FANDOM


  • I've heard this contract alluded to frequently with vague claims as to how and what it stipulates never to be released again.

    If it exists, it's relavent to this wiki, and must be documented, if it does not, it's such a pervasive rumor that it must not go unchallenged by fact.

      Loading editor
    • Please take a look at Founders. Is that what you're looking for?

        Loading editor
    • No, I'm referring to the rumored contract DE signed that opens them up for what in some instances has been called a "legal" suit, and others a "civil" suit should Founders ever be made accessible again. It has no mention on the wiki, on the page you've linked, and yet people keep talking about it in game and in discussions on this wiki as if it is fact. None of my extensive searches have uncovered such a thing, but if it exists it should be made public knowledge instead of simply rumor, no?

        Loading editor
    • If the contract is indeed real then it's still not the Wiki's responsibility to document it (mention it at most), that's up to DE. You might be able to find a Founder with memory of it or not, but otherwise a Google search should also answer your question.

      In any case, DE will likely never release Founder items into the game again, either due to a sales contract or simply out of customer interest.

        Loading editor
    • DE has described the gear given out with the Founder-Packs as exclusive to it; but no, there is nothing legally binding them to that statement.

        Loading editor
    • this is a Beta game and DE can do everithing they want without any warranties for the users....

      The EULA prevail over any other contract.

      See the chapter 8 of the Warframe EULA.

      8. WARRANTY DISCLAIMER

      TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE GAME AND ALL INFORMATION, CONTENT AND SERVICES CONTAINED THEREON ARE PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND

        Loading editor
    • I am a founder with explicitely no memory of this alleged contract, I began searching because every conversation about founders eventually leads back to "The Contract" which most claim is located on the 'bill of sale', when I know for a fact that first mentions of this elusive document started well after Founders concluded, and I've checked my digital receipt to, surprise, find no mystery contract.

      I don't believe I stated that I wanted the entirety of the contract documented on the wiki, but a source link, should it exist would be appreciated, if not, this false information has saturated enough in the community that I think it's at least worth a 'note' section saying that no such document has been proven to exist.

      200.186.76.98 wrote:
      this is a Beta game and DE can do everithing they want without any warranties for the users....

      The EULA prevail over any other contract.

      See the chapter 8 of the Warframe EULA.

      ...

      I've suspected as much. Thanks. Forgot it's still beta...

        Loading editor
    • I this is real I'm happy

        Loading editor
    • 74.139.129.56 wrote:
      I this is real I'm happy

      They probably won't re-open it, but I keep encountering people saying that it's for any reason other than DE's intention to stick to their word. These people also seem prone to hyperbole, one even went so far as to call me evil for saying the exclusivity isn't what led me to buy it, and I wouldn't have minded it not being so exclusive. (And then proceeded to tout the 'virtues' of physical beatings in the real world)

        Loading editor
    • If Warframe is still kicking by 2022, I wouldn't be surprised if by then they hold a giveaway for Excalibur Prime and the weapons. But the rest of the stuff, not so much. 

      Ten years as an MMO is kinda a big deal.

        Loading editor
    • The founder packages were sold as limited time offers only. If they start to sell founder stuff now, it would be at least false advertisement ins some countries. So there is no contract, but due to their public marketing regarding the exclusivity of the founder sales they would open them up for refunds in some countries. But that is a very, very theoretical possibility: First legal costs will be most of the time hire than the refund you get and more important second of all, the PR damage done by breaking their promise is way greater than any possible financial gains on DE's end.

        Loading editor
    • 80.108.172.200 wrote: The founder packages were sold as limited time offers only. If they start to sell founder stuff now, it would be at least false advertisement ins some countries. So there is no contract, but due to their public marketing regarding the exclusivity of the founder sales they would open them up for refunds in some countries. But that is a very, very theoretical possibility: First legal costs will be most of the time hire than the refund you get and more important second of all, the PR damage done by breaking their promise is way greater than any possible financial gains on DE's end.

      But pursuing a legal complaint cross international borders require tidius effort and money not unless you're in canada if your not just filing the complaint alone pose extreme legal and practical challenges. You can't really enforce your country's civil laws outside your own not unless there is a contract made which in this case is quite elusive. The legal challenges are actually in the complainants shoulder to prove first that he has a right that was violated.

        Loading editor
    • There was never a contract ... That's a myth ... If Digital Extremes wants to sell the access again, they'll do it ... Just read the EULA ... they can do whatever they want ....

        Loading editor
    • I guess to some dumb people, video game eulas are above the law of the land... fortunately, Eulas are NOT supreme...

      People get sued for way less, like verbal contracts...

      DE made the promise of exclusivity forever for purchasing a founder’s account that will NEVER be made available again and if that’s not a contract, then I don’t know what is. By all definition, that’s a real contract right there. If they break it, it becomes false advertisement. DE is welcome to do as they please, but there are consequences.

        Loading editor
    • 198.179.137.128 wrote:
      I guess to some dumb people, video game eulas are above the law of the land... fortunately, Eulas are NOT supreme...

      People get sued for way less, like verbal contracts...

      DE made the promise of exclusivity forever for purchasing a founder’s account that will NEVER be made available again and if that’s not a contract, then I don’t know what is. By all definition, that’s a real contract right there. If they break it, it becomes false advertisement. DE is welcome to do as they please, but there are consequences.

      The problem with the "verbal contract" argument, is to have it be legally upheld as a point of contention in the courts is the fact that the value of said contract would have to be proven. Not to mention with the fact that a written document (the ELUA/ TOS in this instance) already being in place, in court that would trump anything verbal.

      On the part of "false advertising" not even that could be proven simply because all DE had to do is say that they were selling access to the game early and/ or the gear was exclusive to the founders program because the only way to get it was through paying into the program. The founders package was for the beta, warframe is still in beta it could be possible for it to come back in that fashion again by "oi, we need dosh" if they ever actually get the game out of beta and use that as a reason.

      To also mention, if Hello Games couldn't get sued for all of their lies then the fraction of the few thousand active founders wouldn't stand a chance in any court (and that's already assuming the could acually prove that something so small would be grounds for action). Even if they did have to settle out the cost of "false advertising" the founders 2.0 pack would make them so much money it would still come out as a net positive. Even on the social side that still wouldn't be generally seen as a bad thing because if that was the case EA, Ubi, Activision, Blizzard, ect would've closed down years ago.

        Loading editor
    • ^there’s actually plenty of proof and evidence... they (DE) won’t challenge the deal they made.

        Loading editor
    • You guys need to learn some English. Here is the English definition.

      Contract-

      a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law.

      DE said “exclusive forever, never be made available again” and they took money for this deal. That’s a contract. They won’t challenge that, EVER. That’s why everyone gets UMBRA. Don’t hold your breaths.

        Loading editor
    • 2600:387:B:F:0:0:0:8A wrote: You guys need to learn some English. Here is the English definition.

      Contract-

      a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law.

      DE said “exclusive forever, never be made available again” and they took money for this deal. That’s a contract. They won’t challenge that, EVER. That’s why everyone gets UMBRA. Don’t hold your breaths.

      Law is more complicated than that. If this contract is unwritten, then you must prove those terms (perpetual exclusivity) were included with no loopholes, which companies rarely leave themselves without. And while they posted ad pages claiming exclusive, those aren't considered part of the contract. That being said, its still extremely unlikely. Easier for DE to use paid workhours on future improvements/advancements then debating best way to reintroduce founders items.

      Not a lawyer, not a founder, would want founder items if offered

        Loading editor
    • 136.160.229.202 wrote:

      2600:387:B:F:0:0:0:8A wrote: You guys need to learn some English. Here is the English definition.

      Contract-

      a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law.

      DE said “exclusive forever, never be made available again” and they took money for this deal. That’s a contract. They won’t challenge that, EVER. That’s why everyone gets UMBRA. Don’t hold your breaths.

      Law is more complicated than that. If this contract is unwritten, then you must prove those terms (perpetual exclusivity) were included with no loopholes, which companies rarely leave themselves without. And while they posted ad pages claiming exclusive, those aren't considered part of the contract.

      That being said, its still extremely unlikely. Easier for DE to use paid workhours on future improvements/advancements then debating best way to reintroduce founders items. Not a lawyer, not a founder, would want founder items if offered

      "If this contract is unwritten, then you must prove those terms (perpetual exclusivity) were included with no loopholes, which companies rarely leave themselves without." https://i.gyazo.com/ba5a4550d0a1d4f6a12e8f6ca4f3d183.jpg THE Quote: ​​​​​​"Being a Founder has its privileges, Snag exclusive items that will never be available again, PLUS instant access to the Closed Beta!" Here is it!

        Loading editor
    • A sale is not a contract, a contract may pertain to a sale, but using the word "exclusive" outside of a legally binding contract complete with definitions for such words(as most contracts typically include) just means something is less accessible than freely available.

      We've already established that a screengrab of an advertisement does not a contract make.

      If you were to charge the company with breech of contract, you would need to acquire and produce said contract, that would not constitute a contract in a court of law. You MIGHT be able to get in a false advertisement charge, but that is a different charge with very different repercussions depending on circumstance and context.

      That particular screenshot is also 6 months outdated as the founders program did not end in March of 2013, so I'll ask again, should you not be obligated to file charges for DE going against their word in that particular image by extending the end date? Or maybe they need to be sued right now because they provided the assets to the Chinese warframe team, who then turned around and made Excal Prime acquirable as any other prime in-game, thus making it a defacto "breach" of this so-called "contract".

      You can literally sue anyone for almost anything, but the challenge is in demonstrating it as legal fact in court, and in some cases your attourney is just as liable for damages if they permit you to file for suit in exceptionally frivolous circumstances.

      This is my legal opinion as a layman with only a passing interest in the law surrounding such things: Nobody has ownership of "an exacalibur prime" except for DE who hold the copyright for the only instances of such a thing, which are a conglomeration of video game assets visually, audibly, and otherwise represented by disperate files and configurations of code within 'the game'. If the game ends, your "items" vanish, your account vanishes, and all the little status modifiers and details that fill up the segments of a database your account information 'inhabit' cease to be. Excalibur Prime is no more or less accessible as good or service than any other warframe as they aren't a product, but the entirety of Warframe is the product and the service.

        Loading editor
    • Jeffman12 wrote:
      A sale is not a contract, a contract may pertain to a sale, but using the word "exclusive" outside of a legally binding contract complete with definitions for such words(as most contracts typically include) just means something is less accessible than freely available.

      We've already established that a screengrab of an advertisement does not a contract make.

      If you were to charge the company with breech of contract, you would need to acquire and produce said contract, that would not constitute a contract in a court of law. You MIGHT be able to get in a false advertisement charge, but that is a different charge with very different repercussions depending on circumstance and context.

      That particular screenshot is also 6 months outdated as the founders program did not end in March of 2013, so I'll ask again, should you not be obligated to file charges for DE going against their word in that particular image by extending the end date? Or maybe they need to be sued right now because they provided the assets to the Chinese warframe team, who then turned around and made Excal Prime acquirable as any other prime in-game, thus making it a defacto "breach" of this so-called "contract".

      You can literally sue anyone for almost anything, but the challenge is in demonstrating it as legal fact in court, and in some cases your attourney is just as liable for damages if they permit you to file for suit in exceptionally frivolous circumstances.

      This is my legal opinion as a layman with only a passing interest in the law surrounding such things: Nobody has ownership of "an exacalibur prime" except for DE who hold the copyright for the only instances of such a thing, which are a conglomeration of video game assets visually, audibly, and otherwise represented by disperate files and configurations of code within 'the game'. If the game ends, your "items" vanish, your account vanishes, and all the little status modifiers and details that fill up the segments of a database your account information 'inhabit' cease to be. Excalibur Prime is no more or less accessible as good or service than any other warframe as they aren't a product, but the entirety of Warframe is the product and the service.

      To add to this, I kinda doubt that anyone is willing to hire an atorney, who will most likely charge around a hundred bucks an hour, to litigate on something that at most cost them $250 originally.

      It just doesn't make any logical sense and everytime I hear the argument "oh founders are gonna sue DE if they release the stuff again" I almost facepalm irl.

        Loading editor
    • nn

        Loading editor
    • Its kind of meh how they named him Excalibur Prime and the Lato Prime and Skana Prime. All the other Primes are/were obtainable in the game by farming or buying with real money and the three founder primes are exclusive, they shouldve named them differently like giving them a special version of them and making the prime version obtainable.

        Loading editor
    • I am not a lawyer, however there exist several things this discussion is either glossing over or stating wrongly.
      • EULA supercedes contract.
      Under US law, no. Plain and simple, unless a contract includes things that are "unconscionable" or contains clauses hidden away in it, it is easily enforced as law in regards to legal disputes about it.
      • DE made no contract
      They did, albeit a verbal one (per the gyazo link further up). While possibly not enforceable under contract law in the US, it would most certainly be counted as a bait and switch scam which does have legal ramifications per instance. It is also illegal in Canada under the Competition Act.
      • hurr the founders'll sue DE
      Most would not. Yes some bad actors or those attempting to feel justified would, but no action would be required from the founders for damage to be done to DE. For reasoning on this: without the Founder Program, warframe would not have seen the second quarter of 2014, there would be no console releases, no 50 million registered losers, no open worlds, nothing; in fact warframe likely would've taken DE with it to its watery grave. The driving force of not releasing the founder gear is not impending lawsuit, it is the imminent backlash that would occur from them turning their backs on the very people that vaulted them to their current height.
      • people won't sue over $250
      Yes, the original damage is $250 at most. Per founder. And per person that believes they should stay exclusive. Welcome to class action lawsuits where a penny of damage to a billion people breaks companies. And that's before emotional damages are added in.
      • but the closed beta stuff!!1!!1
      Was given as a gift with no promise of exclusivity or purchase requirement. This is a red herring argument.
      • but mastery rank
      DE has said time and time again that when mr30 is obtainable there will be an overabundance of mr affinity to be gained.

      So yes, DE could renege on their promise of founder exclusivity because a vocal minority of entitled twits have a jealousy complex, no DE would likely not survive the fallout afterwards. On a personal note, I find this continued outrage over the founder gear to be laughable, no one is bemoaning the china exclusives of umbra prime, primed streamline (until it was forcibly removed), Nezha or Wukong (before they shipped over, hell it wasn't until last week that anyone wanted Wukong), or in the international release: Primed Chamber. Everyone just wants what a few have regardless of how they get it or why only a few have it. I ask you this, if Excalibur Prime, Lato Prime, and Skana prime were tradeable regardless of their level, who all would be willing to spend the money to pay for their upper 5 figure platinum price tag? Primed Chamber is regularly handed out at live events and it averages 35,000 platinum.

      On a separate argument, umbra has the exact same stats as prime with a better passive and radial howl. So I must assume here that no one wants prime for his stats (or god forbid his looks) but only because he is exclusive.



      -Hunter Founder

        Loading editor
    • 24.166.69.132 wrote:

      On a separate argument, umbra has the exact same stats as prime with a better passive and radial howl. So I must assume here that no one wants prime for his stats (or god forbid his looks) but only because he is exclusive.



      -Hunter Founder

      No, I want Excalibur Prime because I want all primes in the game and given how all the other frames have their own prime counterpart, it's natural to want the Excalibur one too. The thing is that it's extremely dissapointing to see that you won't get it forever, assuming DE does something major and we do get it but that's wishful thinking.

      Skana Prime is kinda meh but as stated above, I want EVERYTHING prime, so it's gotta be in my collection.

      Lato Prime has two things in my opinion: the first one is that it's a weapon I like despite it being a beginners weapon. I just like the Lato and having the better version of it would be ideal. The second one is that, because Lato Prime is founders exclusive, we would never get an Aklato Prime and that is something I find to be bullshit. That's why I don't like that.

      "But you already have Umbra!" Which is not Excalibur Prime.

      "But you already have Lato Vandal!" Which is not Lato Prime.

      "But the Prisma Skana!" Is not the Skana Prime.

      Exclusivity has nothing to do with it. Wanting to have everything Prime and not being able to, does.

        Loading editor
    • In addition, see the second to last question at the bottom of this page:

      Warframe Community FAQ

        Loading editor
    • 73.52.140.222 wrote:
      In addition, see the second to last question at the bottom of this page:

      Warframe Community FAQ

      That pretty much seals it. Also why are people so Upset over it!?!? 

      ​The founders rewards were given to people who donated to an Unproven game from a Company on the Brink of Bankrupty. Its because of those People who were willing to pay money that this game gained traction and exists today.

      ​​​​​ ​​​​​ ​​​​

        Loading editor
    • 187.190.191.13 wrote:
      24.166.69.132 wrote:

      On a separate argument, umbra has the exact same stats as prime with a better passive and radial howl. So I must assume here that no one wants prime for his stats (or god forbid his looks) but only because he is exclusive.



      -Hunter Founder

      No, I want Excalibur Prime because I want all primes in the game and given how all the other frames have their own prime counterpart, it's natural to want the Excalibur one too. The thing is that it's extremely dissapointing to see that you won't get it forever, assuming DE does something major and we do get it but that's wishful thinking.

      Skana Prime is kinda meh but as stated above, I want EVERYTHING prime, so it's gotta be in my collection.

      Lato Prime has two things in my opinion: the first one is that it's a weapon I like despite it being a beginners weapon. I just like the Lato and having the better version of it would be ideal. The second one is that, because Lato Prime is founders exclusive, we would never get an Aklato Prime and that is something I find to be bullshit. That's why I don't like that.

      "But you already have Umbra!" Which is not Excalibur Prime.

      "But you already have Lato Vandal!" Which is not Lato Prime.

      "But the Prisma Skana!" Is not the Skana Prime.

      Exclusivity has nothing to do with it. Wanting to have everything Prime and not being able to, does.

      You say exclusivity has nothing to do with it, but the entirety of your 'gimme gimme, I wan it' argument (I'd much rather compare it to a toddler's tantrum) is about you being unable to have the items, because, well, they're exclusive. So here's my solutions for you

      ""But you already have Umbra!" Which is not Excalibur Prime." Chinaframe's founders program had Excalibur Umbra Prime, there, something else to cry about.

      "The second one is that, because Lato Prime is founders exclusive, we would never get an Aklato Prime and that is something I find to be bullshit." That's real fucking neato, no one ever said AkLato had to have a prime much Vasto prime was vaulted for many years before we could an AkVasto Prime. The singular prime of an akgun existing does not gaurantee a primed ak version. It's also curious you fail to mention the dual skana (unless of course you only care about lato because of the toddler mentality of your argument).

      ""But the Prisma Skana!" Is not the Skana Prime." that's real fucking neato and I don't think any significant number outside of yourself care.

      And since we're on the topic of wanting things with no reason as to why we should have them:

      • I want excalibur prime to, hands down, be the most beautiful looking frame in the game with 16k textures and raytracing effects.

      • I want my founder profile glyph to be just as sought after by whiny little shits as my excalibur prime is.

      • But most of all, what I want is for people like you to understand that without the founders trusting in an unfounded solo company, without the founders paying money into a free to play game that admittedly looked like ass and was janky as hell, without the founders putting faith into what could be instead of what and literally buying into DE's ambition there wouldn't have been plains of eidolon and its 31 million registered players, there wouldn't have been fortuna with its 52 million registered players, there wouldn't have been console ports, there wouldn't be a switch port, there wouldn't even be a Digital Extremes anymore. So you can sit there an be a salty little shitstain that wants things they can't have, or you can acknowledge that the founders made a highly risky choice and saved a game that most of us and then another 8 figures of players came to deeply enjoy and will continue to enjoy. If you can say how you've had a similar impact of the same magnitude on the game, then by all means I will be the first to champion for founder status and its exclusives for you, until then you're just a tempermental toddler posting an anonymous message on the wiki.

      And just in case you think my version of history is false: https://www.pcgamer.com/the-story-of-warframe-how-a-game-no-publisher-wanted-found-26-million-players/ or https://www.bananatic.com/games/warframe-30/they-said-this-game-was-supposed-to-fail-now-look-where-it-is-9492 or https://www.pcgamesn.com/warframe/warframe-player-count



      -Hunter Founder

        Loading editor
    • A Lone Tenno
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.