Discussion: One game, one global server access

I don't see the relevance my financial means have to this debate. It would just be as cost effective to give yankess a NA prefix rather than EU players an EU prefix.

I will cut them some slack when I am convinced that they are taking players legitimate concerns seriously rather than just mouthing platitudes

Yeah... not so much. Unless you know specifically what custom db is used for account authentication by the game you're just assuming.
As Arcanaville posted in another thread on this topic: So i take it with a grain of salt when you post: Uh-huh. Luckily technical issues involving database structures has NOTHING to do with their decision because that would involve real world technical limitations and costs rather than merely being a sudden whim to wave their fannies at a segment of the playerbase while "mouthing platitudes", amirite?

If they were to actually wave their "fannies" I imagine a substantial proportion of the EU playerbase would be satisfied.

The legislation doesn't specify that because its presumed: English courts do not have jurisdiction over people outside of its territory nor of conduct that occurs outside of its territory.

However, Part 2 Chapter 1 of the act specifically lists the protected characteristics that the act protects from arbitrary discrimination as defined in the act. Those characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership status, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and religious belief, sex (gender), and sexual orientation. The act further refines the term "race" to refer to color, nationality, and ethnic or national origins.

Neither the account name change nor the global handle change explicitly target any particular color, nationality, or ethnicity. It treats all persons with accounts on that system identically, and in particular does not distinguish between nationality. The act doesn't specify continental location as a protected characteristic.

The act also creates an exception for indirect discrimination, which the renaming system would theoretically be. It states that a provision or practice is discriminatory if it cannot be shown to be a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim." It does not have to be "fair" as people on the forums have been defining fair. It only has to be shown to be aimed at a legitimate purpose, and the practice must not be excessive. Merging the authentication systems is a legitimate aim. Changing the EU accounts that collide is a proportionate means of achieving that aim.

The merge therefore fails to implicate one of the specified protected characteristics, and fails the definition of indirect discrimination as defined within the act.

Do you actually believe NCSoft, a Korean company, cares more about North American people than Europeans? NCSoft, a Korean company, folded the tents of the Korean expansion of City of Heroes when it failed to attract enough players, without a second glance backward. If it were North American players and servers being merged into the more popular European version of City of Heroes, NCSoft would have not blinked an eye in changing the less popular NA players and preserving the state of the more numerous EU players.

You can bet if there were three hundred thousand subscribers in India right now both the NA and the EU players would be getting merged into their server farm and we'd all have to learn to advertise the ITF in Hindi.

Also, Atlas Park would be even more bizarre than it has ever been.

Given the fact that this is a one time deal, I think it is reasonable for the devs to expend effort to figure out if there is a reasonable way for EU players to merge NA and EU accounts if they own both. Of course, I'm going to want a way to earn passport in exchange, but that's a small price to pay.

Perhaps, but at the end of the day, if they've taken players' concerns seriously and decided that the implementation as stated IS the best way to go, will you still assume all they actually did was mouth platitudes? Sounds as if you've already decided.

Then you should try following the discussion that you're quoting part of.

Well der. Facts are facts.
If posters didnt want to spew hyperbolic rubbish about being discrimated about on basis on racial origin, then perhaps the obvious wouldnt need to be stated.
Though I would have to consider that you're trying to be offended if restating the basic facts bothers you.

No, my point all along was that Toffy in claiming it was discrimination based on racial origin was crap.

I take them at their word that they've seriously discussed it. Part of the discussion, though, is going to be "OK, we've got code that is written, works great on our test bench and all we have to do is give the order to do it. And talking to the programmer, he says we'll need to do a lot more testing if we're not only adding the EU records but also modifying the NA records as we go - concerns about race conditions and such."

Yes it discrimiation (of a sort). So is basing it on vet time, using such a wide defination of the term.

Its not discrimation based on racial origin which you earlier claimed.

As has been pointed out numerous times the EULA for EU players forma a legal contract and is based on English Law and any remedy on that falls under the jurisdiction of the English court system - the two parties involved being the player(s) and NCSoft Europe. The NA EULA is irrelevant in this case - i.e in this you are 100% WRONG

As to whether the definition of European would be designated to be either relating to Nationality or Ethnicity would be a matter for the courts to decide if matters were to reach such a stage that would be determined on the basis of what a "reasonable person would deem to be reasonable" - the definition of reasonable also being defined under that same basis - you clearly believe it would not - I and several others also clearly believe it would - Ethnicity relate to where a person or group of peoples ancestors originate - this is not necessarily related to race, colour or nationality as we currently see them and there is case lore indicating that groupings of people falling outwith those parameters are indeed covered.

In practice NCSoft would probably have to prove that this was as you say proportionate and that is far from easy where renaming either party would be equally easy as would renaming both - the latter being inherently fair. NCSoft have already shown that they have previously merged two systems - namely the forums where the same issues as to regional identity were involved. In that case they chose to rename both and then allow the players to request renames later. The courts are administered by laypeople in general and you would need to consider whether they would understand why they would regard the two situations as being any different. At the end of the day it is desirable to avoid any risk of litigation especially where issues are unclear - the only ones to win if things reach that stage are the lawyers.

What I expect NCSoft will do on this is to ask their legal department for advice and are likely to be told that whether they would win or lose such a case it would be an expensive matter and marketing should understand that risking getting involved with court cases with a substantial number of paying customers is not good business practice where alternatives exist.

Yes. Guilty until proven innocent. The claim of "discrimination" throws the burden of proof on its head. The accusation is the proof that the accused acted with evil intent to harm others.

Any action would be most likely to be a civil matter as opposed to a criminal one and as such the party claiming would need to show that they had suffered loss or show that the action was offensive. Once that had been done then the party who the action is against would need to show that such actions were necessary, reasonable and proportionate - Guilt or innocence has nothing to do with it those relate to criminal law - if the courts decided that it was done maliciously or negligently where a duty of care existed then the court could choose to pursue a criminal action in addition to any civil case - in practice I very much doubt such a situation would arise.
Things are also changing such that a third party becoming aware of discriminatory actions may also be able to lodge a claim where they regard themselves as offended even if the discrimination does not directly target them - I dread to think where that will lead if it gets passed.

Put it this way.

Let them try to enforce a decision over servers residing on American soil, owned by a Korean company. Meanwhile, NCSoft Europe can do little more than wring its hands and point fingers.

In short: Good luck with that.



Prove? You mean like citing all the extra work and man-hours that needed to be put in to shepherd and arbitrate renames and name disputes on both sides of the pond?

This time they chose to deal cut out the name disputes and simply deal with renames.

They may also have a technological reason why manipulating both databases is less than desirable.

Translation. Give in to extortionate demands or be sued.

Yeah. Great options.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

Depends on the size of the database and what is being altered besides merely the global name.




So...WHAT? You want them to invite you to NorCal, Austin or Seoul and let you in on the strategy sessions?

You've been with the game this long, and seen some of the actions taken in response to player feedback by what is acknowledged as one of the most accessible and responsive development crews extant. Yet you're still gonna DOOOOOOOOOMMMMMM?

If you're this locked in stone about it, I'm not even going to try reasoning with you. I've got better things to do than headbutt monoliths.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

Well, I didn't want to be TOO positive and get labeled an NCSoft butt-monkey.

Besides, look at all the enjoyment some of these people are getting out of the perception of being "persecuted".

Let's not ruin their fun!

You HONESTLY think NCSoft is going to let people go without the ability to change after this simply because they've already used it once?

Give these guys at least a LITTLE credit.

Wish I knew what to tell you about that. We're still months out here. This was literally announced days ago. Give them a chance to formulate a plan that doesn't have half of Europe going up in flames.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

In this case, you are 100% CONFUSED. I said nothing about the NA EULA. I responded to Shadowe who said that the English statute doesn't say its limited to only discrimination that occurs within England itself. I said it doesn't say that because it doesn't have to: all laws in England only affect the jurisdiction in England. The EULA between an English player and the EU company NCSoft does business as *is* within the jurisdiction of England. But the terms between NCSoft and anyone outside of England fall outside its jurisdiction. English law cannot dictate what those can be.


Apparently your definition of the word "likely" is as fluid as your definition of "nationality." This case wouldn't even make it to court to be laughed out of it.

The EULA between a Swedish player and the EU company NCsoft Europe also do business within the jurisdiction of England. There is no NCsoft Sweden. Despite me living in Sweden, I do business with UK-based NCsoft Europe, under a contract that specifically states that English law applies.

Care to put a financial amount to the loss? Remember you are "losing" a virtual item. So how was this in any way offensive to race, ethnicity, disability, sex, or age?

Might I suggest that you talk to a solicitor before making any baseless claims of discrimination?
I'm sure that most solicitors would laugh you out of their offices.

I can also tell you that small claims court will likely toss your suit out. To top it, all NCsoft Europe will have to do is claim technical issues beyond its control (ie a directive from the parent company and them trying to merge databases) and the judge will throw out your case.

It wouldn't get that far. I doubt that any solicitor would waste their time with this.

It would lead to situations like we are dealing with in this thread.

Check. No more butt-monkey.

Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters

Seattle-based Microsoft had to pay billion-euro fines to the EU Council and even build a special Explorer-less Euro version of Windows. Nobody buys that version, but it's there and it was enforced by a governing European body onto an American company.

...but seriously, let's drop this legal thread. It's silly. It's not discrimination (but if it were, it would be governed by English law, 'kay), it's just either the cheap solution or the lazy solution that in either case happens to screw as many players as possible and all of them Euros. Even if the solution were to screw NA players, there would be less players screwed, since there are more EU players with NA accounts than NA players with EU accounts.

Explorer-less version of Windows? Surely what program gets used to manage files?

I think you mean "Internet Explorer". There is also a "Windows Media Player" free version of Windows.

But that is under the anti-monopoly rulings, and its offered as an *alternative* to the normal version. The normal version is *not* stopped from being sold in the EU.

So you're trying to say that there are more EU players PERIOD, than there are NA players?

I'd love to know how you came by this little nugget of data...

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.