Quoting: neffoThe idea of games as an explicit license rather than a physical thing has existed longer than internet distribution has existed. It's been that way since at least the early 90s, but physical ownership never gave you implicit rights over the thing you owned.

That idea didn't creep into law in the early nineties though, at least not where I live. And of course physical ownership didn't give me the copyright, nor should it have, but at least the seller didn't retain the right to tell me which or how many computers I was allowed to play the game on or come and confiscate my copy whenever they felt like it. Nor could they insist that I log in every time I want to play. The whole concept that the seller should be able to dictate the way I privately use the product after the sale is quite new and frankly absurd.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DrMcCoyThe intend of the law is to give you the ability to observe and inspect the item as if in a brick and mortar store; not to give you 14 days of free use.

This might be the intent of the law, but this clearly differs from the way returns are handled for other types of goods. And as you said, this law is very recent.

The erosion of consumer rights and inflation of corporate influence in the EU over the last few years has been obvious. There are too many glaring examples to even list. The current push for TTIP and it's so called investment protection rules are the icing on the cake. European lawmakers are keeping true to their "let's copy every mistake the US ever did" credo and treating the average consumer like a criminally minded idiot while pandering to big business in hopes of grabbing the marginal amount of tax money they don't manage to evade (perfectly legally, of course).

I'm going to bow out of the discussion now, as it seems this is turning into a one-sided debate on the letter of law, when all I expressed was my disagreement on the general idea of modern subscription services vs. the classic "buy a game, own a copy" model.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestYou always buy a licence to play the game, no matter where you buy it…

And this EU law is actually recent, not centuries old.

Well, obviously it's quite recent. This whole conversation would hardly have been even relevant until a few years back, when advances in Internet bandwidth and availability finally made digital distribution viable.

Still it has not been that long since you actually bought a copy of a game or let's say a musical recording (physical or digital, shouldn't matter) instead of the right to play or listen to them. A right the seller can legally revoke whenever they wish without so much as an explanation, mind you. But you can still buy games you can legally backup and play on any system of your choosing for as long as you see fit from GOG et al.

Quoting: DrMcCoyThis is not Steam gaming the law; this is the exact intention of that law.

And that law was brilliantly written and lobbied by these same businesses that now reap the benefits. I do not see why our rights as consumers should be dependent on distribution mediums.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: neffoIt's not really a loophole, and it's perfectly legal.

It's not a loophole in the legal sense, but it's hard to think of it as anything else. The entertainment industry has managed to persuade most of their clientele that a subscription to games/movies/music/whatever is worth the same as actual ownership of said media.

I can't say I'm convinced, partly because I don't care about their "value added" services. I just want the games, and maybe an easy way to get updates. Couldn't care less about multiplayer lobbies, workshops or any of the social stuff. Don't get me wrong, I do have and use Steam. It is convenient despite their business model, not because of it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BomyneIt's an analogy...

It's a bad analogy.

Quoting: omer666It is legal. In EU there is a period of retractation. During this period, you can't legally use the service you suscribed to. In order to use this service, you must give up on your retractation right. That is the case for any subscription to a service, which is basically what buying a game on Steam is.

Of course you're right. They do have a loophole. Another good reason to prefer services that actually sell games, not just the right to play them. Then again, for many people the convenience, and probably the multiplayer and community features of Steam are worth the tradeoff.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: minjIs that even legal? o.0

No it's not, but lawyers always think they can game the system. These subscriber or license agreements always have tons of stuff that would never hold in court. American (and increasingly European) big business is so used to the fact that the one with the deepest pockets wins anyway, and consumer complaints can basically be shrugged off.

Quoting: BomyneImagine going to McDonalds and buying a big mac. If McD ran by that agreement, then you have a right to a refund until you stick that big mac in your mouth and chow down on it.

Laws like this obviously do not apply to food, so this is basic apples to oranges.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestThey hate us.

Perhaps just a tad overdramatic?

They might not think Linux is their most important platform, but that hardly translates to hate. Just chill and play a game or something. I'm quite sure that as soon as Linux grabs a bigger share of the market, businesses will be more than happy to flaunt their support. It's not about love and hate to those who are in it to make money, i.e. all of them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Too bad it's not one of the good Lego titles by TT Games. I'd rather play even one of their early Lego Indy / SW romps than an online time-waster like this. Not my cup of tea.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: edqeProblems like this happens and then all you can do is wait. Raging doesn't make problems magically disappear.

Did you see someone raging here? Hardly the word I'd use. Lots of disappointed customers though. But you're right, there's nothing we can do but wait.

Crowd sourcing "investors" do not get the same rights as you'd get as a customer paying for a finished product after all. No guarantees for product quality or timely delivery. What a great way to finance your product. All you need is some hype and pretty promises, and in flows the cash. No wonder big business has eagerly embraced the model.

Anyway, Larian (and others) obviously failed to do the basic groundwork before making promises. That's just lazy and disrespectful.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Glog78We can be happy every single game that arrives for Linux - even if they come late.

Well that's a defeatist attitude if I ever saw one. No matter how small a market we are, there's no reason to turn the other cheek when companies take our money and fail to deliver in a reasonable time frame. Linux is slowly catching up, not losing; we shouldn't act like losers.

Unreasonable delays like this are not acceptable, and Larian should be made well aware of this. These portability snags are problems they could have and should have foreseen. I'm sure the game is great, but there's no need to pander to a company who obviously does not think much of you.

View this comment - View article - View full comments