Armored Core 5 - Calling all Chrome Hounds

[S3M]

As an FYI for everyone Armored Core V / 5 is having its servers shutdown on March 20th 2014, so if you've got any outstanding online achievements you need to do them now. 2012 - 2014 that's a poor show from, From Software.

If you were thinking of picking this up then avoid it and pick up Armored Core Verdict Day instead which does have online play, but for how long....

Might try and solo the bosses one last time on ACV before the shutdown happens.

[Asura]

As an FYI for everyone Armored Core V / 5 is having its servers shutdown on March 20th 2014, so if you've got any outstanding online achievements you need to do them now. 2012 - 2014 that's a poor show from, From Software.

If you were thinking of picking this up then avoid it and pick up Armored Core Verdict Day instead which does have online play, but for how long....

Might try and solo the bosses one last time on ACV before the shutdown happens.

Considering the game pretty much IS the multiplayer (like how it was designed to be seamless, unlike previous Armored Core games) I'm very surprised they're dropping support so soon.

[MisterBubbles]

As an FYI for everyone Armored Core V / 5 is having its servers shutdown on March 20th 2014, so if you've got any outstanding online achievements you need to do them now. 2012 - 2014 that's a poor show from, From Software.

If you were thinking of picking this up then avoid it and pick up Armored Core Verdict Day instead which does have online play, but for how long....

Might try and solo the bosses one last time on ACV before the shutdown happens.

Well i think im done with the series now, 2 years is all that From think we deserve, ive not played it much,but if i wanted to i'd want to play online, as Asura said the game is the multiplayer, and now i can't, reallly really bad by From.

[S3M]

Well i think im done with the series now, 2 years is all that From think we deserve, ive not played it much,but if i wanted to i'd want to play online, as Asura said the game is the multiplayer, and now i can't, reallly really bad by From.

Yeah it's down right shameful, even worse than the Gran Turismo 5 total sever shutdown.

From Software are going to patch it to allow some modes to still work but it's really poor customer service. I'd be interested to see if someone was to bring this to the British court system whether this could be made Illegal, under customer law as it stands you have a very good case to get your money back.

Guess they want to increase Verdict Day sales, this is not the way to go about it, were as the recent sale they did does improve player numbers.

[Asura]

I'd be interested to see if someone was to bring this to the British court system whether this could be made Illegal, under customer law as it stands you have a very good case to get your money back.

Nah, it's perfectly legal. Believe me, the T&Cs in the manual (and probably the boxart) will make that very clear.

Pretty sure this was challenged when they shut down the servers for some older PC MMO; I think it was Auto Assault? As that only ran for a short period and there were many complaints when it closed.

So yeah, it's a terrible practice for the consumer (certainly makes me wary of buying their future online-only games), but not illegal.

[S3M]

Nah, it's perfectly legal. Believe me, the T&Cs in the manual (and probably the boxart) will make that very clear.

Asura, I can tell you haven't studied UK law as T&C aren't legally binding in the UK nor are EULAs, in fact they aren't even worth the paper there written on if they conflict with consumer law. The sales of goods act protects consumers for about 5 years after purchase and a recent EU law gives you a two year protection minimum.

Problem is a lot of people don't know that or use it to their advantage.

[Asura]

Asura, I can tell you haven't studied UK law as T&C aren't legally binding in the UK nor are EULAs, in fact they aren't even worth the paper there written on if they conflict with consumer law. The sales of goods act protects consumers for about 5 years after purchase and a recent EU law gives you a two year protection minimum.

Problem is a lot of people don't know that or use it to their advantage.

I'm not a legal expert, no, though I do know that "5 year" thing that's often quoted isn't true, unless it has changed recently. The product purchased has to work "as advertised" for a "reasonable duration", which varies wildly depending on the product (i.e. there's a wealth of difference between a new LCD TV and a Snickers bar).

Armored Core V will continue to work "as advertised" - as in, it will have been advertised as being playable online as part of a service that will eventually come to a close. Does it say on the back of the box that "online features are dependent on online services that are of finite duration", or anything to that effect?

I would honestly be very surprised if they haven't covered their arse on this. They already did it with Chrome Hounds and Demons' Souls. It may be Sony (as opposed to FROM) but consider that branches of GAME are still selling new copies of MAG (I saw one yesterday). You might be able to convince GAME to give you a refund if you buy it, but I doubt you'd get far suing Sony (shame too; MAG also stopped running too soon, and I quite liked it - shame I couldn't convince anyone else to play it!!).

[slicer1000]

I'm not a legal expert, no, though I do know that "5 year" thing that's often quoted isn't true, unless it has changed recently. The product purchased has to work "as advertised" for a "reasonable duration", which varies wildly depending on the product (i.e. there's a wealth of difference between a new LCD TV and a Snickers bar).

Your legal knowledge is incorrect, you do have up to 5 year and slightly longer but you have to prove in a court of law that the company knowingly knew the item was not fit for the purpose sold. The law is nowhere near as black and white as you think. I won't go into any further discussion as it get really complex with the legal side. You could also argue that the game was falsely advertised, if you bought the game recently you would be allowed a refund from the retail without question. GAME selling new copies of MAG is very dodgey and you would be allowed a refund if you bought it.

In a lot of case companies are trying to apply USA law to the UK which is just flatout wrong and they are getting away with it in a lot of case as consumers aren't using it.

[Asura]

Your legal knowledge is incorrect, you do have up to 5 year and slightly longer but you have to prove in a court of law that the company knowingly knew the item was not fit for the purpose sold.

I was going off this page, which was originally posted many years ago:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange

And whilst the law may not be black-and-white, I'm still certain that "as described" in this case means what I said above - that ACV will almost certainly be "described" on the box as dependent on online features which aren't permanent.

I'll make clear that I haven't got a box to look at right now (and can't seem to find a high-res scan on Google) so they may not have said it, in which case you might have grounds for legal complaint, but I'm just pretty sure there will be a get-out clause.

Now, if you're trying to say that even if there is a statement that says "some features of this game are dependent on online functions which may or may not be available in your territory at time-of-purchase", that withdrawing the service could still be regarded as illegal, well that's a different matter altogether. I think you're wrong (otherwise I suspect this would've already happened) but I welcome being corrected, as it'd be useful to know.

Then again, after the recent court case with Colonial Marines, who knows?