CO Word of the Week #9

[Gonzoez]

Your contract of sale is by definition between you and the vendor that gave you the product in return for your money. Sundry consumer protection laws around the world subsequently put the onus on the vendor to deal with problems with the product on your behalf. That's certainly the case in Australia and in the EU. Nobody here bought CS2 directly from CO so they cannot reasonably insist that CO should refund them.

It is not the legalities we are discussing. If someone takes CO to court after all it won't be for the lack of refunds, but rather for deceptive marketing. The question of refunds is more of a question of CO's/PDX's good will and respect for their customers (a.k.a. "the Community")

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

The point we are trying to make is that refunds are absolutely within the realms of CO capabilities, as mentioned. Free DLC with mechanics is also not unprecedented- Imperator did it, a PDX game. Talking about how it’s retailer fault is deflecting responsibility away from CO to Steam, frankly a reflection of what CO has been since October. Its excuses after excuses.

I wouldn’t be so pressing on this subject if not for the fact CO has been talking a big game about how they want to be transparent, how they want to regain the trust of the community, and how action not words will show their commitment. This is a direct action which will go a long way in helping to do so.

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

These two statements seem to be in direct conflict with each other. I find it difficult to believe that CO was so out of touch with Paradox's marketing that nobody at CO was aware of the multiple, repeated promises of modding availability soon after release, both in streams and published articles. This wasn't an isolated incident where Maddie made an off-hand comment in one stream. It was said multiple times in multiple official text publications immediately prior to release.

What I'm struggling to understand is how all three categories of mods (code, asset, map) encountered separate and unique problems so severe that it pushed their final "production" release dates back a full year or more from the game's release. The second quoted statement seems to suggest that development for PDX Mods integration was nearly complete, but sidelined due to bugfixes (which is at odds with the first statement that they weren't nearly ready and the communication saying so was inaccurate). It would stand to reason, then, that the modding tools would be quickly made available whenever work was able to resume on finishing them. Mariina herself said in WotW #3 (November 13th), "We expect it will take a couple of months to get the Editor in a shape where we can release it, but we don’t have a concrete timeline yet as we don’t want to make promises we can’t keep." She then said in WotW #5 (November 27th) " The Editor will be released early next year..." Those statements make it seem like work had resumed on modding support sometime around early to mid November. Now we're not getting code modding in beta form until March, with IOUs attached to map and asset modding. Excluding the holiday break, that's nearly four months of development that has been occurring in all three mod categories just to get a beta release out for code modding, alone.

This isn't adding up and I don't think this clarifies anything for me. Either it was nearly ready at release or it wasn't, but it seems like both things are being said concurrently. Given these statements and the current timelines as it exists, I am beginning to think that work wasn't started in earnest on modding support until shortly before release. I am also beginning to think that we are not getting the full story, here.

To recap, it seems that you've said:

1.) Modding wasn't going to be ready shortly after release and we forgot to update Paradox on the new timeline.
2.) Modding was going to be ready shortly after release and was delayed due to bugfix work.

Which is it?

@co_avanya @co_martsu would CO happen to have a response to this? The timeline doesn’t seem to add up for a lot of people and a response would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Kmo]

There is no game breaking issues in the game, so in no means I would call it a beta. Even CS1 had major deficiencies at the beginning yet it turned out fine in eight years.

Speak for yourself. I can't play until they fix the "unoccupied buildings" bug. It causes demand to drop to zero and it persists into all new maps I create. I own a digital paperweight right now.

 

[Potoroo]

That's just not correct.

Creative Assembly issued partial refunds through steam.

It is correct. Creative Assemblies are not giving refunds directly to players, Steam is. Players won't see actual money, the refunds are going into their Steam Wallets. Steam won't bear the cost of it though, they'll recover the money from Creative Assemblies themselves.

 

[RustyCool]

Is there a way to get a refund pretty please? I am very dissatisfied and disappointed on this company and don’t want anything else to do with it. I just want my money back. I spent $90 on this please help!!!

 

[Mdizzl3]

1. The patch we're working on at the moment includes some performance improvements (assuming they make it through testing of course), though nothing major that's expected to have a huge impact on performance, hence why we haven't mentioned them. They're a part of the continued efforts to improve the performance throughout the game's lifetime.

2. We're working on DLSS integration yes, though I'm afraid we don't have a timeline for when you can expect it. When we do have an update, we'll let you know.

3. We're working on a roadmap (don't expect dates/months though), but it needs to go through a few people before we can share it. I know it's frustrating having to wait, but we need to make sure everyone is aligned on what's shared and how far into the future it reaches. Fingers crossed for next week! ^^

Are you working on AMD FSR 3.0 also?

 

[gekj]

It is not the legalities we are discussing. If someone takes CO to court after all it won't be for the lack of refunds, but rather for deceptive marketing. The question of refunds is more of a question of CO's/PDX's good will and respect for their customers (a.k.a. "the Community")

Yes and the false advertisement is still on the steam store page :

Cities: Skylines II on Steam

Raise a city from the ground up and transform it into a thriving metropolis with the most realistic city builder ever. Push your creativity and problem-solving to build on a scale you've never experienced. With deep simulation and a living economy, this is world-building without limits.

store.steampowered.com

Deep Simulation

AI and intricate economics mean your choices ripple through the fabric of the city. Remember that as you strategize, problem-solve, and react to change, challenges, and opportunities.

 

[safe-keeper]

3. We're working on a roadmap (don't expect dates/months though), but it needs to go through a few people before we can share it. I know it's frustrating having to wait, but we need to make sure everyone is aligned on what's shared and how far into the future it reaches. Fingers crossed for next week! ^^

Thanks. Looking forward to it .

 

[ClemiMD]

It is correct. Creative Assemblies are not giving refunds directly to players, Steam is. Players won't see actual money, the refunds are going into their Steam Wallets. Steam won't bear the cost of it though, they'll recover the money from Creative Assemblies themselves.

Exactly that. I would like to underline that once again.
How is CO supposed to know whether I bought from Steam, the MS Store or a key reseller and for how much money? When I buy from Steam, I receive the invoice from Steam (resp. Valve) and pay Steam, so I have a claim against Steam for the delivery of faultless product. How Steam deals with the publisher, or how publishers and developers deal with each other, is none of our business. In order to achieve something, you must complain to the seller about the faulty product. This is really not difficult.

 

[BoraBora]

Your contract of sale is by definition between you and the vendor that gave you the product in return for your money. Sundry consumer protection laws around the world subsequently put the onus on the vendor to deal with problems with the product on your behalf. That's certainly the case in Australia and in the EU. Nobody here bought CS2 directly from CO so they cannot reasonably insist that CO should refund them.

The vendor is also a buyer with a contract of sale, in this case Steal buys from Paradox. When the seller is not the producer, he has to refund you:

* If the product was fine when he bought it but became defective because of him (bad storage or whatever).

* If he can be refunded himself by the producer, according to its contract (or the general law).

For exemple, as a bookseller:
* You sold a book you damaged while handling it: The refund is on you.
* You sold a book missing 5 pages because of a printing defect: you'll refund the customer then get a refund from the publisher. That's on him.

Unless Steam can legally and/or contractually and/or voluntarily be refunded by Paradox, they don't and won't refund any customer outside of their usual rules (2 hours/14 days). So either:

* Someone sues Steam for selling a defective product (good luck). If CS II is judged to be a defective product, then Steam will stop selling CS II and refund any buyer. Then Paradox, as producer of this defective product, will have to refund Steam.

* Paradox decide to let Steam refund anyone asking for it and contractually commit to refund Steam.

The first choice probably won't happen so this is the place to ask for refunds because only Paradox can allow this. Just like Creative Assembly initiated refunds.

 

[yalex]

Under Australian Law, consumers are protected through the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) it is the responsibility of the retailer to either repair, replace, refund or cancel a product/service if it deemed to have a major failure.

The protections specifically state: 'businesses must not tell consumers to go to the manufacturer for a remedy.

The test here will be whether the current failures of Cities Skylines II constitute as 'major'. This is the test that needs to met to obligate Steam to issue refunds and in turn receive reimbursement from the manufacturer.

For the purposes of Australian Consumer Law software is typically classified as a good, but can be seen as a service under SaaS type models.

Further information and the definition of a major failure are available at:

See: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/p...rvice-you-bought/repair-replace-refund-cancel
See: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/buying-products-and-services/consumer-rights-and-guarantees
and https://www.choice.com.au/shopping/...ghts/articles/refunds-and-returns-your-rights

 

[BoraBora]

Under Australian Law, consumers are protected through the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) it is the responsibility of the retailer to either repair, replace, refund or cancel a product/service if it deemed to have a major failure.

The protections specifically state: 'businesses must not tell consumers to go to the manufacturer for a remedy.

The test here will be whether the current failures of Cities Skylines II constitute as 'major'. This is the test that needs to met to obligate Steam to issue refunds and in turn receive reimbursement from the manufacturer.

So same conclusion as mine: either Steam is sued and the verdict is incertain (major failure or not?) or Paradox initiate refunds voluntarily. As no individual will spend time and money to sue Steam for a 50€ game, it needs a class action lawsuit. But though this would be beneficial not just in this case but as a warning to all the black sheeps in the gaming industry, I don't see this happening.

 

[timfrombriz]

So same conclusion as mine: either Steam is sued and the verdict is incertain (major failure or not?) or Paradox initiate refunds voluntarily. As no individual will spend time and money to sue Steam for a 50€ game, it needs a class action lawsuit. But though this would be beneficial not just in this case but as a warning to all the black sheeps in the gaming industry, I don't see this happening.

I got a decline on my Australia Steam refund.

I didnt provide enough key evidence points. They are definitely in breach of Australian law, spoke with a lawyer friend today to confirm this, and I will pursue this purely because of the conduct of Colossal Order here. [snip]

Paradox will not volunatrily issue a refund, becuase their orientated around shareholders, and anything against surges of income is cancer to them, so watch me create a shit-storm by now going directly to the ACCC and making it a public issue at least for Australia.

Happy Australia Day 26 January

I am now trying to collect enough key points about the misleading and false advertising made for CS2. If anyone can highlight points made in past statements that are orientated this way, please let me know.

One point was made here about Mods being available days after release.

If anyone has other public disclosures made that were misleading/false, please message/PM me so I can build a accurate list of all public disclosures made for this game.

I intend to fight this on the grounds the customer should not be lied to. Im going to put every inch of my energy into this and I will keep the community update on my outcomes in Australia.

Thanks a lot, and lets keep gaming about being honest and transparent. Being made to fork out money for false and misleading statements is NOT ok.

Its not about the money, its about the principals. I dont like being lied to. simple as that.

/mod-edit: Insults removed

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

Getting political in non-political threads is a bad idea.

It's also against the rules/CoC. Pretty much for the reasons you've mentioned.

 

[yalex]

So same conclusion as mine: either Steam is sued and the verdict is incertain (major failure or not?) or Paradox initiate refunds voluntarily. As no individual will spend time and money to sue Steam for a 50€ game, it needs a class action lawsuit. But though this would be beneficial not just in this case but as a warning to all the black sheeps in the gaming industry, I don't see this happening.

A major problem for a product under Australian Consumer Law is defined as one that :

• is unsafe
• is very different from the description or sample
• has either one serious problem or several smaller problems that would stop someone buying the product if they knew about them beforehand
• can’t be used for its normal purpose, or another purpose the consumer told the seller about before they bought it, and can’t easily be fixed within a reasonable time.

In this case the third item seems to potentially apply.

For services the follows is defined as being major:

• creates an unsafe situation
• has either one serious problem or several smaller problems that would stop someone buying the service if they knew about them beforehand
• can’t be used for its normal purpose, or for a specific purpose that the consumer told the seller about, or doesn’t achieve a specific result that the consumer told the seller about, and can’t easily be fixed within a reasonable time.

Similarly, the last item appears to apply and precedent exists. You could debate what a reasonable time means, but precedent exists with game retailers offering refunds for Cyberpunk 2077.

In any case, in the advent of Steam (retailers) not offering refunds in the first instance, there is also an onus on Colossal Order (the Game Developer / manufacturer) and its obligations under Australian Consumer Law. Paradox in this instance is the game publisher or effectively the distributor and its policies on refunds are irrelevant.

Companies hope that they can swat away individual refund requests, so often a combination on ongoing requests and publicity is what is required to change their policies.

I'd suggest contacting gaming websites and highlighting ongoing concerns, once there is a bit of a public momentum (outside of forums that are largely out of the public sphere) attitudes will probably change.

Like I said elsewhere my patience with Colossal Order and Paradox is rapidly diminishing, send me a message if you want to explore potential options in building momentum for refunds.

 

[Qualiall]

I know this is a low priority question, but I just would like to know if there are future plans to have the farms show actual seasonal crop growth on them?

 

[alessandroempire]

So... when will the refunds start?

 

[Otis85402]

The fact that this thread has turned into a debate over the likelihood of refunds being offered shows how massive of a PR fail this is by CO/Paradox.

When people are unhappy with your product, and when you as a company refuse to engage meaningfully with these people, that void will be filled with wild and baseless speculation like what we're seeing here.

Monday should be fun.

 

[unoace1006]

I know this is a low priority question, but I just would like to know if there are future plans to have the farms show actual seasonal crop growth on them?

Anything is possible, but I wouldn’t expect them to confirm any future improvements.