - you prove that you own that virtual sword on your virtual character in your virtual back pack by preventing the game master from taking it away from you.  Who owns that sword?  Not you.  The government can not even suggest that you own anything because the companies ownership is absolute and can be proved with the flick of their wrist or a few keystrokes.

It is nice to think that as gamers we have rights but the simple fact is we don't unless we ourselves organize and use our purchasing power on the MMORPG makers but even then they would have to agree with us.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by Ian_Hawkmoon

 

 

paragraph 1...  Yeah, that was the way it used to be.  But not any more.  Government does not really follow the mandate of the people...  Only when iit suits their (government) needs.

paragraph 2...  Again that is the way it is supposed to work...  But in reality it does not work that way.  And we both know it.

paragraph 3...  The government can step in any time or place it wants to.  It makes the rules.  Like it or not.  Look at all of the security acts that were passed just after 9/11.  And it depends on how you look at it...  And services can be taxed.  The government can step in and pass any law.  It is then up to someone else to fight it in court as wrong.

 

(I am from Canada so I can not comment on anything you have typed above except to say that it sounds unbelievable to me.  I would ask that you cite an example that does not relate to the dangers of terrorism on how your government ignored the masses, please be specific.  Send me a PM or post it in the off topic forum - there is no point arguing it here since it is off topic.)

 

Lets try another angle - an objects owner is the one that has full possession of an object.  Depending on the game, a player does have this (in some games not even this), but only in regards to their fellow players not in regards to the game masters.  Players do not even have full possession of their own characters within the game when it comes to game masters.  Game masters are the agents of the true owners.

The true owners can prove their ownership by simply turning the game off.  Now - you prove that you own that virtual sword on your virtual character in your virtual back pack by preventing the game master from taking it away from you.  Who owns that sword?  Not you.  The government can not even suggest that you own anything because the companies ownership is absolute and can be proved with the flick of their wrist or a few keystrokes.

It is nice to think that as gamers we have rights but the simple fact is we don't unless we ourselves organize and use our purchasing power on the MMORPG makers but even then they would have to agree with us.

Well, if a company advertises an expansion with specific ingame items and features, and two weeks after purchase the items and features have clearly been removed from the entire game, I think we have a serious problem--one that is not too difficult to prove.

Paying for an online game should be like paying for a satellite t.v. package.  I know what I"m getting, for how long and for what price.  The service provider cannot sell me a package that includes the sports channel, and then at their sole descretion replace the sports channel with the learning channel.  If I pay for a sports channel package for 6 months, I'll get a sports channel package for 6 moths, or I'll get my money back. 

Any service provider that wants to be able to advertise one thing, then sell another, or make any changes they want to a service at any time, without any consideration for the customer has serious ethical problems. 

P.S. the software and subscriptons are already taxed in my jurisdiction, so this isn't the issue.  Preventing serial bait and switch scams is more of a priority in my mind.

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

 

Well, if a company advertises an expansion with specific ingame items and features, and two weeks after purchase the items and features have clearly been removed from the entire game, I think we have a serious problem--one that is not too difficult to prove.

 

Paying for an online game should be like paying for a satellite t.v. package.  I know what I"m getting, for how long and for what price.  The service provider cannot sell me a package that includes the sports channel, and then at their sole descretion replace the sports channel with the learning channel.  If I pay for a sports channel package for 6 months, I'll get a sports channel package for 6 moths, or I'll get my money back. 

Any service provider that wants to be able to advertise one thing, then sell another, or make any changes they want to a service at any time, without any consideration for the customer has serious ethical problems. 

P.S. the software and subscriptons are already taxed in my jurisdiction, so this isn't the issue.  Preventing serial bait and switch scams is more of a priority in my mind.

Originally posted by Wickersham

 

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

 

Well, if a company advertises an expansion with specific ingame items and features, and two weeks after purchase the items and features have clearly been removed from the entire game, I think we have a serious problem--one that is not too difficult to prove.

 

Paying for an online game should be like paying for a satellite t.v. package.  I know what I"m getting, for how long and for what price.  The service provider cannot sell me a package that includes the sports channel, and then at their sole descretion replace the sports channel with the learning channel.  If I pay for a sports channel package for 6 months, I'll get a sports channel package for 6 moths, or I'll get my money back. 

Any service provider that wants to be able to advertise one thing, then sell another, or make any changes they want to a service at any time, without any consideration for the customer has serious ethical problems. 

P.S. the software and subscriptons are already taxed in my jurisdiction, so this isn't the issue.  Preventing serial bait and switch scams is more of a priority in my mind.

I agree it is bad business and unethical (I will never pay for a SOE game), however, the sports channel can decide that they don't want to cover football and hockey and would prefer to cover mens figure skating because they feel that you will enjoy it better.  There's nothing you can do about it so sit back and enjoy crappy music and men in tights until the end of your contract and then exercise your buying power.

 

  Gov intervention in these types of issues based upon "looking out for the best interest of the consumer" could end up resulting in a more undesirable gaming environment in the long run . The underlying motivation is usually about them getting a piece of the pie as it is .

It`s best for consumers to make their  voice heard in response to unethical bu