The frustration is understood. But it's not a bait and switch. The freehold skin is advertised as for use on a freehold. It will be able to be used on a freehold.
There are questions that need to be answered as soon as possible by Intrepid. But everyone makes their own decision to buy or not to buy something that it's unknown exactly what it's for. Like I referenced earlier in the thread, I chose not to buy a freehold skin because I didn't know what exactly it was for.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Apparently Intrepid was under the impression that their customer base had the intelligence required to make informed (or in this case, uninformed) decisions when spending their own money, like: "I don't yet know what this cosmetic is for so I should probably wait. Or accept that it may not be what I'm assuming it is."
You literally can’t wait to buy them. They’re available for a month then gone forever. So if there are limitations that were not advertised, hopefully they’ll allow refunds.
5
Options
CptBrownBeardMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
You literally can’t wait to buy them. They’re available for a month then gone forever. So if there are limitations that were not advertised, hopefully they’ll allow refunds.
Granted. I'd personally suggest that they come up with a quick form of reference. Nothing too crazy to implement, perhaps a handful of symbols that they could slap on the corner of a cosmetic image to denote it's general purpose. Something like:
{T1, Freehold, Forge}
or
{T2, Pet, Non-combat}
Or even just a list. I'd take a list. Anything that would help put this issue to rest.
Fayle Linn (is it pronounced 'Failing'?)...
Are you planning on filing a lawsuit about $100 or so in digital images? Will you hire an attorney, much less a competent one? I'm sorry I am neither sympathetic nor enthusiastic about your quest, though I would enjoy being asked to serve on the jury.
I know there have been quite a fewlot of questions regarding cosmetics over the years. As we get further along in development, we'll be providing more specific information regarding what specific buildings, items, etc., you can place each cosmetic on. We'll update this for all past items.
I had a meeting with the Design Team the other day, instead of last February as I promised, (as they are working on further details for the Freehold System) to help clarify some of the answers to the questions y'allthe community members have been asking, and they will be sending me information. Once I receive this, I will be working on a content update to reflect that information, and going forward, we will provide those details on each individual cosmetic item. Updating all the past items to provide more clarity on what in-game item types you can place the cosmetics on will take time once this process begins, so please bare with us as we start from present to past items, updating their information.
We appreciate your support, and patience. As systems get more finalized like the Freehold System, these very specific answers to questions will be easier to define moving forward.
This is horseshit. You need to just answer the questions before someone says the phrase "Bait and Switch". Oopsie
§ 238.2 Initial offer.
(a) No statement or illustration should be used in any advertisement which creates a false impression of the grade, quality, make, value, currency of model, size, color, usability, or origin of the product offered, or which may otherwise misrepresent the product in such a manner that later, on disclosure of the true facts, the purchaser may be switched from the advertised product to another.
(b) Even though the true facts are subsequently made known to the buyer, the law is violated if the first contact or interview is secured by deception
I have screenshotted this, in case you decide that removing it will help you legally.
Are you a moron? Seriously, you have no grounds for a lawsuit. The fact that they have not given you a detailed explanation of every item in the game and how it works is not a bait and switch. You sound like a 12-year-old child. Just because you had an impression in your mind of what the item would be doesn't mean that the item will function that way. Second, playing the game is a license, you don't own any tangible property. Third, if you were going to bring a lawsuit, what economic damages did you suffer? You won't get a court to make the developers do what you want in programming the game. The most you would get would be economic damages.
A bait and switch would be if someone tried to take one vehicle and make it look like another vehicle. Like if I took a car kit that made the frame look like a Porsche, but the car was really some $10,000 car with the body of the Porche. If I sold you a coin that looked like another coin but was a different year. It's to prevent fraud. I tell you my store is going to have a sale and the item on sale is gone right away and I have already lured you to my store and won't sell you the item at the advertised price.
In the real world if an attorney files a frivolous lawsuit the attorney for the other party can ask the judge for sanctions against the party. That means that the legal fees of the defendant would be paid by the plaintiff who filed the frivolous suit. Here is an example from the Texas statute, but I am sure California has similar laws. The attorney could also be disciplined, and no one wants to have their law licensed suspended.
I have screenshotted this, in case you decide that removing it will help you legally.
Oh cool, an Internet lawyer!
So, if you think anything Intrepid have done fits under the regulations you have linked, you have an expensive and pointless legal bill in your future.
All building skins in the game are sold on the condition that they are used on in game freeholds. In order for you to have any grounds, the absolute first thing that needs to happen is that one that is advertised as being able to be used on a freehold is - for some reason - not able to be used on a freehold.
While it may well not be ideal to not have the details for which buildings they can be used on, it also isn't something that warrants legal action, as you seem to want to attempt here.
But hey, go ahead, try it. Let us all know how much it costs you.
I am sure that it wouldn't need to come down to 'bait and switch' legal action. If Intrepid doesn't deliver freeholds as expected by each individual then I'm sure they would be able to contact Intrepid to resolve the issue amicably without involving expensive lawyers, whose fees would far exceed the funds spent on cosmetics.
I agree that Intrepid would do well to clearly define the expectations for cosmetics to avoid refund requests in the future.
I am sure that it wouldn't need to come down to 'bait and switch' legal action. If Intrepid doesn't deliver freeholds as expected by each individual then I'm sure they would be able to contact Intrepid to resolve the issue amicably without involving expensive lawyers, whose fees would far exceed the funds spent on cosmetics.
I agree that Intrepid would do well to clearly define the expectations for cosmetics to avoid refund requests in the future.
Right, this is probably the most reasonable opinion so far. A lot of people are used to either being a fan or dealing with shady mega corps. In both cases there is a strong emotional reflex.
Intrepid is made up of people who are very intimate with project and therefore their own emotions are at play here. In other words you can be a lot more nuanced. You don't need to 'shout' and threaten class action, they can hear you just fine if you use your 'inside voice' and say you are disappointed. They are a small company. The literal lead of marketing spoke here. That's a huge deal.
At the same time the fact that they made these things without that clarity is something one could reasonably be disappointed in. I am not effected by the freehold skins. The house I got will look bitchin on any building type But at the same time, it does worry me. I was under the impression they made these things with a lot more intentionality than seems to have been the case or maybe it was the case and they just literally 'forgot to label everything' when putting out the marketing, because quick reminder, they did not have Margaret day 1 of selling these things.
To admonish people's disappointment or feeling misled due to a flaw in Intrepid's original approach is not a good thing. If you baby people, they won't feel the sting of failure needed to improve where it counts. Admonish their tone and 'shouting', not their pain or disappointment as 'being unintelligent and dumb.'
This is a fixable mistake. So let them fix it. They need neither your defense nor admonishment. If they really don't need the money, they have the freedom to 'make people whole' who may have made purchases they wouldn't have. Hopefully that also means they can make things have more distinct 'use cases' without factoring in how much they have to refund people as a result for a healthier design long term.
I hope that anything that they do not or have not specified what building it goes on will be able to be put on anything.
If it says Freehold, it can be only used in a Freehold. If it says Tavern, only on a Tavern ,etc.
And since they did not put limitations on most of the stuff already sold, those skins should stay being free to be put on anything. It would be in bad taste to put limitations on already sold items. We bought on faith, so that faith should be appreciated and allowed for.
Once they start to specify, we will know, and can decide what to buy.
Fayle Linn (is it pronounced 'Failing'?)...
Are you planning on filing a lawsuit about $100 or so in digital images? Will you hire an attorney, much less a competent one? I'm sorry I am neither sympathetic nor enthusiastic about your quest, though I would enjoy being asked to serve on the jury.
I would like to volunteer to join you on that jury!
In reality, there is so much legal cover that I doubt any lawsuit wound have standing.
What actually bothers me the most is the assumption that Intrepid is either acting on bad faith or won't make every attempt to work on behalf of the users' best interests. Especially when they literally have not given anyone justification for such an attitude.
Any word on this yet? You bring out new buildings every month, and I can't even consider buying them cos I don't know whether or not I'll actually be able to use them.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
maybe it was the case and they just literally 'forgot to label everything' when putting out the marketing
We've been asking for clarity for a looooong time. If it was that they'd just 'forgotten', they could have corrected that months and months ago.
That's true about a lot of things at Intrepid. So you'll get no counter defense from me. That's just a valid feeling to have at this point. Their cosmetic policy is unclear on more than just buildings.
Any word on this yet? You bring out new buildings every month, and I can't even consider buying them cos I don't know whether or not I'll actually be able to use them.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
I understand the sentiment but the issue is it's not just a 15 minute meeting since they haven't solidified what all the freehold buildings are. Even if they have an idea of what they want, coming out and saying what they are means they are comiting to that plan which they may want to change. It's easier to leave it open so they can assign the cosmetics to buildings when they know for sure what those buildings are.
When it comes that time, i'd imagine that they could be flexible with what cosmetics can be put on what buildings. Either allowing some to be put over multiple buildings that make since or making versions of the cosmetic for different buildings.
Any word on this yet? You bring out new buildings every month, and I can't even consider buying them cos I don't know whether or not I'll actually be able to use them.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
I understand the sentiment but the issue is it's not just a 15 minute meeting since they haven't solidified what all the freehold buildings are. Even if they have an idea of what they want, coming out and saying what they are means they are comiting to that plan which they may want to change. It's easier to leave it open so they can assign the cosmetics to buildings when they know for sure what those buildings are.
When it comes that time, i'd imagine that they could be flexible with what cosmetics can be put on what buildings. Either allowing some to be put over multiple buildings that make since or making versions of the cosmetic for different buildings.
Which means now is a good time to reiterate or reinforce the fact that buying housing skins, (while certainly a player’s choice) currently isn’t fully fleshed-out.
Wouldn’t want new players assuming they can buy four (4) housing cosmetics for the four seasons … and display them all at once in a freehold. Even if it was their choice to buy not knowing that info ahead of time.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited March 2022
When is Nodes 3?
(I've been asking Steven and Margaret for the third Know Your Nodes article for almost three years now and we can't even get that approved for release.)
Any word on this yet? You bring out new buildings every month, and I can't even consider buying them cos I don't know whether or not I'll actually be able to use them.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
I understand the sentiment but the issue is it's not just a 15 minute meeting since they haven't solidified what all the freehold buildings are. Even if they have an idea of what they want, coming out and saying what they are means they are comiting to that plan which they may want to change. It's easier to leave it open so they can assign the cosmetics to buildings when they know for sure what those buildings are.
When it comes that time, i'd imagine that they could be flexible with what cosmetics can be put on what buildings. Either allowing some to be put over multiple buildings that make since or making versions of the cosmetic for different buildings.
It might not be a 15min meeting to decide how much range of choice there will be, but it should be a 15min meeting to decide if there will a range of choice at all. Personally I think each building should have minimum three base structures they could be applied to in addition to a purely decorative option. Perhaps excluding those that are quite clearly a specific building type like the forge.
Any word on this yet? You bring out new buildings every month, and I can't even consider buying them cos I don't know whether or not I'll actually be able to use them.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
I understand the sentiment but the issue is it's not just a 15 minute meeting since they haven't solidified what all the freehold buildings are. Even if they have an idea of what they want, coming out and saying what they are means they are comiting to that plan which they may want to change. It's easier to leave it open so they can assign the cosmetics to buildings when they know for sure what those buildings are.
When it comes that time, i'd imagine that they could be flexible with what cosmetics can be put on what buildings. Either allowing some to be put over multiple buildings that make since or making versions of the cosmetic for different buildings.
It might not be a 15min meeting to decide how much range of choice there will be, but it should be a 15min meeting to decide if there will a range of choice at all. Personally I think each building should have minimum three base structures they could be applied to in addition to a purely decorative option. Perhaps excluding those that are quite clearly a specific building type like the forge.
Exactly. What's the impact on coding? What's the impact on revenue? What's the impact on customer satisfaction? Decision.
Bump. We still need an answer to what the products you are currently selling will do in the game. What are we buying exactly?
The longer this goes on, the more I think you are currently selling products that doesn't match with what you actually want to do with freehold buildings, or for some reason you can't apply the skins to those freehold buildings with the design and technology you have, to the extent that players reasonably expect, so you fear an uproar.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Right now I'm buying a building style saying, "This looks good, I hope I can actually use it in-game."
As a result, I'm extremely picky about what building styles I've bought. They have to be really, really good. Unlike a costume piece, where I know I can use it if I want to.
I assume that there have been more than one 15 minute meeting about this. I hope that they come out with an answer soon though. So many skins, I have to really love the concept before buying.
I agree with everyone here about how they should really give us more details on this, but I think I understand why they haven't come out with the details yet. They are still early in development and lots of things are subject to change, this we all know. So my theory is because things might change about freehold buildings and skins and whatnot, they don't want to give a definite answer too early and then change it after purchases were made. Imagine that person who was already upset wanting to sue. If they had specifically said it is for a specific building type and then change it later, then that person actually might have grounds to sue because they bought when it said for building A and now it changed or that type of building isn't going to be on freeholds anymore or something. I'm NOT saying its ok for them to just leave us in the dark like this, I just think they are being careful and trying to fully figure this out and why its talking so long. I also really hope we get more info soon friends!
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Selling JPEGs of cosmetics that may or may function the way you imagine them to doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the project. It's a big reason people call Ashes a scam. I can understand if they don't want to give details that are subject to change, but they hardly communicate that at all.
A simple disclaimer saying "The specific functions of player housing are subject to change, so we can't give any details yet of how this item will function in game" would go a long way IMO.
What do you guys imagine the Leyline Orrery to do?
It looks like a building you can walk inside, but considering what an orrery is IRL, and the vague nature of the descriptions, it could very well be a model you place on a shelf in your house.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Selling JPEGs of cosmetics that may or may function the way you imagine them to doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the project. It's a big reason people call Ashes a scam. I can understand if they don't want to give details that are subject to change, but they hardly communicate that at all.
"It's a big reason why people call Ashes a scam?" That doesn't seem completely made up at all.
What do you guys imagine the Leyline Orrery to do?
It looks like a building you can walk inside, but considering what an orrery is IRL, and the vague nature of the descriptions, it could very well be a model you place on a shelf in your house.
It's a building skin. That's what it "does". It changes the appearance of a freehold building you own. None of those facts are in question. Your suggestions are borderline insane, and I'm not sure you understand what this thread is even about.
People are questioning whether or not a skin will alter the appearance of an entire freehold (the way a costume alters the appearance of all a player's gear), or if it will just change the appearance of one building. People are questioning whether a skin can be applied to any building, or just certain ones. Those are the questions people have. Not whether it is "a model you place on a shelf in your house".
If you think that an orrery has to be tiny, you must have never watched the movie The Dark Crystal (which I'm sure inspired this cosmetic).
I'm sure your comments here are just exaggerations to make a point, but I don't think they're extremely helpful.
Comments
There are questions that need to be answered as soon as possible by Intrepid. But everyone makes their own decision to buy or not to buy something that it's unknown exactly what it's for. Like I referenced earlier in the thread, I chose not to buy a freehold skin because I didn't know what exactly it was for.
You literally can’t wait to buy them. They’re available for a month then gone forever. So if there are limitations that were not advertised, hopefully they’ll allow refunds.
Granted. I'd personally suggest that they come up with a quick form of reference. Nothing too crazy to implement, perhaps a handful of symbols that they could slap on the corner of a cosmetic image to denote it's general purpose. Something like:
{T1, Freehold, Forge}
or
{T2, Pet, Non-combat}
Or even just a list. I'd take a list. Anything that would help put this issue to rest.
Are you planning on filing a lawsuit about $100 or so in digital images? Will you hire an attorney, much less a competent one? I'm sorry I am neither sympathetic nor enthusiastic about your quest, though I would enjoy being asked to serve on the jury.
Are you a moron? Seriously, you have no grounds for a lawsuit. The fact that they have not given you a detailed explanation of every item in the game and how it works is not a bait and switch. You sound like a 12-year-old child. Just because you had an impression in your mind of what the item would be doesn't mean that the item will function that way. Second, playing the game is a license, you don't own any tangible property. Third, if you were going to bring a lawsuit, what economic damages did you suffer? You won't get a court to make the developers do what you want in programming the game. The most you would get would be economic damages.
A bait and switch would be if someone tried to take one vehicle and make it look like another vehicle. Like if I took a car kit that made the frame look like a Porsche, but the car was really some $10,000 car with the body of the Porche. If I sold you a coin that looked like another coin but was a different year. It's to prevent fraud. I tell you my store is going to have a sale and the item on sale is gone right away and I have already lured you to my store and won't sell you the item at the advertised price.
In the real world if an attorney files a frivolous lawsuit the attorney for the other party can ask the judge for sanctions against the party. That means that the legal fees of the defendant would be paid by the plaintiff who filed the frivolous suit. Here is an example from the Texas statute, but I am sure California has similar laws. The attorney could also be disciplined, and no one wants to have their law licensed suspended.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/CP/htm/CP.10.htm
So, if you think anything Intrepid have done fits under the regulations you have linked, you have an expensive and pointless legal bill in your future.
All building skins in the game are sold on the condition that they are used on in game freeholds. In order for you to have any grounds, the absolute first thing that needs to happen is that one that is advertised as being able to be used on a freehold is - for some reason - not able to be used on a freehold.
While it may well not be ideal to not have the details for which buildings they can be used on, it also isn't something that warrants legal action, as you seem to want to attempt here.
But hey, go ahead, try it. Let us all know how much it costs you.
I agree that Intrepid would do well to clearly define the expectations for cosmetics to avoid refund requests in the future.
Right, this is probably the most reasonable opinion so far. A lot of people are used to either being a fan or dealing with shady mega corps. In both cases there is a strong emotional reflex.
Intrepid is made up of people who are very intimate with project and therefore their own emotions are at play here. In other words you can be a lot more nuanced. You don't need to 'shout' and threaten class action, they can hear you just fine if you use your 'inside voice' and say you are disappointed. They are a small company. The literal lead of marketing spoke here. That's a huge deal.
At the same time the fact that they made these things without that clarity is something one could reasonably be disappointed in. I am not effected by the freehold skins. The house I got will look bitchin on any building type But at the same time, it does worry me. I was under the impression they made these things with a lot more intentionality than seems to have been the case or maybe it was the case and they just literally 'forgot to label everything' when putting out the marketing, because quick reminder, they did not have Margaret day 1 of selling these things.
To admonish people's disappointment or feeling misled due to a flaw in Intrepid's original approach is not a good thing. If you baby people, they won't feel the sting of failure needed to improve where it counts. Admonish their tone and 'shouting', not their pain or disappointment as 'being unintelligent and dumb.'
This is a fixable mistake. So let them fix it. They need neither your defense nor admonishment. If they really don't need the money, they have the freedom to 'make people whole' who may have made purchases they wouldn't have. Hopefully that also means they can make things have more distinct 'use cases' without factoring in how much they have to refund people as a result for a healthier design long term.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
We've been asking for clarity for a looooong time. If it was that they'd just 'forgotten', they could have corrected that months and months ago.
If it says Freehold, it can be only used in a Freehold. If it says Tavern, only on a Tavern ,etc.
And since they did not put limitations on most of the stuff already sold, those skins should stay being free to be put on anything. It would be in bad taste to put limitations on already sold items. We bought on faith, so that faith should be appreciated and allowed for.
Once they start to specify, we will know, and can decide what to buy.
Woop!
I would like to volunteer to join you on that jury!
In reality, there is so much legal cover that I doubt any lawsuit wound have standing.
What actually bothers me the most is the assumption that Intrepid is either acting on bad faith or won't make every attempt to work on behalf of the users' best interests. Especially when they literally have not given anyone justification for such an attitude.
For the sake of a 15mins conversation in a meeting, I'd have thought that Intrepid could give us the info we need. For a company that prides itself on its customer focus and openness, this is getting to be rather poor.
That's true about a lot of things at Intrepid. So you'll get no counter defense from me. That's just a valid feeling to have at this point. Their cosmetic policy is unclear on more than just buildings.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
I understand the sentiment but the issue is it's not just a 15 minute meeting since they haven't solidified what all the freehold buildings are. Even if they have an idea of what they want, coming out and saying what they are means they are comiting to that plan which they may want to change. It's easier to leave it open so they can assign the cosmetics to buildings when they know for sure what those buildings are.
When it comes that time, i'd imagine that they could be flexible with what cosmetics can be put on what buildings. Either allowing some to be put over multiple buildings that make since or making versions of the cosmetic for different buildings.
You’re right, @mcstackerson.
Which means now is a good time to reiterate or reinforce the fact that buying housing skins, (while certainly a player’s choice) currently isn’t fully fleshed-out.
Wouldn’t want new players assuming they can buy four (4) housing cosmetics for the four seasons … and display them all at once in a freehold. Even if it was their choice to buy not knowing that info ahead of time.
(I've been asking Steven and Margaret for the third Know Your Nodes article for almost three years now and we can't even get that approved for release.)
It might not be a 15min meeting to decide how much range of choice there will be, but it should be a 15min meeting to decide if there will a range of choice at all. Personally I think each building should have minimum three base structures they could be applied to in addition to a purely decorative option. Perhaps excluding those that are quite clearly a specific building type like the forge.
Exactly. What's the impact on coding? What's the impact on revenue? What's the impact on customer satisfaction? Decision.
The longer this goes on, the more I think you are currently selling products that doesn't match with what you actually want to do with freehold buildings, or for some reason you can't apply the skins to those freehold buildings with the design and technology you have, to the extent that players reasonably expect, so you fear an uproar.
As a result, I'm extremely picky about what building styles I've bought. They have to be really, really good. Unlike a costume piece, where I know I can use it if I want to.
A simple disclaimer saying "The specific functions of player housing are subject to change, so we can't give any details yet of how this item will function in game" would go a long way IMO.
What do you guys imagine the Leyline Orrery to do?
It looks like a building you can walk inside, but considering what an orrery is IRL, and the vague nature of the descriptions, it could very well be a model you place on a shelf in your house.
"It's a big reason why people call Ashes a scam?" That doesn't seem completely made up at all.
It's a building skin. That's what it "does". It changes the appearance of a freehold building you own. None of those facts are in question. Your suggestions are borderline insane, and I'm not sure you understand what this thread is even about.
People are questioning whether or not a skin will alter the appearance of an entire freehold (the way a costume alters the appearance of all a player's gear), or if it will just change the appearance of one building. People are questioning whether a skin can be applied to any building, or just certain ones. Those are the questions people have. Not whether it is "a model you place on a shelf in your house".
If you think that an orrery has to be tiny, you must have never watched the movie The Dark Crystal (which I'm sure inspired this cosmetic).
I'm sure your comments here are just exaggerations to make a point, but I don't think they're extremely helpful.