Playtime compensation for unplayability of FFXIV due to travel restrictions.

[LaylaTsarra]

We need to be compensated for coming here and reading stuff like this.

[LianaThorne]

I'm kind of confused on what this thread is:

- I made a random character on Golem, Dynamis and attempted to DC travel them to Aether which went through, just with a bit of a longer queue (3:28s). So that seems to be working as intended minus the slightly longer queue (which makes sense since they'll prioritize natives to the DC over travelers now, which is a good thing so the people that actually pay to play on that server/DC can be on it)

- I also attempted to DC transfer another character of mine on Marilith, Dynamis to the Primal DC and was prompted with the payment screen. So that also seems to be working as intended. This character is older than 3 months though so it wouldn't have the requirement to stay on the DC.


So...what exactly do you want compensation for? Longer queue times? The forced 3 month wait that's mandatory for anyone who transfers to/makes a character on a DC classified as "new"? As far as I can see, if you hit that 3 month mark you can dip out of there or just DC travel to another server and hang out there until your timer runs out (like most people who moved to Dyna just for housing lol).

[KazukoHimura]

I'd really only want comp for the stuff related to the restrictions rolled out on 7/31 and probably only for the first week or so? Things do seem to have settled down at least on my end, but then again, I don't travel to Aether, just Crystal and Primal for RP purposes. And even then, I'd be happy if they just rolled it back, no free play time added necessary.

But as I said, Aether was the server hit the hardest by this, and I haven't traveled to it, so I am lacking some vital info-and am thus not in a position to be able to request.

Edit: To clarify, I'm talking more about getting Error 3088'd out, and more severely, getting caught in DC travel queue loops to the point you can't even play the game. At the very least I'd like people affected by the latter to be comp'd in some way since that was genuinely a technical issue.

[AlysCamoa]

As a fellow Dynamis player, my only thoughts on this are:

Nobody ever said that it was guaranteed you'd be able to travel data centers 100% of the time. Yoshida didn't, the TOS didn't, the game doesn't. Perhaps next time consider staying on the same DC as your raiders, RPers, entire communities based on social gatherings, small groups of friends etc. The game didn't open Mog Station for you and force you to transfer to Dynamis.

I sympathize with your problems, but demanding a refund just makes you look entitled.

Great point.
Except intra-DC travel is also heavily restricted if you're on Dynamis or Crystal.
So if I have people I meet up with on Mateus, or Brynhildr, what should I have done?
There is no excuse for the state of XIV's server infrastructure.
None.
Yoshida thinks he might get resignation letters on his desk if he asks the engineers to fix it?
Good. Clearly those people don't care about the end-user, so why keep them around? To collect our money without providing us a modernized service?

Literally agreed that they can change the game anytime they want to. And told you if you don't like that, uninstall.

The legality of this sort of EULA is dubious at best. You can write 'I'm allowed to change the contract terms on a whim during a period you've already paid to access our services' all you want, but if somebody has prepaid for several months of access and you suddenly change the terms of that access, any country with decent contract law will allow you to demand reimbursement if you don't agree to new terms.

[Isala]

Great point.
Except intra-DC travel is also heavily restricted if you're on Dynamis or Crystal.
So if I have people I meet up with on Mateus, or Brynhildr, what should I have done?
There is no excuse for the state of XIV's server infrastructure.
None.
Yoshida thinks he might get resignation letters on his desk if he asks the engineers to fix it?
Good. Clearly those people don't care about the end-user, so why keep them around? To collect our money without providing us a modernized service?



The legality of this sort of EULA is dubious at best. You can write 'I'm allowed to change the contract terms on a whim during a period you've already paid to access our services' all you want, but if somebody has prepaid for several months of access and you suddenly change the terms of that access, any country with decent contract law will allow you to demand reimbursement if you don't agree to new terms.

You want a HUGE example of why their defense of a EULA is the dumbest crap ever? There's literally a lawsuit against Adobe from the government for trying to pull that crap.

[VoidsentStatus]

You want a HUGE example of why their defense of a EULA is the dumbest crap ever? There's literally a lawsuit against Adobe from the government for trying to pull that crap.

Actually the government is suing Adobe for hiding fees and not easily allowing people to cancel their subscriptions per FTC site. Square Enix does not have hidden fees regarding DC Travel nor is the subscription page changed at all.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news...ily-cancelling

The legality of this sort of EULA is dubious at best. You can write 'I'm allowed to change the contract terms on a whim during a period you've already paid to access our services' all you want, but if somebody has prepaid for several months of access and you suddenly change the terms of that access, any country with decent contract law will allow you to demand reimbursement if you don't agree to new terms.

It's not dubious. It exists in every online video game that has ever been released. There has to be a section that allows them to update the game with patches that are going to inevitably piss off people. It would be up to a court to decide when those changes are big enough or deceiptful enough to receive reimbursement, but you don't have much of an argument for "well I can't travel where I want to during this 5-8 hour window, but I can for the rest of the day, and I also have 10 years of worth of PvE and PvP content in the game to enjoy still that'll take me over a year to finish, but i want a refund for those 5-8 hours." You're not going to make it to a proper courtroom, realistically they're going to file to have it dismissed as the foundational argument doesn't even have a logical chance to succeed at all.

[AlysCamoa]

Actually the government is suing Adobe for hiding fees and not easily allowing people to cancel their subscriptions per FTC site. Square Enix does not have hidden fees regarding DC Travel nor is the subscription page changed at all.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news...ily-cancelling



It's not dubious. It exists in every online video game that has ever been released. There has to be a section that allows them to update the game with patches that are going to inevitably piss off people. It would be up to a court to decide when those changes are big enough or deceiptful enough to receive reimbursement, but you don't have much of an argument for "well I can't travel where I want to during this 5-8 hour window, but I can for the rest of the day, and I also have 10 years of worth of PvE and PvP content in the game to enjoy still that'll take me over a year to finish, but i want a refund for those 5-8 hours." You're not going to make it to a proper courtroom, realistically they're going to file to have it dismissed as the foundational argument doesn't even have a logical chance to succeed at all.

Except your own foundational argument isn't sound. You're assuming patches must necessarily piss people off. Who would be pissed off by improvements to server infrastructure that allow for better interconnectivity without infringing on the use of a player's subscription time? As opposed to the current limitations put in place for the sake of 'network stability', which require users to spend time sitting idly in a menu instead of actually utilizing the product they're paying a recurring fee for access to.

[VoidsentStatus]

Except your own foundational argument isn't sound. You're assuming patches must necessarily piss people off. Who would be pissed off by improvements to server infrastructure that allow for better interconnectivity without infringing on the use of a player's subscription time? As opposed to the current limitations put in place for the sake of 'network stability', which require users to spend time sitting idly in a menu instead of actually utilizing the product they're paying a recurring fee for access to.

Because patches also include balance changes and exploits, replacing content such as seasonals, etc. Infrastructure is not the only thing in a game that needs to be changed over time. And any change that revolves the state of the game going forward is going to be subject to pissing off someone. Any potency increase or decrease, any unlock challenge changed in other games, any visibility changes, any ui changes, any monetization changes, etc. You are never going to find a single online game that has only updated infrastructure and made no other changes that irritated a section of the playerbase. There is never going to be a change that is 100% universally liked. There is always going to be one person that likes a job/class nerfed, they liked grinds or inconvenience to other people, they liked to see other people pissed off, they liked skill diff'ing other players, they hate players receiving free items, or they have different visibility preferences, etc. It is impossible to please 100% of any meaningful playerbase and as such, every patch is subject to NECESSITATE pissing off someone. Not to mention that infrastructure is not part of the game itself. It is what facilitates playing the game, but is not a game element in itself that would be under the definition of a patch.

[KLazarus]

Who would be pissed off by improvements to server infrastructure that allow for better interconnectivity without infringing on the use of a player\\'s subscription time?

You are begging the question, assuming the conclusion in your premise.

I am a newer player, but I have seen past and current sentiment inside and outside the game from a subset of players that hate that world and DC travel even exists; that players from other worlds ruin their “culture” and market board.

[angienessyo]

Are your friends not able to visit you on Dynamis? Any time the one person not on Aether in my static has trouble getting here, we just go to Dynamis. I feel like at this point Dynamis players might need to work on building and growing their community as the game isn't doing the greatest at letting people use world travel.