Guild Wars 2

NecroN.8306:

Really? Someone else did? Why would anyone think that? I think you need to go back and look who posted it to make sure!

Since you’re such a fan, if you see me in game, I won’t charge you for taking a screenshot of me. See you in HoT! =]

mrstealth.6701:

As for the claim made in the original version of the FAQ, there is no mention made of HoT purchases including GW2. The heavily implied intent of the text is that a previous, separate purchase is required. This where #3 comes in; “has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience”. This establishes that even implied false information in a manner that might deceive is enough to consider the company guilty of false advertisement.

Unless you’re reading the actual statute, the link provided by the person who brought it up does not have any redacted text.

I think you mean #2 which is “the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience” while #3 is “the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience.”

I don’t see the heavily implied text where a previous, separate purchase is required. Granted, I only have experience with a handful mmo expansions, but the ones I have experience with allow a person to buy the base game at the time of the expansion, if you don’t have the base game already.

This situation is no different. Anet has just made it more convenient for those who don’t have the base game already. It’s an incentive for new customers much like how cable companies throw in a couple months free of a premium channel to new customers.

NecroN.8306:

Looks like Anet’s attorney is in da house. All rise the Kangaroo Court is in session.

Someone else already accused me of working for Anet so do you guys have some inside knowledge about a future job offer from Anet to me? Because that would be most excellent.

And thanks for recognizing my mad armchair-lawyering skills.

Alexxander.8306:

Nice try Anet.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Advertising

“Proof Requirement
To establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things:

(1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser’s own or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activity; (FAQ said “BUY GW2 NOW!! U NEED IT FOR EXPANSHUN!!”)

(2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (Anyone during the time the FAQ was active)

(3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience;
(Do I even need to explain this one again?)

(4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and
(Not relevant afaik)

(5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement’s potential to injure a customer. [I]The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. [/I] False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

You are going to armchair-lawyer it up with elements of a federal criminal statute? Meaning prosecution is done by the federal government and not individuals. Furthermore, you are also saying that element 4 does not apply when ALL the elements of a statute has to be met to be guilty of said crime? (Seriously, you could have at minimum said that buying the game gives you access to the Anet servers which are located in a different state, and it would thus count as an interstate service.)

But let’s humor you and overlook the fact that the elements are for a federal criminal statute and you basically said the 4th element has not been met. So ignoring your irrelevant editorializing of what you think the faq said and actually quoting the previous version of the faq,

“Q: Do I have to own Guild Wars 2 to play the expansion? A: Yes. Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns is an expansion to Guild Wars 2 and not a stand-alone campaign, and therefore it requires the base game to play.”

It looks like the answer is yes, you need to own GW2 to play the expansion. And unless you know something about the HoT code that we do not, it looks like that is true. So therefore, no false statement of fact has been made.

Addressing your editorializing about having to buy the game, there is nothing about having to buy GW2 before HoT. Yes, it says you have to own the game, but you can buy GW2 later or at the same time or have the nice people of Anet give it to you free for buying HoT.

Now, if you still feel like a crime has been committed, you can contact the US attorney general or your state attorney general (because your state probably has some false advertising laws too).

Alexxander.8306:

Give them to veterans for the new class. Give those of us who were conned by the FAQ something as compensation for the damages (as we did not have the play time to justify parity with veterans), and leave the base version as it is. This is well within their power.

You still need GW2 to play HoT. Most people have been playing GW2 for a long time. Just because Anet is including GW2 with HoT does not mean you or any veteran player has suffered any actual damages.

I don’t see any slight to the “veteran” player base. If the pricing was $50 for the expansion and $60 for both, I don’t think anyone would complain.

If Anet does give into all the hoopla, I think those who have pre-purchased HoT (let’s call them the HoT veteran player base) should get even more out of principle. Otherwise, Anet is insulting the HoT veteran player base.