they remind me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDDEhLw1PVI
This is like software fine print in EULAās. OP do you read those before clicking agree? You might be technically correct, but most people donāt behave in a technically correct way.
Most people when asked whether they want to play a game theyāre interested in tomorrow or a month from tomorrow will make the obvious choice. You and I know this, imc should know this. So stop trying to defend illogical decision making with technicalities. It makes us forum goes look petty for trying to trip up others with trifling details.
you must be simple because from what you are saying you sound pretty simplemindedā¦
-
Do you even know how patches work they often will fix a bug but also make a new bug or an old bug in the event of fixing said bug its called coding deal with it.
-
That is completely up to the company on how the do there marketing practices stop expecting everyone to accept your world view and leave marketing to the people who are employed to deal with such because it is them who has the statisics not you with your assumptions and they did state clearly on the steam store as you can see in the picture stop trying to twist the wording to suit your assumptions.
-
Trading is still in the game dude even if they did not block out trading the RMT would still be there or even worst hereās a idea stop throwing out whoās the blame and in fact report it on the correct section of the forum they will olny work against players if people keep accepting there serviceās.
-
You must be sheeple the only time I pay attention to reviews if the game cost Ā£29.99 or higher because then I am questioning why it has such negative views if its a free to play or a low cost entry point reviews must have at least for a mmo about 40 hours of game time before I claim them valid if not then its most likely some whiny person with little understanding of how a mmo works and most likely grew bored before even finishing the tutorial.
I donāt know, some people makes me feel bad, itās sad that we have that bunch of ignorants here, they think if iām defending IMC one time with FACTS automatically iām a white knight. Seriously do not be a simple minded who only can look at one directionā¦ Itās not because someone is wrong sometimes that they are going to be wrong everytime.
Who cares man, I already posted a negative review for the lol.
You play on Orsha? Was grinding on Demon Prison 2? xD
Canāt play with lag when Bot spam the shout channel. And GM donāt know how to make a option to disable the should channel. So bad !!
the problem is they are simple minded unless the facts are in there favour they will always claim those against there optional of negative is considered a white knightā¦
LOL I just couldnāt resist ,
idgaf bout IMC or op or the game but you are actually saying that ,
the majority of the people who are bashing the game are right because the majority of the people who are bashing the game are wrong.
So the majority decides whatās wrong and whatās right according to you.Rules donāt apply as long as you are the majority?
Because the majority of people donāt read rules or the EULA it means the rules donāt matter/donāt apply ?
wat?
And you call him illogical for defending an illogical decision ??
Iām just trying to understand if you really mean it.
Cuz if so I can finally tell my bank to ā ā ā ā off and get off my balls,
I donāt have to pay the fine I got charged with because the majority of the people I know never read the full contract when getting a credit card.
Thanks for the awesome idea.
Hi, can you tell me what was on line 3 of paragraph 2 of the ToS terms of service?
You have 2 minutes to respond before I assume you just googled it.
Next question, do you think imc actually believes that the majority of its users are reading the fine print it includes?
Finally, do you think that those rules that imc sets down are necessarily legally or morally binding?
Practically speaking, you and I both know that basically nobody reads the EULAs or similar fine print. Also you are wrong that terms like EULAs (or the fine print terms that imc put up for ToS) are necessarily legally or even morally binding.
See:
The enforceability of an EULA depends on several factors, one of them being the court in which the case is heard. Some courts that have addressed the validity of the shrinkwrap license agreements have found some EULAs to be invalid, characterizing them as contracts of adhesion, unconscionable, and/or unacceptable pursuant to the U.C.C.āsee, for instance, Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology, Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software Ltdā¦ Other courts have determined that the shrinkwrap license agreement is valid and enforceable: see ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, Microsoft v. Harmony Computers, Novell v. Network Trade Center, and Ariz. Cartridge Remanufacturers Assān v. Lexmark Intāl, Inc. may have some bearing as well. No court has ruled on the validity of EULAs generally; decisions are limited to particular provisions and terms.
The 7th Circuit and 8th Circuit subscribe to the ālicensed and not soldā argument, while most other circuits do not. In addition, the contractsā enforceability depends on whether the state has passed the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) or Anti-UCITA (UCITA Bomb Shelter) laws. In Anti-UCITA states, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) has been amended to either specifically define software as a good (thus making it fall under the UCC), or to disallow contracts which specify that the terms of contract are subject to the laws of a state that has passed UCITA.
I just donāt understand why people want to defend these corporations. You as a consumer have rights and itās sad that there are people who just roll over and let those companies step all over them (and they happily defend the companyās right to do just that!)
No I canāt tell you and why the fk would I waste time to check Google?I donāt need to show off.
I never read the rules,I didnāt even check the DLC info.
But at least I donāt go around saying rules donāt apply cuz no one reads them cuz Iām not stupid.
Plus Iām not the one making assumptions saying people who are not mad at the game for its current state are white knights and are defending the company.
I believe I got better things to do.
Iād love to see someone trying to file a lawsuit and claim he knew what he paid for while he never read the information of what he bought.
Yes hello Mr Judge,I paid for a startup and itās not functioning like I thought it would.
Stay salty 
It works both ways unfortunately and your too focused on the negative therefore you are going to see it in a negative light.
Okay so your basically agreeing that being ignorant is acceptable okey so lets put this out there why is there such a thing called a EULA then? because if anyone could be ignorant to get off the hook with there choiceās it invalidates the reasoning behind the EULA so your logic right there is faultyā¦
A EULA is there as a documented information packet to tell people what they are agreeing too in the protection of there IP when you start any software application if you fail to follow what you accepted to then you are in the wrong regardless if you read it or not it was presented to you and you choose to ignore it and blindly accept what was in that document tough luck you loose game over.
If you accepted a contract with say a phone company agreeing to terms of service but because you donāt agree with it after your first month you complain its unfair well thatās the same instance if you read what you was agreeing with you would have understanding of what it was and make a more logical choice.
IGNORANCE IS NOT A EXCUSE stop accepting it is.
Okay well here you go then:
EDIT: for those who are interested here is some more reading on EULAs from the EFF.
Reminds me of the mcdonalds case where a woman tried to sue mcdonalds for making her kid fatā¦
This is not the example of what I asked for
but are you seriously trying to prove your point by posting an example of something as stupid as this cuz it happened once?
Does it make it just?
Does it make your point which is,laws/rules donāt apply if the majority doesnāt know them,valid?
Does this make sense because it happened once? LOL
I love the internet.
Bro, we arenāt talking about EULA we are talking about the fking first page! http://prntscr.com/ao638w
lets take into account statically anything that has been in law courtroom has a chance of success and failure because its based on what the jury declares unanimously basically a person effecting the case that can get the jury and or judge on there side will always have a higher chance of success that does not come down to the case at hand but how well he can twist and turn the view of the jury and judge.
It only happened once does not justify it happening loads of times Iāve heard of loads of stupid cases that have won just because of as I said above I recall one such case winning because a coffee cup did not warn the person who brought it that it was hot and she won the caseā¦ (Iām still confused about this who orders cold coffee?) and that is why now every coffee cup has a warning label or this one the guy who sued lynx deodorant because of false advertising because it did not give him women who craved him for application of lynx deodorantā¦
Using one and only one fact of something like this happening is no different then someone claiming they won the lottery and yes it can be added but the claim is very thin in the application to persuade people based on what your backing up similar to people who on the forum claim they have āmad skills in programmingā when trying to prove someone wrong and copying there qualification from the internet and pushing it off as they have them qualifications.
I stand by what the law believes in and that is ignorance is not an excuse you was presented a legal document and you choose to blindly accept the wording on said document no matter what excuse you can come up with.