Serious question for moderators, Gree, regarding the terms of service

[Evan1000]

Sharing, Selling, Donating accounts that do not belong to you is a breach of the TOS and Gree takes that seriously.

Why?

Extras

[Dipstik]

If you see a database error, please don't keep hitting "post" over and over...

From Gree's perspective, if someone wants to spend $500 on Crime City, that money should be spent on gold, not to pay off someone who's bored of the game and wants out.
From a player's perspective, we all want to be the strongest in the game. If someone quits, they're out. It's really frustrating watching five different people take over the same account, none of whom have put in the same work or money you've put in, and watching that account beat you over and over again.

[Weasel]

Why? What's the point?

All accounts are owned by Gree. You can't legally sell something that doesn't belong to you. Luckily for those involved, instead of taking legal action Gree is just banning accounts.

There's also the issue of someone technically "saving" thousands of dollars by paying someone a fraction of that for an account rather than paying Gree the cost of building that account. They may still spend a lot with the account, but there's no way for Gree to "recover" the lost revenue from somebody paying a third party for Gree's services.

Not to mention, as Dipstik correctly points out, attrition is an important part of these kinds of games. If the strongest accounts are consistently passed down from one person to the next, eventually nobody will bother paying Gree at all because no amount of money spent by one person on one account can compete with an unlimited number of individuals matching that amount on a single account.

Then there's that gold bonus program. Why spend $10k individually to qualify for the top tier if your syndicate can keep a "group" account on which they can spend $170 each for the same result?

[Dipstik]

Gree cannot sue you for violating the TOS. Their remedy is to ban you from all services and delete any offending accounts.

[Winnson]

I can see why Gree doesn't want OP old accounts passed around. They're OverPowered and if the person playing it left, the account should go with that person. Makes perfect sense.

However, if Gree has turned a blind eye to it until just now and then are selectively banning OverPowered accounts, that sucks.

If all accounts belonging to someone that is not the original owner of that account are being wiped, fine.

If some are going and some are staying depending on your current affiliation, that is definitely not fine.

I believe that's all Monte is trying to say, and it sounds fair enough.

[TheJess]

There is nothing at all morally or criminally wrong with transferring an account for a fee. However, it is common for game companies to attempt to bar such a practice for the reasons Weasel articulated, namely to manage their revenues.

Whether the SAS syndicates decide to report people who sell their accounts is their own prerogative, and whether it is an underhanded way to compete is anyone's to debate.

However, it is clear to nearly everyone, except the usual troll, that it smells of jealousy and desperation. And, the way SAS chose to announce their decision to report transfers leaves the typical bad taste.

[sister morphine]

There is nothing at all morally or criminally wrong with transferring an account for a fee. However, it is common for game companies to attempt to bar such a practice for the reasons Weasel articulated, namely to manage their revenues.

Whether the SAS syndicates decide to report people who sell their accounts is their own prerogative, and whether it is an underhanded way to compete is anyone's to debate.

However, it is clear to nearly everyone, except the usual troll, that it smells of jealousy and desperation. And, the way SAS chose to announce their decision to report transfers leaves the typical bad taste.

And what of the allegation that TAW have already (selectively) reported transfers? Does that taste better or worse.

[Vile Lynn]

GREE does see from other forms of communications (Line/Groupme), that other people are purchasing accounts and has been banning those.

We are discussing outcomes now?

GREE is spying in our 3rd-party chat rooms?
omg, who knew!

[Weasel]

There is nothing at all morally or criminally wrong with transferring an account for a fee. However, it is common for game companies to attempt to bar such a practice for the reasons Weasel articulated, namely to manage their revenues.

Whether the SAS syndicates decide to report people who sell their accounts is their own prerogative, and whether it is an underhanded way to compete is anyone's to debate.

However, it is clear to nearly everyone, except the usual troll, that it smells of jealousy and desperation. And, the way SAS chose to announce their decision to report transfers leaves the typical bad taste.

There is nothing morally wrong with transferring an account for a fee? I'm no lawyer, so really can't say much about the legality of it, but exchanging for monetary gain an item/product which does not belong to you, thus depriving the actual owner of said item or product of their due earnings, is not right from any angle. IMO, that is tantamount to theft.

Spin it however you want, people who sell accounts are making a profit from selling something which they did not create, invent, produce, etc., and that they do not, have not, and never will control ownership of.

[Evan1000]

If you see a database error, please don't keep hitting "post" over and over...

Sorry, I have a habit of doing that. Even if there is no error

And I see your guys points, but I'm looking at it from the point where its a freaking phone game and people shouldn't care if an account is passed down.

If you had something valuable (not saying a crime city account is in any way valuable), and you gave it to your kid, who sells it to his friend. Did you lose anything? Other than something sentimental to you. GREE doesn't lose any money from sold accounts. If anything they just made a new paying customer

[Weasel]

Sorry, I have a habit of doing that. Even if there is no error

And I see your guys points, but I'm looking at it from the point where its a freaking phone game and people shouldn't care if an account is passed down.

If you had something valuable (not saying a crime city account is in any way valuable), and you gave it to your kid, who sells it to his friend. Did you lose anything? Other than something sentimental to you. GREE doesn't lose any money from sold accounts. If anything they just made a new paying customer

Your analogy is bad, and you should feel bad.

[Dipstik]

If they thought they came out ahead they'd allow it. Or selectively enforce it in special circumstances. The reason games like this usually have a rule against transferring accounts is because they assume it's better to make someone start from the beginning than to let them take a shortcut. If they want to get ahead that bad they'll spend more before they give up and quit.

Do you even try to think about these things or do you just pick a position and make whatever assumptions you need to support it?

[Evan1000]

If they thought they came out ahead they'd allow it. Or selectively enforce it in special circumstances. The reason games like this usually have a rule against transferring accounts is because they assume it's better to make someone start from the beginning than to let them take a shortcut. If they want to get ahead that bad they'll spend more before they give up and quit.

Do you even try to think about these things or do you just pick a position and make whatever assumptions you need to support it?

Alright, I see where you're getting at with that. Still don't agree with banning the sold account. That's a waste of all the former player's effort and/or cash.

And well, I have my position, but can't find an argument that would match that of a lawyer's and a weasel's

[montecore]

There is nothing at all morally or criminally wrong with transferring an account for a fee. However, it is common for game companies to attempt to bar such a practice for the reasons Weasel articulated, namely to manage their revenues.

Whether the SAS syndicates decide to report people who sell their accounts is their own prerogative, and whether it is an underhanded way to compete is anyone's to debate.

However, it is clear to nearly everyone, except the usual troll, that it smells of jealousy and desperation. And, the way SAS chose to announce their decision to report transfers leaves the typical bad taste.

I never said SAS had decided to report transfers. I still think it's a lame thing to do. It's been talked about.

[smokey77]

Everyone in this game should have to start at the same place, level one with a blank hood and no stats. If someone has enough of the game and quits then they're account should quit with them. The selling of accounts goes on in an industrial scale. When I was looking for a new syn to join recently,I was told by two people that my stats were bad but that wasn't a problem as I could join a room and buy a low level account for $50!! People are so lazy nowadays they want the world and they want it yesterday. It just makes a joke out of the people who actually put the time and effort in to build their player/hood.