Seems really nice. I don't do early access, but I'll definitely check this out once it's done.

Quoting: liamdaweI've always had a love for these first person dungeon crawlers since the early games on Amiga, so to have a sci-fi version with guns and RPG elements, it was far too good an idea to pass up.

You never played Captive [External Link] on the Amiga then? Excellent sci-fi crawler from 1990. Unless this is just nostalgia, as I haven't actually played it in a couple of decades.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: neffoYou were limited in your use of the product though. You were limited to a single physical copy, physical media typically had to be in the drive for the game to work. If that copy was lost, destroyed you lost your access to the game. Backup copies of the physical media weren't allowed, and were typically very difficult to make regardless. Physical media wasn't exactly what I'd call freedom.

You're pretty much wrong on all accounts where I live. It might have been this way for you, but many countries held out well into the "noughties" before giving in.

It was perfectly legal for me to make any number of physical copies for backup purposes, to "crack" my game to play it without the installation media and use whatever means were necessary to circumvent copy protection to do this. As long as I respected copyright and didn't provide - let alone sell - illegal copies of my games to others. This was tested in court, so it's not just speculation. Yes I know I'm being deliberately vague here. That's because I find the specifics incredibly boring.

BTW, I don't understand where you got the idea that I miss physical copies. I'm perfectly fine with and actually prefer digital distribution. That's got nothing at all to do with what we're discussing here.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

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? :whistle:

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