Can/should digital download distributers ensure their games work (patch as required)?

[gorfias]

Can/should digital download distributers ensure their games work (patch as required)?

I bought Vampire Masquerade from Steam. It virtually does not work on newer systems with newer OS. The only way to fix it I know of is to patch it using unofficial patches.

People in the Steam forum are bitching that Steam shouldn't be selling such things unless they can patch them first or have otherwise ensured they work.

I'm hoping if the patch I installed is a virus, someone would have said something by now. (Norton didn't recognize the file, which is bad if it is a virus, but good in that if it was a known virus, the alarm would have sounded). Without digital distribution, there's no way I would own this game.

But if Steam could have taken care of this first, it would have saved me a lot of time and apprehension.

ITMT: I've bought other games I can't see how they would know to ensure they work. Example: Windows live doesn't work on some networks on which it is blocked. Spellforce doesn't work in other areas. Might be my own firewall on my router. How is Steam supposed to know how my stuff is set up?

Related issue: Windows Live patched my Bioshock 2, which now, no longer works on my Windows 7 64 bit OS. My OS is, like, a currently supported flagship for MS. This is something you would think they would ensure works!

Similar experiences from y'all? Anyone know about what digital distributors can/should do for the games they distribute?

 

[josemlopes]

They certainly should but PCs will always have a bit of risk of having something being incompatible (with that said they should always do research and say in what it probably wont work in).

I still dont mind that much that Steam has recently gone nuts with the type of games that it adds, like if it was an actual store, I like to know that even if the game is completely broken but I still want to buy it I can (a lot of russian games basicly). Certainly this only works if there is something like GOG to handle what you could consider actual up to date re-releases (basicly if the same game is on GOG and Steam you might as well get it on GOG).

For example, just now Steam added Mashed, I really liked that game back then even though most people think its shit. I know the game may not work all that well but at 5$ and since I am waiting for it to be 75% off I dont mind having to do the extra work myself to get it running to have the possibility of playing that game again without having to make a long ass search on eBay for something that will have the same issues as this version.

 

[gorfias]

(basicly if the same game is on GOG and Steam you might as well get it on GOG)..

I'll have to start comparing before I buy. I did get VM for only $5 as well. A worth while risk as long as I don't get virus/malware.

 

[nesbitto]

I would argue that providing a game works on its supported systems, Steam has every right to sell it. Even if it is for older, obsolete platforms. They should however, have a warning listing that the game doesn't work on newer OSes.

With regards to patches, Steam has a built-in official patch updater. They wouldn't and shouldn't touch unofficial patches with a twenty foot barge pole. They'd probably be liable for any damages if you messed up your computer.

In relation to your specific circumstance, a quick check of the negative Steam reviews for V:tMB would reveal that the game doesn't work on newer systems. The first line of the most helpful negative review is literally "This game can not be run on any modern operating system without unofficial patches."

I don't want to shame you, there shouldn't be any need to check if a game is playable or not. (I think Jim did a video about this once.) But the game is fairly old at this stage, a cursory inspection at its viability on a current OS probably should have been on the check list. But Steam should have it flagged as having potential problems.

 

[Smooth Operator]

They should absolutely define which systems it does work with and which it does not (and that should be prominently display on top of the page not buried at the end), something they still have a lot of trouble with because no one at Steam double checks if any of the information devs put on their game page is legit.
But beyond that compatibility updates are far more an extra feature that sites like GoG do, and with more recent games it would fall on developers more then the salesmen.

 

[josemlopes]

(basicly if the same game is on GOG and Steam you might as well get it on GOG)..

I'll have to start comparing before I buy. I did get VM for only $5 as well. A worth while risk as long as I don't get virus/malware.

Yes since unless the game is really obscure there are usually some unnoficial patches (or fixes) that make it work, and I rather be able to own the game but needing to tweak it a bit then not having anyone sell it because it doesnt straight up work on every system.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

Not necessarily.

I think PCs are too diverse and, more importantly, I don't think this is the job of the supplier to ensure this.

I think it is more the responsibility of the maker of the product.

Quality control and assurance should be departments of the developer and much less to be done on the supplier end. It's really in Steam's own interest to do some, but developers shouldn't be left out of this.

It shouldn't be up to Steam to have to test another company's product extensively.

Again, it would benefit Steam's image to do it, but I imagine they are annoyed with developers once they start getting backlashes on things they didn't have any hand in making.

 

[theSovietConnection]

I do think that it would be wise of Steam to be a little more dilligent on their end in quality control. I'm not saying Steam should have to go out and test absolutely every game on absolutely every system, but if they get repeated complaints about a game not working on a certain OS, I do think at that point it would be prudent to investigate and flag products as necessary. A quick look on the Store page for Masquerade only revealed the following for OS incompatability:

Does not support Windows XP 64
Supported Chipsets for 98/ME/200/XP:

That being said, I'm running Windows 7 64 bit OS and I had no problems whatsoever running Masquerade. I'd reinstall it and double check for you, but with my current internet speeds I'd be about 3 days downloading it.

 

[OneCatch]

Yes, but with caveats. I think that a distributor shares some responsibility for fucked up modern releases (looking at you Metro 2033, though it was fantastic when I eventially got it working). Modern games should work on modern systems, and if there are major problems they should be patched, and if a Dev is being uncooperative it should be pulled from distribution and refunded for anyone who's had those problems.
That's not to say that all incompatibility issues should be instantly refundable (because the customer isn't always right and even if they are their PC hardware might not be), but egregious bugs affecting many players should be sorted.

I think you've got to have some understanding with older games. I love playing 'vintage' games and it's frustrating as hell when they don't work straight away, but if you're playing a game from a decade ago which was designed for a system which is about six iterations out of date, I think you've got to be prepared to do some poking around to get it working. That might well include unofficial patches or whatever.
Such games should carry prominent warnings about limited compatibility, but I think it's acceptable to sell them 'as is'.

Completely agree about GFWL though - that thing is a fucking parasite. It randomly killed my Fallout 3 saves before for absolutely no reason.

Btw, if you are messing with mods and third party patches and are worried about viruses, you might want to consider an AV that's a little more potent than Norton.
ZoneAlarm or Avast Free are decent for realtime protection, and having a copy of Malwarebytes for occassional scans is worthwhile. Malwarebytes in particular is good as a nuclear option if other AV's fail to find something nasty, and can be used to run manual scans on any download that you suspect might be bad.

 

[AnthrSolidSnake]

Wow, so it still isn't compatible? My girlfriend had a CD copy of that game, and it also didn't work on a newer OS. She also had to install a bunch of unofficial patches to get it to work. You'd think that would have been important before reselling it, but I guess if they can con people out of money with little extra effort, then they will.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Ive been gaming since Atari. So when a game didnt work then i just got a replacement or my money back. Now it seems ok for a company to sell crappy software for full price, and if it doesnt work, thats ok we will fix it later. Thats unacceptable for me, i expect it to work out the box. I think internet has made developers lazy. Even on PC it seems ok to just wait for a modder to fix issue, again unacceptable, i love that modders can do this and salute them, but the issue is they shouldnt have to. The game should work as advertised.

For instance, with Steam my copy of Kotor 1 and 2 wouldnt work even though ive played them fine before. Had to spend ages looking online for ways to fix the issue. Sorry but this sucks. Steam wouldnt help as it wasnt a Valve game (even though i bought it off Steam) and links to Disney didnt have an option for those games. So thats a knock on the whole "PC is always BC" comment. When i buy a game from a store, then they are responsible for refunds or replacements, seems with digital downloads thats not the case. Which i thing is a major issue.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

yes, we are sacrificing physical copies, patches released on a timely manner should be expected, atleast for a reasonable about of time, and even when a signiicant amount of time has passed, it shouldnt be above the software distribuitor to link users to sites with patches for the game, or maybe put some warnings about compatibility issues, Fallout 3 had one, which is weird cuz i never had a problem with that game

 

[Menageryl]

There seem to be people complaining about the situation rather bitterly, whereas I'm firmly in the camp that rather supports the release as-is vs. having the game disappear or unavailable (or available only in a lesser, more broken form)...
Now, while I agree that there should be support for some kind of process like perhaps a refund if truly necessary, I also - without trying to sound harsh - am of the opinion that the purchaser is even MORE responsible!!! Take bloody charge and make a little effort, please!

ALL game listings on Steam include system requirements - minimum and / or recommended.
Even if you're not technically inclined, when you see X is compatible with Y you should then confirm your specs. And thus likely compatibility. FIGURE IT OUT!
And once you do, it should be a simple process of deduction that one might, just maybe, experience issues with this software - considering your system specs don't exactly line up with what's stated.
Surely it's a logical and easy step thereafter to get onto the Net to run a few searches, do a little light reading, then make an INFORMED decision about whether to purchase or not?

Or am I being a little overly optimistic here?

 

[Raziel]

This kind of situation is why gaming on the pc is my least favorite platform aside from the phone. I think they need to have at the MINIMUM VERY clear warnings that these things won't work on modern systems or whatever.

Doesn't steam actually keep a profile of your pc's hardware? If so they should absolutely just pop a warning before purchase that your particular system won't be able to run a specific game.

Or perhaps simply give you a time period to return the game that doesn't work on your system.

 

[Menageryl]

PC is still a winner for the ability - in not-quite-but-almost 100% of the cases - to continue playing old games. AS LONG AS A LITTLE EFFORT IS MADE and / or the individual involved has some technical skill and knowledge.

FAR better that the situation on consoles.

YES this may prove problematic for people without the necessary ability to take advantage of the flexibility and power of a PC... But - from the perspective of someone WITH that facility AND with the desire to continue playing old (sometimes VERY old) games - still the better situation to be in!

 

[Elfgore]

Don't worry man. The patch is clean. I had to do the same and have had no problems yet.

Onto the subject at hand, yes steam should guarantee a product works. I should not have to google the fix or rely on patches. And say a game doesn't work, I should be able to get a refund. I've had Jade Empire for about a year now. I still can't play it. Of course steam does nothing and bioware really doesn't care anymore.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

Don't worry man. The patch is clean. I had to do the same and have had no problems yet.

Onto the subject at hand, yes steam should guarantee a product works. I should not have to google the fix or rely on patches. And say a game doesn't work, I should be able to get a refund. I've had Jade Empire for about a year now. I still can't play it. Of course steam does nothing and bioware really doesn't care anymore.

im totally on your boat, the thing is that, besides refunds there isnt much steam can do if the software is abadonware, i would however support some sort of crowdfunded solution, such as valve contacting the creators of these fan patches and allow them to be uploaded to steam, they probably cant mess with the code of the game itself, legal issues and stuff, but put the patch as a separate download in the store page (think Just Cause 2's multiplayer Mod), hell they might even give the patchers a small payment from valve's sales cut


Gaben call me, im full of ideas

 

[Something Amyss]

They should absolutely define which systems it does work with and which it does not (and that should be prominently display on top of the page not buried at the end), something they still have a lot of trouble with because no one at Steam double checks if any of the information devs put on their game page is legit.

Hell, they don't check to see if games work on the "supported" systems, either.

 

[Something Amyss]

Gaben call me, im full of ideas

That's operating under the assumption he gives a crap, when all evidence points to the contrary.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

It'd certainly be nice if distributors made sure the games worked. I downloaded more than a few games from GoG that didn't seem to work on my laptop. Not sure why, either. Just glad the games were free.

Then again, computers come with so many configurations, it might not be possible to ensure all of the games work. One wrong processor, one wrong video card, one missing driver, and it all comes apart. Ensuring games work might not be all that easy.