So when does SE plan to credit our accounts for the multiple ongoing service issues?

[winsock]

Those issues are not on the fault of their side if you refer about the interruptions regarding the DDoS attack.

They could show a sign of goodwill and throw a us a bone about it, but they owe us nothing.

Disagree.

While the DDoS attacks aren't their fault, they aren't mine either, so why should I pay for it? It also doesn't suddenly absolve SE from the responsibility of providing quality service.

If I order a delivery service and the first delivery attempt is not successful because criminals hijacked the truck or blocked off roads, the company shouldnt charge me 2 delivery fees. It wasn't my fault.

[ManuelBravo]

Disagree.

While the DDoS attacks aren't their fault, they aren't mine either, so why should I pay for it? It also doesn't suddenly absolve SE from the responsibility of providing quality service.

If I order a delivery service and the first delivery attempt is not successful because criminals hijacked the truck or blocked off roads, the company shouldnt charge me 2 delivery fees. It wasn't my fault.

Hence the terms of use, we all pay subscriptions, they deliver quality and connectivity to the best of their capabilities. Not their fault, not our fault, and SE did warn that this can happen hence we still click on the nice I AGREE portion that no compensation can be given. It's great if they do, however not required. Being not all players are being affected to be at that scale so lets just move on. It's called a business for a reason and SE disclosed all information beforehand. Someone did post that portion of the terms of use prior a few pages back in case you missed it. Then again if most people here have a hard time understanding the terms of use, or even bother to read them I doubt most people read prior postings.

Hopefully people will read this or is this is still too hard? In other words shit happens, play at your own risk, we are warning you.

5. INTERRUPTION TO THE SERVICE

From time to time, in order to provide our customers with the optimal gaming experience, it is necessary for Square Enix to conduct routine maintenance on the computers and/or servers that support the Game. During these times, access to the Game or support services may be interrupted. Access may also be temporarily suspended in whole or in part, without notice, due to emergency repairs, fire, flood, explosion, war, strike, embargo, governmental action or failure to act, the act of any civil or military authority, act of God, or by any other causes beyond Square Enix's control, or any other reasons for which Square Enix, in its sole discretion, deems that temporary suspension is necessary. You acknowledge that disruptions of service may occur and waive any causes of action against Square Enix in any way arising from or related to any such disruptions of service.

THX to Worldofneil who posted these terms earlier.

[winsock]

Hence the terms of use, we all pay subscriptions, they deliver quality and connectivity to the best of their capabilities.

...snip

Hopefully people will read this or is this is still too hard? In other words shit happens, play at your own risk, we are warning you.

5. INTERRUPTION TO THE SERVICE
[snip]
...causes beyond Square Enix's control...

Who cares? Setting the ToU stuff aside, the ethical thing to do would be to compensate people in some way. It's a common practice and the ToU doesnt prevent SE from compensating people.

If you cant get your mind of the ToU and I join in on playing lawyer, the line i snipped would be the one i would contest. You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

[Xtrasweettea]

Who cares? Setting the ToU stuff aside, the ethical thing to do would be to compensate people in some way. It's a common practice and the ToU doesnt prevent SE from compensating people.

If you cant get your mind of the ToU and I join in on playing lawyer, the line i snipped would be the one i would contest. You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

The thing is that you have no idea how SE had set up the delivery and connectivity. You do not know who is the customer of the ISP. Is the customer of the ISP the server company, SE, or a third party?

Do you know which of the entity are responsible for the access circuits, the routers, device maintenance, etc.?

As someone who specializes in customization within a large telecommunications and internet company, I see few ways how SE "set up" the connectivity:

-SE/Server Company manages the routers to the servers and owns the maintenance of those routers. SE sets up their own firewalls. The ISP only provides transport (meaning the line) and access circuits to the routers. If the customer of the ISP is the Server Company, than SE has no control over connectivity whatsoever.
-The ISP manages the routers to the servers and owns the maintenance of those routers. This also allows the ISP to establish firewalls. ISP also provides the transport and access circuits as well. It doesn't matter is SE or the server company are the customer of the ISP or each other at this level.
-ISP manages the routers, but maintenance is owned by SE or the server company. ISP can establish firewalls. ISP also provides the transport and access circuits as well. It doesn't matter is SE or the server company are the customer of the ISP or each other at this level.

We also don't know the makeup of the site:
-is it a single threaded circuit sites?
-is it a dual threaded circuit site with no failover? Failover bascially meaning that is a circuit goes down, the other circuit will take over or take on the extra load from the downed circuit.
-is it dual threaded circuit site with failover?

Seeing that the DDOS attacks are not even taking down anything, just making life rough for gamers, I can guarantee that the server company or SE is not even getting a credit from the ISP unless they have a custom service level agreement that allows that to happen.

Expecting SE to provide us a credit, even ethically, is laughable from how I am seeing this.

[Alien_Gamer]

Who cares? Setting the ToU stuff aside, the ethical thing to do would be to compensate people in some way. It's a common practice and the ToU doesnt prevent SE from compensating people.

SE is not the one doing the attacks, SE is on the receiving end of it. They are as much a victim of the attacks as you are. Since when is it ethical to make a victim compensate another victim for something they have no control over?

If you cant get your mind of the ToU and I join in on playing lawyer, the line i snipped would be the one i would contest. You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

You'd make a bad lawyer if you did this. Their ability to deliver service is directly tied to their budget, your statement makes no sense. You also have no knowledge about hard they are or are not working to deliver quality service; you chose to believe they aren't doing their best despite it being in their best interest to do so and despite the fact that they've said so and the evidence all pointing to them doing so. There is no amount of money in the world that will make a company immune to a DDOS attack. You can mitigate its effects but you can't stop it and with the exponential growth of the Internet of Things and non existant security on those devices, the scale of the attacks is significantly outpacing the ability to mitigate through more capacity or faster hardware or more efficient software.

[Baingoleth]

Who cares? Setting the ToU stuff aside, the ethical thing to do would be to compensate people in some way. It's a common practice and the ToU doesnt prevent SE from compensating people.

If you cant get your mind of the ToU and I join in on playing lawyer, the line i snipped would be the one i would contest. You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

Someone give this baby a mega-ranger already. It's clear he has been the spoiled, entitled type and won't shut up until he gets his toy.

[Lazaruz]

You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

It... really isnt.

Like it or not, the game has a set budget to stay within, and if they were to exceed that, I have no doubt that the upper management at SE would be having some very serious talks about how to either increase the monetization, or shut down the game.

SE delivering quality and connectivity to the best of their ability is infact "to the best of their ability and budget"
Trying to argue otherwise just seems like you're arguing semantics.

And while the ToS doesnt prevent them from compensating people, it absolutely gives them no legal reason to do it, as you already agreed to the clause within it.

I'd also like to ask in what world does it make sense to demand the victim to cough up compensation for being a victim.

[ManuelBravo]

Who cares? Setting the ToU stuff aside, the ethical thing to do would be to compensate people in some way. It's a common practice and the ToU doesnt prevent SE from compensating people.

If you cant get your mind of the ToU and I join in on playing lawyer, the line i snipped would be the one i would contest. You are only speculating that SE is delivering quality and connectivity to the very best of their abilities. I would speculate that they are delivering the quality and connectivity that they can within the game's budget, which is a very different thing.

Ethical? is it unethical to harass a company for something that they warned before hand, and we as the consumer are aware can happen at any time? or is it just because today's generation need a trophy for just trying and don't want their feelings hurt? Is it also fair to request compensation for a service that uses a third party like the USPS for late deliveries when when both parties depend on the USPS? As for you comment who cares about ToU, are you really missing the whole point or just trolling? I know common sense is a dying trait in the world but really that comment takes the cake.

[Felis]

Disagree.

While the DDoS attacks aren't their fault, they aren't mine either, so why should I pay for it? It also doesn't suddenly absolve SE from the responsibility of providing quality service.

You can switch to a EU or JP datacenter until the internet in NA is stable again (if the routing to europe or japan are not influenced by the DDoS attack). It is not as if you don't have any access to the game.