So better stay away from Steel Beasts dongles

[Ssnake]

I've debated selling my Steel Beasts dongle.

It has the previous SB version on it.   Can't justify being so paranoid about losing the damn thing (which should've been filled with gold dust and crack based on cost) and I haven't played it in a year or more.

You may find out that the cost thing isn't so bad as you currently think. On the rare occasions that CM sticks with a Steel Beasts license show up on eBay, they usually go for about $60...$90. So in the best of cases you bought it for $115.-, sell it for $90, actual expense: $25.-

You see, the CM stick actually helps to retain the second-hand value of the software. There are no restrictions on selling it on, and the absence of pirated versions helps it being marketable. Even if you don't sell it for the best possible price you end up with something that is quite comparable to the costs of a one-year time based license.

People get all hypnotized by the initial price when a lot of games these days, especially when combined with DLCs and some MMO subscription, will easily cost just as much or more --- and cannot be sold afterwards. I'm ready to take a lot of blame for everything that we do. But it would be nice to get, once in a while, also a bit of credit for the things that we do right with respect to CodeMeter, and our pricing policies.

[Nefaro]

I've debated selling my Steel Beasts dongle.

It has the previous SB version on it.   Can't justify being so paranoid about losing the damn thing (which should've been filled with gold dust and crack based on cost) and I haven't played it in a year or more.

You may find out that the cost thing isn't so bad as you currently think. On the rare occasions that CM sticks with a Steel Beasts license show up on eBay, they usually go for about $60...$90. So in the best of cases you bought it for $115.-, sell it for $90, actual expense: $25.-

You see, the CM stick actually helps to retain the second-hand value of the software. There are no restrictions on selling it on, and the absence of pirated versions helps it being marketable. Even if you don't sell it for the best possible price you end up with something that is quite comparable to the costs of a one-year time based license.

People get all hypnotized by the initial price when a lot of games these days, especially when combined with DLCs and some MMO subscription, will easily cost just as much or more --- and cannot be sold afterwards. I'm ready to take a lot of blame for everything that we do. But it would be nice to get, once in a while, also a bit of credit for the things that we do right with respect to CodeMeter, and our pricing policies.

I do appreciate being able to re-sell this game second hand.  Most DRM schemes were made to prevent exactly that.   

It was the deciding factor in my original purchase, despite my reservations about the price & dongle.  Still think it's an enjoyable sim, but I jump around too much in order to keep up with it.  Would be better to just do some multi-player with the occasional month sub in my case.

[Tuna]

So it's a military product, that requires a dongle.. but yet you can buy it without a dongle.. Which is it?

I was never close to buying this game due to the dongle and the price.

But gaming with the people on Asid's site,  I was getting tempted to give it a shot. Now, I'm not so sure. Again, back to customer service.
I appreciate you coming on, and telling your side of the story. There is nothing wrong with you sticking to your rules. But if you want to gain more customers, then you should treat long time customers a little better. Especially where you have the ability to kill the existing dongle.

Some people hate Battlefronts DRM and Update pricing. But you know what, when you have a problem, they help you. They help you immediately.
That goes a long way trying to grow the customer base, even when you are doing other things that may alienate them.

[RyanE]

SO the short of it is I am out almost $200 with no game.  It could be easily remedied by esims.  esims has set internal rules that don't allow that to happen.  Regardless of their rationalizations, they could have easily been more flexible.  In fact Ssnake is still claiming I never gave them the chance to be flexible.  I am still waiting to see where that was offered.

I am in no way blaming esims for losing my luggage.  But the response to a long-time customer in a bind is spend another $125 with us.  My main point for posting is if you want to play SP, you better guard your dongle or esims will want their next pound of flesh.

I can tell you right now, if I treated my corporate customers with that level of inflexibility, I would soon find myself lacking contracts.

As to my luggage, my corporate travel VP managed to get United to up the comp to $300.  My company is paying another $200.  I am still out a dongle and a game.  And I am out a healthy amount of respect for how esims treats its gaming customers.  All for a net of $50 for esims.

btw, the I have avoided the timed licenses due to the number of bugs I have seen during upgrades.

[Boggit]

I guess the question is, do you believe the veracity of the claim? If you do, charge whatever you need to cover your costs and send a replacement. If you do not, don't issue a replacement. If the guy can provide proof-of-purchase, I don't see where the problem is.

The point I was trying to make is that we set up a policy where it shouldn't matter whether I (or anyone else who might be working on customer support) believe a claim to be true. Maybe I am pedantic in my attempt to eliminate personal bias and the quality of the story being told. Our guideline is whether a claim can be verified.
Also, I find it somewhat unfair that eSim Games is blamed for mistakes that others made - the airline, which lost the suitcase to begin with, and offers a mere pittance for compensation. The unreasonable policy of his employer to cover only a part of the loss that occurred during a company-mandated travel. The way it appears to me is that we are being singled out as the most vulnerable party, and that the essence of the negotiation tactic is extortion:
"Do as I want, or I go public".

That's not how I roll.


I tried to offer an alternative view point to look at the situation to find a creative way out, but it was roundly rejected. When I complied with the demand to blacklist the CM stick I wasn't even given the time to explain that it wouldn't work immediately. Rather, I was accused of stealing his license (just in case that the suitcase would show up, after all- apparently there still is a chance for that); which is rich - after all, I blacklisted the stick on his direct request, as fast as I could. When I gave the technical explanation how the blacklisting worked, this thread was opened already to drag the case into the public.

I'm sorry. I may be looking like a pedantic ass, but if there is one thing where I react very badly, it's blackmail and extortion. It may not be intended like that, and my hand remains outstretched for further negotiations despite a somewhat difficult atmosphere at this point. But I'm not sure if RyanE is actually interested in a solution other than total surrender on my part.

I have no dog in this fight. I am just looking at the issues raised as a neutral outsider.

Ssnake is right that RyanE was treated badly by the airline and the company, and that isn't his fault. However, I don't recall RyanE claiming that it ever was his fault that those entities didn't act fairly towards him. The fault of the loss lies with either a thief, or the airline losing the luggage. RyanE's complaint was that he had not been treated reasonably by eSim having regard to the facts alleged.

Mirth covered this take on Ssnake's response quite succinctly... and Ssnake's response hardly addresses it.

Given that Ssnake's involvement is a matter of customer service with regard to a replacement dongle, it all hinges as far as Ssnake is concerned on proof of loss. Clearly, Asid is aware that eSim do look after their customers with a broken dongle, and likewise Ssnake attests to that as well. But in this case there is no physical evidence of the loss because either the dongle is lost with the luggage, or stolen. So the issue is do you give RyanE the benefit of the doubt?

As an established customer of several years I'm inclined to believe his position that he would not suddenly try to clip eSim for a dongle, especially as this has not happened before, and he is willing to pay the replacement cost of the dongle, so that eSim is not carrying a loss on the transaction. Maybe communications have been a bit heated and both sides have their hackles up, but in the greater scheme of things is this really something for eSim to get worried about?

I think Con is right that this is a matter to deal with by common sense. It may not be policy for eSim to replace dongle's without physical evidence, but sometimes - like in this case - you don't have physical evidence. If the customer covers the cost of the replacement, and you know he has regularly paid into the company on upgrades, where is the loss to the company? Moreover, one assumes that he will continue to pay for upgrades as time goes on if he has a working dongle, which must be good for company revenue. Is it beyond expectation that eSim says to RyanE - it's not our policy to supply replacement dongles without evidence, but in your case we'll accept your version of events as a goodwill gesture if you pay the replacement cost.

Of course, this is yet a matter for eSim to decide. However, as a neutral in all this, it does seem a route to a happy ending for all concerned - and reflects well on eSim's customer service when something out of the ordinary happens.

[RyanE]

Exactly...that has been my point all along.

[RyanE]

Its also telling that an airline, of all organizations, tripled the standard compensation when presented with the fact I am a frequent and long-term customer.  So in the end, an airline, one of the more detested customer service companies in the world, outperformed esims on customer service from a customer's perspective.  That is not a contest you want to even be in as a company.

[RyanE]

One more point...

Ssnake used losing an iphone as an example.  My family and I have lost phones before.  Verizon sells me a certified used phone as a replacement at a fairly deep discount.  In fact, since I am one of the original Verizon Wireless customers, they give me a bigger than normal discount on it.  See how that works?

They don't make start over, pay a new line activation fee, pay full retail for the phone, etc.  I go in, say I lost my phone and paid a price, depending on how old the phone is, and I am done.  That's not even considering insurance.

[Boggit]

Some people hate Battlefronts DRM and Update pricing. But you know what, when you have a problem, they help you. They help you immediately.
That goes a long way trying to grow the customer base, even when you are doing other things that may alienate them.

That's definitely true. Battlefront support is excellent, and they do usually help you out very quickly (not always immediately, although they do often help even outside of office hours, which is unusual (and dedicated) in my experience).

[Jarhead0331]

Now, some people are hoarders. They just like to OWN a game rather than being able to just play it whenever they want. I can't help with that urge.

So now people who like to OWN what they actually BUY are some how looked upon negatively and described as "hoarders"?  And this is you not wanting to escalate things?

I think the lesson here is that esims, or at least Ssnake doesn't really care about the recreational user. The product is geared toward, and the company makes the most money from, government/military contracts. Esims views the fact that the PE version even exists as a favor that the enthusiast crowd should be grateful for. I don't fault Ssnake for placing a greater emphasis on the more lucrative customer base, but I do fault him for his piss poor attitude.

[mirth]

I missed the hoarders comment before. It's a helluva an attitude from someone selling a game for $125 a pop, plus paid upgrades.

I like to OWN the games I buy AND play them whenever I want. Guess that makes me some kind of fringe element hoarder. 

[Con]

Now, some people are hoarders. They just like to OWN a game rather than being able to just play it whenever they want. I can't help with that urge.

So now people who like to OWN what they actually BUY are some how looked upon negatively and described as "hoarders"?  And this is you not wanting to escalate things?

I think the lesson here is that esims, or at least Ssnake doesn't really care about the recreational user. The product is geared toward, and the company makes the most money from, government/military contracts. Esims views the fact that the PE version even exists as a favor that the enthusiast crowd should be grateful for. I don't fault Ssnake for placing a greater emphasis on the more lucrative customer base, but I do fault him for his piss poor attitude.

I have to agree with JH on this.  It would be more transparent if esims stated that their civilian version is for renting not buying if you purchase licenses.  The dongle option is not a robust solution as we see here (I am sure with a much larger customer base there would have been many more instances of these types of losses of a dongle).  The fact that esims puts the onus on the customer to prove that they have had a theft/loss of the dongle with the outcome irregardless leading to no middle ground compromise is the same situation as credit companies passing the pain and blame on victims of theft identity and making it their (the victims) problem to clean up a mess not caused by them.  Its an abdication of corporate responsibility.

[JudgeDredd]

I'm not interested in further escalation, so I'll refrain from making further posts in public - at least for the moment. Thanks for giving me a chance to present an alternate viewing angle. Who knows, maybe we can all calm down and find a solution after all.

I think that's a good idea because your initial response on here was shameful for a company.

In it you said

...All right, eMail communication is impersonal

Given your initial post, I don't think the email communication being impersonal is the problem. Your further posts have faired no better

You said in a further post

It is not the Customer's fault that the DRM costs a lot of money.

Never said it was.

But I never saw in the customers post where he blamed you for losing his luggage or getting a pitiful amount of compensation from the airline, and yet you felt it important to point those two things out in your initial post.

I really dislike those standard letters you get saying "We're sorry your experience with our company fell below that we aim to achieve....." - but almost anything else being written by you would have been so much better than your initial post on here to a long term customer with a problem.

Given how gamers have felt about DRM over the years, it's a sad state to see that even though gamers have "embraced" it by not boycotting the industry (through their sickness to continual buy games even though they haven't played the others  ::) ), the industry still views customers as robbing bastards first  :'(

[Bison]

I missed the hoarders comment before. It's a helluva an attitude from someone selling a game for $125 a pop, plus paid upgrades.

I like to OWN the games I buy AND play them whenever I want. Guess that makes me some kind of fringe element hoarder. 

Extremist.

[FlickJax]

TBH after reading ssnakes response I am pleased I have never bought this and I am not likely to now.