|
to Snakeoil
Re: Is It Time To Enforce a Gamers' Bill of Rights?you might have to buy it to get it... but once you buy it its then free to play |
|
SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature. Premium Member join:2000-08-05 united state |
Snakeoil
Premium Member
2013-Mar-14 10:38 am
K. |
|
Snakeoil |
to El Quintron
One reason why I prefer to buy second hand games, or games sitting in the bargain bin.
I've shelled out 60 plus bucks for new games, only to have them turn out to be games I dislike.
I feel either there needs to be a "beta" of the game, or a "free" starter area of the game. So players can try the game out, before they invest 60 plus dollars into it.
Even for single player games. I recall, that years ago, many games offered a single level or two, that you could play and explore. if you liked it, you could be the full version/unlock code, which would open the whole game to you. Sadly though, I think the crackers ruined that model, by creating cracks that break the need for an unlock code, thus allowing people to steal the game. |
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
1 edit |
to Snakeoil
Re: Is It Time To Enforce a Gamers' Bill of Rights?dupe |
|
|
IamGimli |
to Snakeoil
said by CylonRed:The above has really nothing to do with giving refunds for returned games - EA is not going to do that - the store that SOLD the game will and that policy no longer exists for the reasons already given. If they won't do it voluntarily, they should be made to do it. That's the whole point of the movement. said by Snakeoil:So the game maker is supposed to know if your particular PC can or cannot run the game? No, but you shouldn't have to pay for something you can't use. said by Snakeoil:Sure they have system requirements on the side of the box, but there are many people who ignore the stated requirements and buy the game. So the game maker needs to be punished for the person's stupidity? Because they failed to read the box? Again, a REFUND is in no way a PUNISHMENT. The money the consumer pays for the product implies that the consumer can actually USE the product. If the consumer CANNOT use the product, the money should be refunded. You do know that it's not all (not even a majority of) computer owners who actually know the specs of their computer, right? It costs NOTHING WHATSOEVER to refund a consumer for something that doesn't work. What it does though is ensure that consumer comes back next time because they know they can trust that you will stand behind your product. It's not surprising the industry is in the shape it's in when there's so many of you who are only too willing to throw your money at billion-dollar companies expecting nothing in return. |
|
·Metronet
|
"If they won't do it voluntarily, they should be made to do it. That's the whole point of the movement."
Soooo - so much for the small video game company who will have to give refunds with zero proof the person can't play it? Right - makes perfect sense - play video games for free and the company will still make money. Kinda violates basic economics - the only hope they could have enough money is to charge far more for the games.
Who is going to buy a $100 game? No one - that alone will effectively kill the PC video game. |
|
SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature. Premium Member join:2000-08-05 united state |
to IamGimli
It's the PC's owner job to know their system specs before buying software for it. If they buy the software, and it doesn't work, I see the fault laying with the PC owner and not the company.
But like I also said, if the hardware mets the specs, and the program doesn't run, then it's on the software maker's side to assist the PC owner in getting it to run. And if they can't then go ahead with the refund.
Though you do know why they don't refund game/movie purchases don't you? Because of the pirates. They'll go, buy a copy of the game/movie, then burn a copy. They they'll reseal the box and bring it back to the store for a refund. Then they'll go home and share that pirated copy with anyone else that wants a copy.
So how is that not punishing the developer?
But again, I still think that it's the responsibility of the computer owner to know what his computer can run. For example: I run linux on one of my PCs at home. Should I be entitled to a refund for buying a game that is windows only, and trying to run it on my linux box? Knowing full well that window programs aren't native to the linux environment? Sure, I was experiementing with cross over or playonlinux, and I failed to get the game to work. But does that mean I should be able to get a refund?
I don't think so. |
|
Cthen Premium Member join:2004-08-01 Detroit, MI |
to IamGimli
said by IamGimli:said by CylonRed:If returning video games were truly addressed by the marketplace and it worked - it would still be done. The fact it is no longer a policy or the store wend out of business pretty much sums up what the marketplace thinks of the policy. Nope. All it shows is that the consumers have been convinced they're powerless and that they have no rights. It also shows that those same consumers are too lazy or self-centered to put their money where their mouth is and stop buying from those companies that don't respect them. It's the same reasons why EA is still in business and why "piracy" is still talked about as a problem of the industry instead of the piss-poor quality of the products. That argument will fall on deaf ears around here. Making bad excuses is the king of why they should continue to give these companies money letting them know they are just fine with what these companies are doing. |
|
JobbieKeep It Simple Premium Member join:2010-08-24 Mexico |
to Savious
said by Savious:said by Jobbie:It happened to me on D3, I was in the beta and it was awful but bought on the hype and got the game (with annual pass on top) and we all got burned on that. Jobbie, this feels like blatant bandwagon bashing. Did you even get a character to Inferno? It is not bandwagon, did you play the beta?, I did and it was terrible, I didn't need to get to inferno, I experienced the whole game on the first run. I leveled at least one of each character up the second difficulty before I quit. |
|
KrisnatharokPC Builder, Gamer Premium Member join:2009-02-11 Earth Orbit |
to IamGimli
said by IamGimli:said by Snakeoil:So the game maker is supposed to know if your particular PC can or cannot run the game? No, but you shouldn't have to pay for something you can't use. I had no idea that gamers were being coerced into paying for games they can't play, against their will! |
|
Krisnatharok |
to IamGimli
said by IamGimli:Again, a REFUND is in no way a PUNISHMENT. The money the consumer pays for the product implies that the consumer can actually USE the product. If the consumer CANNOT use the product, the money should be refunded. No it doesn't, the money implies the customer now owns a copy of the game, or a right to the unlock code, or whatever. Notice the motto of under my avatar--Caveat Emptor--Buyer Beware! said by IamGimli:You do know that it's not all (not even a majority of) computer owners who actually know the specs of their computer, right? You do know that most Americans are AT LEAST obese and at risk for early onset of heart disease and Type 2 diabetes? That doesn't mean it's wise. said by IamGimli:It costs NOTHING WHATSOEVER to refund a consumer for something that doesn't work. What it does though is ensure that consumer comes back next time because they know they can trust that you will stand behind your product. Yes it does. It takes the time to process the return (from the company that was the final point of sale, i.e. Gamestop), and then the physical copy probably can't be resold since it has been activated online without the software company (developer/distributor) generating a new code to stick in the box. And then there would be the fraud associated with abusing such a system to generate additional "free" codes. I can't imagine software sold as "open box" being sold for full MSRP either, so there's that money lost. For online distributors, such as Origin/Steam, the process DOES become much simpler, as they are only out the bandwidth required to deliver the game, and it becomes much easier to delete it from the customer's library. I'd even support a 15% "restocking fee" to recoup the cost of the bandwidth. That's inline with industry standards for anything returned to Newegg because you just don't like it. said by IamGimli:It's not surprising the industry is in the shape it's in when there's so many of you who are only too willing to throw your money at billion-dollar companies expecting nothing in return. I throw my money at developers whose games I want to play. I expect a good experience, and nothing said about this SINGLE POINT OF NO-CAUSE SOFTWARE RETURN has anything to do with the rest of the proposed "gamers' rights." I *DO* expect a quality game that is balanced, working, complete, and full of rich enjoyment. But I don't think the gaming industry should be responsible for paying for the stupidity of consumers. Fuck em. Let evolution do its damn job. |
|
JobbieKeep It Simple Premium Member join:2010-08-24 Mexico
1 recommendation |
Jobbie
Premium Member
2013-Mar-14 1:53 pm
TLDR: Inform yourself and vote with your wallet. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to Krisnatharok
said by Krisnatharok:said by IamGimli:It's not surprising the industry is in the shape it's in when there's so many of you who are only too willing to throw your money at billion-dollar companies expecting nothing in return. I throw my money at developers whose games I want to play. I expect a good experience, and nothing said about this SINGLE POINT OF NO-CAUSE SOFTWARE RETURN has anything to do with the rest of the proposed "gamers' rights." I *DO* expect a quality game that is balanced, working, complete, and full of rich enjoyment. But I don't think the gaming industry should be responsible for paying for the stupidity of consumers. Fuck em. Let evolution do its damn job. I'm somewhere in the middle, I absolutely hate buying stuff from EA and Ubisoft, but some of their games I like, which I try to minimize support by buying them on sale. That being said, I think it's easy for seasoned gamers who are generally technically savvy to assume that everyone should know that an AAA title won't run on a $300 laptop, some won't know this and within reason refunds shold be offered. (eg: you installed, you couldn't get it running, and you returned it a day later) I try and support indepedent devs, and buy from Steam (or the Dev directly) whenever I can; but even if I shop good it doesn't mean that someone who wants BF3, or SIM should be punished for choosing the games they want by a stupid quasi-illegal EULA, with draconian DRM. Vote with your wallet? for sure, but it's not so great if those policies start a trend, or if the big guys keep buying out indie devs. |
|
SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature. Premium Member join:2000-08-05 united state |
Snakeoil
Premium Member
2013-Mar-14 4:48 pm
quote: That being said, I think it's easy for seasoned gamers who are generally technically savvy to assume that everyone should know that an AAA title won't run on a $300 laptop, some won't know this and within reason refunds shold be offered. (eg: you installed, you couldn't get it running, and you returned it a day later)
I still say it's not the fault of the retailer if someone purchases Crysis 3 to run on a netbook/chromebook. Open the box, and you own it, no questions asked [or so that was the old return policies on software/DVDs]. It's like making a auto dealer/maker responsible for someone being stupid enough to pump diesel into a gasoline fueled engine, or visa versa. [Trust, there are those out there that have done it, hence is why the nozzles of diesel pumps vary from the nozzles of gasoline pumps]. It's up to the user to know what their system can, or cannot run. All the manufacturer has to do is state the lowest end hardware it will run on. As hard as you try, you just can't protect stupid from stupid. IE walking and texting laws, driving and texting laws. |
|
EUSKill cancer Premium Member join:2002-09-10 canada |
to El Quintron
I like techdirt's response to this (imho dumb) idea: 1. Gamers have the right not to give money to assholes
The end.
|
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by EUS:I like techdirt's response to this (imho dumb) idea:
1. Gamers have the right not to give money to assholes
The end.
:p As much as I appreciate the simplicity there's a lot more to the discussion than that. |
|
Savious Premium Member join:2012-03-05 Billings, MT |
to Jobbie
said by Jobbie:said by Savious:said by Jobbie:It happened to me on D3, I was in the beta and it was awful but bought on the hype and got the game (with annual pass on top) and we all got burned on that. Jobbie, this feels like blatant bandwagon bashing. Did you even get a character to Inferno? It is not bandwagon, did you play the beta?, I did and it was terrible, I didn't need to get to inferno, I experienced the whole game on the first run. I leveled at least one of each character up the second difficulty before I quit. I think that your basing your opinion on genre preference. Diablo 3, with all its faults, is still a good game. The reason I stopped playing was due to a poor end game. If I were to rate it on a 1 to 10 scale by category: Bugs: 9 very minor release issues. I had connection issues at release time, but the day of the 15th I played uninterrupted all day, until MY connection busted out. Graphics: 8 its an ARPG, I was happy and some of the tile sets were gorgeous. End game: 6, with a bump to 7 post patches. Initial end game was hard, really hard. I wish they would have left it the way it was. What frustrated most people was the difficulty of upgrading your character. But economically, they couldn't hand out godly items like candy, so naturally the AH is where casuals are going to vst there upgrade. TL:DR you have no real basis for your opinion other than you don't like Diablo games. |
|
Savious |
to El Quintron
On topic:
Were talking about a ~$50 investment here. If you are that worried about your money, wait for reviews from a source you trust.
If you buy an online only game unknowingly, you're an idiot. I've been checking system requirements since I was 13. It takes 10 seconds.
We have only ourselves to blame for DRM. The pirate bay is loved on here for some reason. Sites like that are reasons companies create DRM. Just like Metallica and Napster, I side with Metallica. |
|
BlockgorillaSarcasm is my native tongue join:2010-02-11 Wichita, KS |
to Savious
said by Savious:I think that your basing your opinion on genre preference. Diablo 3, with all its faults, is still a good game. The reason I stopped playing was due to a poor end game.
If I were to rate it on a 1 to 10 scale by category:
Bugs: 9 very minor release issues. I had connection issues at release time, but the day of the 15th I played uninterrupted all day, until MY connection busted out.
Graphics: 8 its an ARPG, I was happy and some of the tile sets were gorgeous.
End game: 6, with a bump to 7 post patches. Initial end game was hard, really hard. I wish they would have left it the way it was.
What frustrated most people was the difficulty of upgrading your character. But economically, they couldn't hand out godly items like candy, so naturally the AH is where casuals are going to vst there upgrade.
TL:DR you have no real basis for your opinion other than you don't like Diablo games. i know what frustrated me, and it was recycled content. Where 25% of the game was the only new stuff. once you made it out of the first tier of difficulty, you had seen 99.9% of the game. The only thing that was different the numbers in the loot generator. I thoroughly enjoyed the 25% though, I think Jobbie and I were on skype at the time and were repeatedly going, "OMG", "awesome", etc |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to Savious
said by Savious:On topic:
Were talking about a ~$50 investment here. If you are that worried about your money, wait for reviews from a source you trust. Cost isn't the only issue for me, I spend more on liquor in a week, and a $50 bottle of Bourbon (or two $25 ones even) which I'll gladly pay will technically entertain me for less time than a single $60 game would. That being said, Jim Beam don't care if I'm connected to the internet or not while I'm drinking his whiskey, and that's what this conversation is about. said by Savious:We have only ourselves to blame for DRM. The pirate bay is loved on here for some reason. Sites like that are reasons companies create DRM. Just like Metallica and Napster, I side with Metallica. Really? Why would think that paying customers have to pay for the actions of Pirates? I've been both, but any company that's going pass the costs of their paranoia and bad business sense onto me is going to lose me as both a customer and investor. |
|
EUSKill cancer Premium Member join:2002-09-10 canada |
to El Quintron
I've followed the discussion, and I disagree, but then I never pre-purchase games, am very picky about which games I do end up purchasing, and usually wait a good 6-12 (Half-Life series not applicable) months before going in with my hard-earned $$. Doing it this way I've felt I felt that I've made a bad purchase only one time since ~'98. To each their own. |
|
Savious Premium Member join:2012-03-05 Billings, MT |
to Blockgorilla
This is no different than Diablo 1, 2, path of exile, torchlight etc...
Its a Diablo game. The fun is in itemization to build a character that can crush the hardest things the game can throw at you.
As i said, Diablo gets bandwagon hate by people that dislike the genre and have no business bashing it. |
|
Savious |
to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:said by Savious:On topic:
Were talking about a ~$50 investment here. If you are that worried about your money, wait for reviews from a source you trust. Cost isn't the only issue for me, I spend more on liquor in a week, and a $50 bottle of Bourbon (or two $25 ones even) which I'll gladly pay will technically entertain me for less time than a single $60 game would. That being said, Jim Beam don't care if I'm connected to the internet or not while I'm drinking his whiskey, and that's what this conversation is about. said by Savious:We have only ourselves to blame for DRM. The pirate bay is loved on here for some reason. Sites like that are reasons companies create DRM. Just like Metallica and Napster, I side with Metallica. Really? Why would think that paying customers have to pay for the actions of Pirates? I've been both, but any company that's going pass the costs of their paranoia and bad business sense onto me is going to lose me as both a customer and investor. Because that's the way the world works. |
|
JobbieKeep It Simple Premium Member join:2010-08-24 Mexico |
to Savious
I've played every single Diablo game and loved each one before this one, maybe not in the extent you have but you have no real basis for your opinion on my gaming experience. |
|
Jobbie |
to Savious
said by Savious:As i said, Diablo gets bandwagon hate by people that dislike the genre and have no business bashing it. We all paid for the game, we have all the business to give whatever opinion we have on it. Take a deep breath. |
|
Savious Premium Member join:2012-03-05 Billings, MT |
to El Quintron
I've seen very little unbiased hate for Diablo on here from people.
Repeated content has been a staple of ARPGs forever, so disliking a game due to that is frustrating. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to Savious
said by Savious:Because that's the way the world works. And this will deter piracy how? |
|
BlockgorillaSarcasm is my native tongue join:2010-02-11 Wichita, KS |
to Savious
said by Savious:This is no different than Diablo 1, 2, path of exile, torchlight etc...
Its a Diablo game. WHAT I THINK IS fun is in itemization to build a character that can crush the hardest things the game can throw at you.
As i said, Diablo gets bandwagon hate by people that dislike the genre and have no business bashing it. fixed that for you |
|
Savious Premium Member join:2012-03-05 Billings, MT |
Savious
Premium Member
2013-Mar-14 6:11 pm
said by Blockgorilla:said by Savious:This is no different than Diablo 1, 2, path of exile, torchlight etc...
Its a Diablo game. WHAT I THINK IS fun is in itemization to build a character that can crush the hardest things the game can throw at you.
As i said, Diablo gets bandwagon hate by people that dislike the genre and have no business bashing it. fixed that for you No, its actually been stated as a fact by the majority of the player base. Which is why it had so many evolutions to the end game. Players couldn't productively gear for inferno. |
|