PSA PSA: Heirloom Collection Platinum Changes & Lessons

[NecroPed]

13 minutes ago, Voltage said:

When I did that, I was pushed into buying items I was going to earn in-game anyways like Yareli, Aegrit, or other gear.

And I feel its worth noting that this type of pack can actually be counter productive to DEs goals. 

Take for example the voruna pack that came with a unique decoration that is only available in the pack. You had to get voruna and her weapons for a single decoration, which were obtainable from an entirely new game mode. This pack directly deincentivized playing new game content and I think that is bad whether they're still supporting them with money or not because it skews the reasons why people might not be playing a game mode and the suits are going to be looking at statistics like that to judge the updates/contents success. 

And I get that the idea behind spending for some is to alleviate the need to earn everything, but it should be presented as a complete choice, rather than directly incentivizing disregarding chunks of new game content for a little shiny thing. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by NecroPed

[Voltage]

4 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

And I feel its worth noting that this type of pack can actually be counter productive to DEs goals. 

Take for example the voruna pack that came with a unique decoration that is only available in the pack. You had to get voruna and her weapons for a single decoration, which were obtainable from an entirely new game mode. This pack directly deincentivized playing new game content and I think that is bad whether they're still supporting them with money or not because it skews the reasons why people might not be playing a game mode and the suits are going to be looking at statistics like that to judge the updates/contents success. 

And I get that the idea behind spending for some is to alleviate the need to earn everything, but it should be presented as a complete choice, rather than directly incentivizing disregarding chunks of new game content for a little shiny thing. 

This is alleviated by those packages often giving you the decoration if you gift someone else the bundle. While expensive, it is an avenue. These bundles also aren't exclusive FOMO, they are always around! I mostly ignore these because I like to play the content, and I don't care for decorations.

There are so many examples of DE being player friendly, but these examples are now old. Supporter Packs, Regal Aya, and now Heirlooms are the real examples that give the impression that this is the new way things roll, and that previously friendly behavior is out the window.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Voltage

[PublikDomain]

8 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

So for example if they were to introduce a pack with just the skins that makes people feel they bought something they wouldn't have and want a partial refund for the difference they'd surely have to remove things from the account in order to rectify it, leading to my previous point.

So you're saying people may have overpaid by purchasing content they didn't want to purchase just to get the other content in the bundle? Because that sounds like a bad thing to me! Shouldn't DE make sure this doesn't keep happening? Shouldn't players who have paid for things they didn't actually want to buy have that resolved? Which would be a better response to that?

1. Add more purchase options so this stops happening, and if necessary issue refunds to people who had to purchase something they didn't actually want to purchase
2. Do nothing and continue having people pay for things they don't actually want to purchase and leave these people stuck having paid for content they didn't actually want

11 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

Either that or allowing partial refunds for the difference between the two packs without taking away the difference in goods, but wouldn't that simply be opening DE up to exploitation by having anyone who bought the package and actually wanted it, able to get a partial refund and keep what they fully intended on buying in the first place, effectively making the difference between two said packs being entirely free for anyone who's already purchased it? 

Why would the step in bold happen? If someone asks for a refund, obviously they don't get to keep the stuff they bought. That doesn't happen here or anywhere.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

3 minutes ago, Voltage said:

It's implied in the marketing of the bundles as well as so many posts here on the Forums and Reddit. You're pressured into the purchase as the contents of said purchase won't be available ever again after December. Given the nature of Accolades in Warframe, you'll be lucky to see another one available in the next 10 years for an average player like yourself or myself.

That's how all of this works. If there was no exclusivity, and the Accolade represented anyone who's made financial purchases in Warframe for the last 10 years, a lot less people would be rushing to buy it, and people wouldn't be so vocal about it being an issue. I know I wouldn't have purchased it if that were the case, and I certainly wouldn't be vocal about how disrespectful this bundle is either.

Sorry just to rewind there, you're under the impression that the majority of these tantrums are happening because of the Accolade rather than because of the Skins?

Where is that? I've certainly seen folks foolish enough to think that they get to decide what options are going to be available, completely unaware of how entitled it makes them look. But I genuinely haven't seen anyone ask for the Accolade to be put in a seperate pack. Where are you seeing this?

[PublikDomain]

1 minute ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Sorry just to rewind there, you're under the impression that the majority of these tantrums are happening because of the Accolade rather than because of the Skins?

Both are issues.

2 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

But I genuinely haven't seen anyone ask for the Accolade to be put in a seperate pack. Where are you seeing this?

I am on page 5. I know there's a lot to read but try to keep up.

On 2023-08-30 at 12:31 PM, PublikDomain said:

The "10 year supporter" accolade being an exclusive part of the bundles is offensive.
I guess it doesn't matter to you that I bought $80 of Regal Aya and a $25 Tennocon ticket in 2021, and spent $140 for a Prime Access and $25 for another Tennocon ticket in 2022, and that I bought $80 more Regal Aya and yet another $25 Tennocon ticket earlier this year, and that bought a $180 artbook the second it was announced at Tennocon, nor does it matter to you that I've bought various Tennogen items and small amounts of plat here and there since 2013.

Selling this accolade says loud and clear that you don't think anyone is a real "10 year supporter" unless they cough up another $30-$90 to show it. Frankly it's disgusting, and you're supposed to be better than this.

Give the "10 year supporter" accolade to everyone who has supported you over these 10 years, whether it be by buying plat or merch or Prime Access or tickets to see you at Tennocon. We all lift together, right?

[Darkbring]

1 minute ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Sorry just to rewind there, you're under the impression that the majority of these tantrums are happening because of the Accolade rather than because of the Skins?

Where is that? I've certainly seen folks foolish enough to think that they get to decide what options are going to be available, completely unaware of how entitled it makes them look. But I genuinely haven't seen anyone ask for the Accolade to be put in a seperate pack. Where are you seeing this?

 

Let's not diminish the impact of the Accolade. It says "10 years supporter" not "Heirloom supporter", can only be purchased with cash, and only for a limited time. What a slap in the face of everyone who supported the game for 10 years.

[NecroPed]

14 minutes ago, Voltage said:

This is alleviated by those packages often giving you the decoration if you gift someone else the bundle. While expensive, it is an avenue. These bundles also aren't exclusive FOMO, they are always around!

There are so many examples of DE being player friendly, but these examples are now old. Supporter Packs, Regal Aya, and now Heirlooms are the real examples that give the impression that this is the new way things roll, and that previously friendly behavior is out the window.

Yeah, that would have helped alleviate it on a personal level at least, albeit at a pretty big cost, but still pushes other people to avoid new content so its more potentially shifting the problem than necessarily solving it, and I have no problem with an individual choosing to buy those packs and avoid content as a result, and am thankful FOMO isn't a part of it too, which would make it far worse, just feel its a bad way to do things especially for new game content and if they keep going down this direction, I would hope the next step from here isn't a pack deincentivizing new content with FOMO at least. 

I agree, this feels like a slippery slope that we probably should have caught onto earlier and need to stand up against now more than ever to avoid setting the precedent. 

13 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

So you're saying people may have overpaid by purchasing content they didn't want to purchase just to get the other content in the bundle? Because that sounds like a bad thing to me! Shouldn't DE make sure this doesn't keep happening? Shouldn't players who have paid for things they didn't actually want to buy have that resolved? Which would be a better response to that?

1. Add more purchase options so this stops happening, and if necessary issue refunds to people who had to purchase something they didn't actually want to purchase
2. Do nothing and continue having people pay for things they don't actually want to purchase and leave these people stuck having paid for content they didn't actually want

Why would the step in bold happen? If someone asks for a refund, obviously they don't get to keep the stuff they bought. That doesn't happen here or anywhere.

I agree it is a bad thing, I'm just not sure things are as simple as just offering refunds. 

I agree that there should be some rectification, but I was bringing that up to refer to my point about potentially needing to delete things from an account to refund resulting in potential issues like corrupt data (and if this isn't a problem then all the power to them refunding the difference and deleting the goods, otherwise I'm not suggesting this as a solution)

 

Thats my point, I'm trying to say this shouldn't happen because someone was saying it was as simple as just offering partial refunds, but because that doesn't actually solve the main problems it could lead to a situation like that if thats what we consider the solution.

Edited September 1, 2023 by NecroPed

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

29 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

I suppose if all they were doing is decreasing the price of the pack then sure thats probably pretty simple and would work (albeit still comes with potential problems, for example generally dealing with the console companies hosting the game), but I think think this is a lot more complex for a few reasons. The $ price isnt the inherent problem for a lot of people so a simple decrease in price that is still accounting for the contents of the package isn't an appropriate fix for a lot of people, it's buying things they don't want and can buy any time just to get the things that they want that most people have a problem with. So for example if they were to introduce a pack with just the skins that makes people feel they bought something they wouldn't have and want a partial refund for the difference they'd surely have to remove things from the account in order to rectify it, leading to my previous point.

Either that or allowing partial refunds for the difference between the two packs without taking away the difference in goods, but wouldn't that simply be opening DE up to exploitation by having anyone who bought the package and actually wanted it, able to get a partial refund and keep what they fully intended on buying in the first place, effectively making the difference between two said packs being entirely free for anyone who's already purchased it? 

it is literally THE fix, there is nothing else other than a complete drop of price or switch to platinum that can change that.

TBH, it should be free for the people they already scammed.

21 minutes ago, Voltage said:

It's implied in the marketing of the bundles as well as so many posts here on the Forums and Reddit. You're pressured into the purchase as the contents of said purchase won't be available ever again after December. Given the nature of Accolades in Warframe, you'll be lucky to see another one available in the next 10 years for an average player like yourself or myself.

That's how all of this works. If there was no exclusivity, and the Accolade represented anyone who's made financial purchases in Warframe for the last 10 years, a lot less people would be rushing to buy it, and people wouldn't be so vocal about it being an issue. I know I wouldn't have purchased it if that were the case, and I certainly wouldn't be vocal about how disrespectful this bundle is either.

does this guy just need me to say that i feel pressured to stop??

Because i feel hella pressured, and i almost bought it, but seeing that other people were as upset I chose not to.

FOMO is real even when you beat it, because it's a constant thought.

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

29 minutes ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Yeah, I get the feeling you must be used to being viewed like that. As you wish nobody.

Okay.

[NecroPed]

6 minutes ago, Thunderlord_Zinogre said:

it is literally THE fix, there is nothing else other than a complete drop of price or switch to platinum that can change that.

TBH, it should be free for the people they already scammed.

If it can result in potential corrupt data then no, it is not THE fix. I am not sure if this is necessarily the case, I am just trying to emphasize that it might not be that simple. Like I said, if its a simple reduction in price then sure it would work, but not only does that not address all the problems at hand, it only addresses the one they've already addressed by adding platinum to increase the value of the pack, whether its what people wanted or not. 

I'm not going to agree with you or argue that last point. 

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

Just now, NecroPed said:

If it can result in potential corrupt data then no, it is not THE fix. I am not sure if this is necessarily the case, I am just trying to emphasize that it might not be that simple. Like I said, if its a simple reduction in price then sure it would work, but not only does that not address all the problems at hand, it only addresses the one they've already addressed by adding platinum to increase the value of the pack, whether its what people wanted or not. 

I'm not going to agree with you or argue that last point. 

The problem at hand is literally the price.

The fact that they added platinum and aya to inflate it just makes it worse.

[PublikDomain]

21 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

I agree it is a bad thing, I'm just not sure things are as simple as just offering refunds. 

I agree that there should be some rectification, but I was bringing that up to refer to my point about potentially needing to delete things from an account to refund resulting in potential issues like corrupt data (and if this isn't a problem then all the power to them refunding the difference and deleting the goods, otherwise I'm not suggesting this as a solution)

 

Thats my point, I'm trying to say this shouldn't happen because someone was saying it was as simple as just offering partial refunds, but because that doesn't actually solve the main problems it could lead to a situation like that if thats what we consider the solution.

Which is fine to have concerns about, but I don't really think it would even be a common enough problem to matter. I'd wager that most people who have purchased the packs are fine with their purchase, especially now that they're getting more. Those that aren't fine shouldn't be left as they are, and if a refund is what's needed to resolve it then a refund is what's needed. DE is more than capable of issuing refunds. They might not want to, but there's no threat of corrupt data or whatever. DE handles refunds and chargebacks all the time. Negative plat might be an issue, but that's something for them to deal with on a case-by-case basis and since it's a problem of DE's own creation there's no reason to be concerned about them having to fix it.

Edited September 1, 2023 by PublikDomain

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

and fair, that's an extreme take from me, but i genuinely do not care about DE right now, i was here during excal prime and wasn't able to afford it, so i miss it forever, and I'll be damned if i'm going to keep playing if they do it to me twice.

Just now, PublikDomain said:

Which is fair, but I don't know if it's necessary. I'd wager that most people who have purchased the packs are fine with their purchase, especially now that they're getting more. Those that aren't fine shouldn't be left as they are, and if a refund is what's needed to resolve it then a refund is what's needed. DE is more than capable of issuing refunds. They might not want to, but there's no threat of corrupt data or whatever. DE handles refunds and chargebacks all the time. Negative plat might be an issue, but that's something for them to deal with on a case-by-case basis and since it's a problem of DE's own creation there's no reason to be concerned about them having to fix it.

Exactly, something being difficult is not an excuse, it should have been difficult to bring themselves to do this in the first place.

[(XBOX)NondoBear]

too bad 4 more regal aya wasn't added so whoever don't got both warframes can get them I mean if heirlooms are never returning then atleast make the deal really the best.

yall up the plat but just my opinion for new or returning players 4 more regal aya would be great.

[NecroPed]

1 minute ago, Thunderlord_Zinogre said:

The problem at hand is literally the price.

The fact that they added platinum and aya to inflate it just makes it worse.

No, it is ONE of the problems and so far the only one thats been remotely addressed. It isn't even an inherent problem to a lot of people. To many its not the actual $ price thats the problem, you are drastically oversimplifying the situation. 

I am not disputing that, though adding extra platinum to raise the value of the bundle is essentially addressing the same problem you are asking to be addressed with refunds, the value of the pack. Whether its the best outcome or not, so far this is the only problem thats been temotely addressed and refunds don't address what I would consider to be the far bigger problems, the inherent anti consumer and predatory tactics. 

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

Just now, NecroPed said:

No, it is ONE of the problems and so far the only one thats been remotely addressed. It isn't even an inherent problem to a lot of people. To many its not the actual $ price thats the problem, you are drastically oversimplifying the situation. 

I am not disputing that, though adding extra platinum to raise the value of the bundle is essentially addressing the same problem you are asking to be addressed with refunds, the value of the pack. Whether its the best outcome or not, so far this is the only problem thats been temotely addressed and refunds don't address what I would consider to be the far bigger problems, the inherent anti consumer and predatory tactics. 

then please inform me, because i have seen nobody pleased by anything other than a reduced price.

Adding platinum is NOT the same solution, adding "value" is not reducing price, nobody cares about value, this is a bundle as THANKS FOR 10 YEARS OF PLAYING, it's not a special rich boy's "look at me" outfit.

This is another way for them to squeeze money out of the desperate and frivolous while making those who can't afford and aren't interested seem unsupportive.

the problem is that it was ever priced, marketed, and artificially bloated so badly in the first place.

The only other problem I see is the fact that the frames aren't sold separately, and they're limited time, which is absolutely fair, but on an absolutely mundane tier compared to A NINETY DOLLAR PAIR OF DELUXE SKINS.

THAT DON'T HAVE AS MUCH CONTENT AS SOME DELUXE SKINS.

39 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Both are issues.

I am on page 5. I know there's a lot to read but try to keep up.

when is his next nuh-uh

[Darkbring]

4 minutes ago, Thunderlord_Zinogre said:

then please inform me, because i have seen nobody pleased by anything other than a reduced price.

 

Go read the very first page then. People ask for no FOMO, for more options, etc.. There is a whole list of problematic unethical tactics DE used to make this S#&$storm happen.

[PublikDomain]

11 minutes ago, NecroPed said:

refunds don't address what I would consider to be the far bigger problems, the inherent anti consumer and predatory tactics. 

How so? Because so far I've only seen refunds used as a reason not to address those problems. "What if people ask for refunds", "what if the data gets corrupted", etc. Addressing those two issues you mention is easy: ditch the FOMO, and make the skins permanently plat purchasable on the ingame market like all of the other Deluxe skins added since 2015. They're just Deluxe skins like any other and there's no reason for them to be different. Then the anti consumer and predatory tactics are gone. Poof. The value of the packs has already been addressed for those that do want to buy them, there would no longer be a pressure or rush to buy a pack before it's gone forever for those worried about missing out, and all of the resulting toxic elitism and smuggery would be gone since everyone could join in on the "celebration". Refunds are just a part of the cleanup to address the people who have fallen to those "predatory tactics", and that's something they're more than capable of doing even if they'd rather not.

[Thunderlord_Zinogre]

15 minutes ago, Darkbring said:

Go read the very first page then. People ask for no FOMO, for more options, etc.. There is a whole list of problematic unethical tactics DE used to make this S#&$storm happen.

fair

[NecroPed]

6 minutes ago, Thunderlord_Zinogre said:

then please inform me, because i have seen nobody pleased by anything other than a reduced price.

Adding platinum is NOT the same solution, adding "value" is not reducing price, nobody cares about value, this is a bundle as THANKS FOR 10 YEARS OF PLAYING, it's not a special rich boy's "look at me" outfit.

This is another way for them to squeeze money out of the desperate and frivolous while making those who can't afford and aren't interested seem unsupportive.

the problem is that it was ever priced, marketed, and artificially bloated so badly in the first place.

The only other problem I see is the fact that the frames aren't sold separately, and they're limited time, which is absolutely fair, but on an absolutely mundane tier compared to A NINETY DOLLAR PAIR OF DELUXE SKINS.

THAT DON'T HAVE AS MUCH CONTENT AS SOME DELUXE SKINS.

when is his next nuh-uh

Read just about any of my comments on these posts and you'll have plenty to go off. Let alone the countless other people talking about FOMO, the packs being bloated with things you don't want (which is a separate issue to inherent value, that you have already acknowledged, which actually requires a different fix than simply reducing the cost) and the predatory traps. 

It is essentially the same but in the opposite direction, adding contents and reducing prixe are both two different ways of increasing the value per $, if the problem is the inherent value then that literally increases the value without reducing the price, so while it might not be a perfect fix for everyone it is still at least somewhat addressing the issue of the packs value, the inherent problem isn't that no one wants to spend $90-100, for many its the layers of problems surrounding the purchase. I for one am happy to spend $100 on the pack now that the platinum increases the value od the pacl to a point I'm more comfortable with. Though I do understand not wanting to spend that and wanting cheaper accessibility which I completely support. 

 

I personally think the solution comes down to two major things since addressing the value of the pack (which I will acknowledge as still a problem for some, disregarding those who purchased it but wouldn't have, were a differnet pack available, in which case refer to my points about potential data corruption issues, so long as those issues do not exist I fully support refunding the difference between the packs and removing the difference in contents from accounts, my issue is not with refunding itself). 

1. A pack with just the skins. 

2. Increasing the regal aya in the pack to make the purchasable amounts of regal aya consistent with the spendable amounts, so as to not push people to devalue the regal aya in the heirloom pack by not having enough for the best value package, or push people into a trap where they have to buy excess regal aya they don't need for the purchase in order to retain the best value of their regal aya. 

Now if deleting refunded items lack the data corruption issues that I've read are a possibility and a new pack with just the skins is added than I will add in:

3. Refund the difference between the packs for anyone who wants the skins on their own.  

[Anmorata_Armitage]

1 minute ago, NecroPed said:

Read just about any of my comments on these posts and you'll have plenty to go off. Let alone the countless other people talking about FOMO, the packs being bloated with things you don't want (which is a separate issue to inherent value, that you have already acknowledged, which actually requires a different fix than simply reducing the cost) and the predatory traps. 

It is essentially the same but in the opposite direction, adding contents and reducing prixe are both two different ways of increasing the value per $, if the problem is the inherent value then that literally increases the value without reducing the price, so while it might not be a perfect fix for everyone it is still at least somewhat addressing the issue of the packs value, the inherent problem isn't that no one wants to spend $90-100, for many its the layers of problems surrounding the purchase. I for one am happy to spend $100 on the pack now that the platinum increases the value od the pacl to a point I'm more comfortable with. Though I do understand not wanting to spend that and wanting cheaper accessibility which I completely support. 

 

I personally think the solution comes down to two major things since addressing the value of the pack (which I will acknowledge as still a problem for some, disregarding those who purchased it but wouldn't have, were a differnet pack available, in which case refer to my points about potential data corruption issues, so long as those issues do not exist I fully support refunding the difference between the packs and removing the difference in contents from accounts, my issue is not with refunding itself). 

1. A pack with just the skins. 

2. Increasing the regal aya in the pack to make the purchasable amounts of regal aya consistent with the spendable amounts, so as to not push people to devalue the regal aya in the heirloom pack by not having enough for the best value package, or push people into a trap where they have to buy excess regal aya they don't need for the purchase in order to retain the best value of their regal aya. 

Now if deleting refunded items lack the data corruption issues that I've read are a possibility and a new pack with just the skins is added than I will add in:

3. Refund the difference between the packs for anyone who wants the skins on their own.  

Just add a pack without aya and plat involved and extend the window of purchase to a full year or indefinitely and everyone would be happier.  Including DE who would likely sell more of these than they will if they do not do this.

[NecroPed]

8 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

How so? Because so far I've only seen refunds used as a reason not to address those problems. "What if people ask for refunds", "what if the data gets corrupted", etc. Addressing those two issues you mention is easy: ditch the FOMO, and make the skins permanently plat purchasable on the ingame market like all of the other Deluxe skins added since 2015. They're just Deluxe skins like any other and there's no reason for them to be different. Then the anti consumer and predatory tactics are gone. Poof. The value of the packs has already been addressed for those that do want to buy them, there would no longer be a pressure or rush to buy a pack before it's gone forever for those worried about missing out, and all of the resulting toxic elitism and smuggery would be gone since everyone could join in on the "celebration". Refunds are just a part of the cleanup to address the people who have fallen to those "predatory tactics", and that's something they're more than capable of doing even if they'd rather not.

Because a refund doesn't remove the predatory tactics that are still there regardles of the amount you pay. 

I am personally in full support of ditching the FOMO entirely but I have no faith in that changing. But that kinda reinforces the point I was trying to make anyway, that a simple reduction in price and refunding it is not THE solution like was being suggested. It is A solution to A problem while there are still many layers being addressed.

And I am not sure if the data corruption is an issue, it is just what I have read, and so without knowing for sure I will treat it as a 'it might not be as simple as it seens' situation.

 

And no, there is more to it than just FOMO. The regal aya purchasable amounts not being consistent with spendable amounts, leading to devaluing your purchase or falling for a predatory trap to buy more regal aya than you need foe the purchase. 

[PublikDomain]

1 minute ago, NecroPed said:

Now if deleting refunded items lack the data corruption issues that I've read are a possibility and a new pack with just the skins is added than I will add in:

Where have you read this? I'm curious what's being said. I find it highly dubious that DE would be under any such risk, and I don't see how they (or any business for that matter) could continue to remain in business for 30 years without being able to process refunds.

Just now, NecroPed said:

Because a refund doesn't remove the predatory tactics that are still there regardles of the amount you pay. 

It's not supposed to? Refunds are a tool to clean up the mess that's already been made, not a solution to prevent more of the mess.

[NecroPed]

7 minutes ago, Anmorata_Armitage said:

Just add a pack without aya and plat involved and extend the window of purchase to a full year or indefinitely and everyone would be happier.  Including DE who would likely sell more of these than they will if they do not do this.

I absolutely agree. This is my current suggestion(at least without the removal of timed exclusivity because I don't think they will change it after having committed to it from the start, but if they can change it then I fully support them doing so), my comment was just in regards to a reduction in price and refund being the supposed solution, which does not address the issue that people want to buy the skins without the bloat. Paying less for bloat doesn't solve the bloat being there to begin with.

Edited September 1, 2023 by NecroPed

[NecroPed]

2 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Where have you read this? I'm curious what's being said. I find it highly dubious that DE would be under any such risk, and I don't see how they (or any business for that matter) could continue to remain in business for 30 years without being able to process refunds.

It's not supposed to? Refunds are a tool to clean up the mess that's already been made, not a solution to prevent more of the mess.

Several forum posts over the years, some of which referenced DE saying it, though I can't speak of the legitimacy to that claim. I simply wont rule it out. 

I'm not suggesting that they can't process refunds, but its common practice for digital items tied to an account to not be refundable, so it begs the question of why is that actually the case? Is it possible that data coreuption plays a role? Refunding isn't the inherent issue here, likke I've said if its a simple reduction in price and a refund of the difference I think its simple and would work. I just don't think that solves most of the problems at hand. 

 

I'm not saying it is supposed to, but if thats "THE solution" like being suggested it would have to solve those problems as well would it not? Otherwise we need MORE solutions.