Results 21 to 40 of 117
26-01-2013, 06:42 PM #21
Either way, with the sims, they're sitting on one of the most expanded popular games ever. The jump to DLC (even though it hasnt hit sims in a big way yet, there are still people I know that buy "offline" versions of those expansions) seems a natural one.
Some games the DLC is properly implemented, like Mass Effect 3, in others, they seem not much less than cashgrabs.
To be fair, THQ wasnt much better with Saints Row 3's DLC, which was mostly superficial items.
26-01-2013, 06:45 PM #22
26-01-2013, 06:47 PM #23
26-01-2013, 06:50 PM #24
26-01-2013, 06:51 PM #25
The problem is always there, even with Valve's Steam. The fear that they can take away things you have bought and paid for is very real and not at all irrational. I was very uncomfortable clicking "Agree" when they wrote their new legal waiver barring class action suits. It has the very real potential to turn into something really, really ugly.
The only reason I've been harsher on EA for things like this is because they have actually done some stupid things with their EULAs. People have gotten bans and suspensions for things as minor as avatars a moderator didn't like - which lock them out of their games. That's overstepping the boundaries of sensible behavior. Even to this day the language on their data collection is vague and leaves a lot of questions about what they can and can't search through - a very sharp contrast to Valve's self-imposed restrictions on "only if it's related to your hardware and games". If they don't intend to monitor anything else, why isn't it in writing?
I still make it a point to always look for games without DRM attached to them. There are people who post things like "No Steam, no buy!" (especially on the PC Gamer boards) and it baffles me. Why would you require a DRM method shackled to your game? It's not intrusive and annoying DRM (yet) but it is very much DRM.
Steam has earned a reputation as being mostly inoffensive and sometimes useful (its matchmaking works well). But we'd all do well to remember it's still a form of DRM.
As for the legality issue I have no idea how relevant EULAs would be in court. We've not reached that point yet.
Shit.Virtual Pilot 3D™ NEVER NOT SCAM!
26-01-2013, 06:54 PM #26
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
But the consumer also deserves to own merchandise they have paid money for. Regardless of whether that merchandise is digital or physical, the consumer deserves protection, too. I deserve to know that I will always be able to play games on Steam or Origon, regardless of whether EA or Valve goes out of business 10 years from now. I paid for the goods, I should be able to use them.
And I should be able to use them in any way I see fit. So long as I am not profiting from someone else's hard work - or helping others to do so - I should be able to play a game the way I want to play the game. These are, after all, games and not books. Or movies. If i want to edit ini files or tweak game settings I should be allowed to do so. IF you want to bar me from then redistributing the product you produced in my changed form, I will have to live with that, since to do elsewise would be to, in essence, profit from or gain notoriety due to someone else's work. Regardless of the rules regarding distribution, however, once I buy a game - or a gaming console - I should be able to do with that game or device as I please. Since, you know, ownership.
Your making out as if the game coming with multi-player options is some how a burden, but I'm not really seeing how? I don't play XCOM multi-player either (because I rarely have the time for multi-player anything these days), but I don't begrudge those who can and do the opportunity.[/QUOTE]
Multiplayer becomes a burden once Publishers begin using it as a crutch in order to prevent people from altering their own personal, single player experience in order to heighten their enjoyment of the game. If you do not want me using mods in multiplayer, fine. When and IF I choose to play multiplayer, THEN you can overwrite my modified ini file (looking at you, XCOM/Firaxis). But refusing to allow me to mod my own single player experience because you tacked on (yet another) multiplayer afterthought to yet another single player game...no. Just...no. The game belongs to me, I own it and once I own it, I will alter, modify, tweak and house rule it any damned way I please. If i cannot redistribute "my version" fine, but that should not prevent me from having "my version" of a product I own.
Or we can just prevent people from putting after market rims on a car, or a book jacket on a favorite hard back novel. Since, you know, they too are altering someone else's product.
26-01-2013, 06:59 PM #27
The best way to handle this I believe would be to just allow mod support that keep modded servers separate. This of course costs time and money for development, but doesn't that lead to happier customers who then will have a more positive outlook on the developer and publisher which means more future sales?Virtual Pilot 3D™ NEVER NOT SCAM!
26-01-2013, 07:07 PM #28
26-01-2013, 07:17 PM #29
The bulk of a games profitability lies with its first few weeks of release and its success or failure in terms of sales at that point in time can massively impact its future, both as a franchise and of its developer. For all the plaudits people might throw as VTM:B or Alpha Protocol neither of those games sold particularly well to the extent that Troika went belly up having failed to secure a new contract and Alpha Protocol turned out to be Michael Thorton's first and last outing. Now I certainly don't claim that either of those occurrence's was the resultant of game piracy, I'm using them more to highlight how key those initial sales are in terms of the future prospects for both developers and franchises in that embryonic launch period . It's not the Assassins creeds, Mass Effects or GTA Vs that are at risk from piracy (titles of that scale & scope will always be profitable) it's the lower level ones hoping to build a fan base that are. The ones where that initial success or failure can make the difference between a pay cheque or cleared desk the following week.
26-01-2013, 07:44 PM #30
26-01-2013, 09:19 PM #31
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Yet companies like Fantasy Flight do not use unreasonable EULA's and DRM to keep their games selling.
27-01-2013, 12:19 AM #32
The question I put to you is this: What breach of the EULA would you consider to be so great that a person should lose access to all games they paid money to 'subscribe' to? I use the term 'subscribe' since it's what Valve use in their EULA; we never purchase games on Steam, we just subscribe to them. Honestly, I can't think of any reason to totally remove a person from their account. Banning from the store? From trading? From online gameplay? Sure. But from everything they subscribed to? No.
In 2010 they compiled a list of software present on users' computers. I'm not sure if how many people have MS Office installed is really relevant to gaming...
With that said I don't remember if, at the time, you had to specifically consent to the software collection part.
27-01-2013, 01:28 AM #33
Becasue if EA, Steam or whoever pull theplug on the service they provide it is you who has to go to the pains to take them to court.
No one's gonna do that. So EULAs are basically a company's way of having a document to point to to say "told you so" so you can't proceed through their internal complaints system."KING GEORGE IS A FROG
le BANG~__-MICHEAL FUCK OFF~~__-INTERPOL KNOW YOU WELLBIENG~—
NOT RUSHMORE MOUNTAIN
KILL WESTON KILL MUST KILLTHEWESTERNINMYHEADDOESN’TEXSIST
TEXASISDEADINPARISHEWASAMAN..BINGBING.TETTOHEAD.SP ACEOK,TIMEDEADANDSTOPPED1920HOKKAIDO.UNDERSTOODAT1 ONE.
27-01-2013, 02:27 AM #34
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
27-01-2013, 04:05 AM #35
27-01-2013, 04:28 AM #36
This isn't a question of law, it's a question of ethics. The law might be fairly solid but we're asking if it should be allowed. Personally I don't believe "being a dick" should result in someone losing access to all of their games.
27-01-2013, 08:59 AM #37
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
As discussed in many other threads, there is a fundamental difference in nature between leasing something and buying something. Games don't fit the model of leasing so it feels like total bullshit that they're framed games as license to access content with ordinary contractual terms of termination i.e. written notice within x amount of days (so no reason necessary at all) or right to terminate for breaching provisions of "not acting like a dick", whatever that means. There aren't any licensing agreements (whether it's your broadband internet, library membership or whatever) that are even remotely comparable to the current DD model as applied to games.
27-01-2013, 09:31 AM #38
In this day and age of inter-connectivity it's hardly a case that it's you solely alone Vs big brother. If some dude in Australia can persuade a bunch of strangers to spare enough pocket change in order to fly Gabe Newell down to look at his game mod, I don't doubt in the event that someone had their account unfairly banned/closed a public appeal outlining the facts would garner either financial and/or legal support/advice.
Personally I thought the Russian dude 'repaying drinks' bought for him by gifting his 'friends' games was dodgy as hell tbh (given his 'drinking buddies' all seemed to exist on other continents...), but that didn't stop people getting all hot and bothered over his Steam account being outright banned, and instead he ended up simply having his gifting privileges revoked once Valve looked into the matter further to the public uproar. A fair compromise I'd say to the situation of an individual whom was seemingly exploiting loopholes in the system.
27-01-2013, 05:10 PM #39
One thing all this talk has led me to suspect is a shift to making EVERYTHING subscription based. That way nobody can bitch if they lose access to a game due to threatening to rape and murder a child or something.
And, to be fair, the industry has shown signs of this. DLC in general is a push toward havign a near-continuous stream of new content as opposed to a yearly burst (the old expansion pack model). Hell, BF3 + BF3:Premium was comparable to a year's subscription to an MMO if memory serves.
27-01-2013, 06:45 PM #40
- Join Date
- May 2012
Kadayi, I would say if a publisher/developer wishes to over invest in a product, it's their problem, not mine as a consumer. If they put less in, it's less risk. Why try and sell gold plated tooth picks or toilet seats? Keep the production method that suits the product.
Last edited by TechnicalBen; 27-01-2013 at 06:48 PM.