"What do you say is the purpose of playing games if not for fun? You've already had your rush after making those purchases, so why should the game company have to reimburse you now?"
"I don't understand the purpose of Lawyer Tang's lawsuit, to be honest. It feels a bit like grandstanding..."
There were many similar comments, and some came from those professing to be professional lawyers.
"Lawyer Da Li": It makes sense to refund the part of a top-up that wasn't spent, but I don't think it's reasonable to return the rest. The plaintiff received services provided by the game company and enjoyed the fun of the game; the contractual purpose had been fulfilled.
Of course, these comments were all posted online by Mei Tian Company's PR department, like those professional opinions, which were taken from the legal department's written defense.