Consumer rights: Updates that make a purchased game worse or completely break it.

[Avnger]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

If you updated your game, it's entirely on you that it doesn't work with your computer anymore. You had the option to not install the update, and you chose otherwise. Your action is what broke the game for your computer.

edit: Even if it auto-updated, it was still a choice of yours to enable (or not disable) auto-updates. That's not an excuse either.

 

[WeepingAngels]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

If you updated your game, it's entirely on you that it doesn't work with your computer anymore. You had the option to not install the update, and you chose otherwise. Your action is what broke the game for your computer.

Steam auto updates and there is no way to turn off updates. Steam offers three options
1) Always keep this game up to date
2) Only update this game when I launch it
3) High Priority - Always auto-update this game before others

edit: Even if it auto-updated, it was still a choice of yours to enable (or not disable) auto-updates. That's not an excuse either.

It's not really a choice.

 

[Avnger]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

If you updated your game, it's entirely on you that it doesn't work with your computer anymore. You had the option to not install the update, and you chose otherwise. Your action is what broke the game for your computer.

Steam auto updates and there is no way to turn off updates. Steam offers three options
1) Always keep this game up to date
2) Only update this game when I launch it
3) High Priority - Always auto-update this game before others

edit: Even if it auto-updated, it was still a choice of yours to enable (or not disable) auto-updates. That's not an excuse either.

It's not really a choice.

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

 

[WeepingAngels]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

If you updated your game, it's entirely on you that it doesn't work with your computer anymore. You had the option to not install the update, and you chose otherwise. Your action is what broke the game for your computer.

Steam auto updates and there is no way to turn off updates. Steam offers three options
1) Always keep this game up to date
2) Only update this game when I launch it
3) High Priority - Always auto-update this game before others

edit: Even if it auto-updated, it was still a choice of yours to enable (or not disable) auto-updates. That's not an excuse either.

It's not really a choice.

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

The game is unavailable physically. Are you listening to yourself? You think people who buy games on Steam should have no consumer rights?

 

[irishda]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You don't subscribe to a game development studio and pay them a monthly/entrance fee to play whatever games they wish to have up and running.

Yes you do. That's exactly what you do. Your entrance fee is buying the game. The ones up and running and the ones they still have servers for. Don't like it? Go get a physical copy of a game that's not dependent on servers.

In this digital age, the parameters of game ownership has changed. This is no longer you purchasing a product, this is you purchasing access to one. And if you don't like it then you better have a time machine so you can kill Gabe before he invents steam.

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

What's wrong with the comparison?

 

[Orga777]

Lol. Do you know what this discussion tells me? PC and digital gaming is even more garbage than I first thought and all the "master race" morons just are fooling themselves with how great everything is until their games no longer work by whatever whims a random company decides to do with the product at a later date that makes it unplayable. It sounds more like an anti-consumer crap-fest that they use to treat people as much like dirt as possible. No wonder I barely go on Steam and never buy much of anything on there. So while the "master race" cries every time a game breaks down from broken updates or whatever, physical copies of console games will always work. Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off. Nah, man. It makes perfect sense now when everyone was angry at MS when they first announced the Xbone with their nonsensical DRM and download only policies. Sorry folks. But I will take lower graphical power over shit like this any day.

 

[Kerg3927]

Now. You might technically be protected on some paper, but these are not really enforced by any public sector. Not to mention this would have to often be done across country borders. You would have to sue the billion dollar companies, with more lawyers than your IQ, to get something out of them. Even if that's a F.U.

/thread

Everything else is just talk. Companies don't have to honor all of your consumer rights. They just have to honor them enough to where it's not worth it for you to hire a lawyer and sue. And generally, since the price of a video game is a fraction of the cost of hiring a lawyer for a single hour of work, I think the only time litigation is worth it is if the violations are so widespread that it results in a class action lawsuit.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Now. You might technically be protected on some paper, but these are not really enforced by any public sector. Not to mention this would have to often be done across country borders. You would have to sue the billion dollar companies, with more lawyers than your IQ, to get something out of them. Even if that's a F.U.

/thread

Oh, well if Kerg3927 says the thread is over, then the thread must be over. Pack it up everyone.

 

[somonels]

Just because you bought something does not automatically give you rights to it

What does this mean? Are you trying to say that I don't have any consumer rights attached to my purchased copy?

Depends what you mean by rights[./quote]

That's right, start backpedaling.

I think the only time litigation is worth it is if the violations are so widespread that it results in a class action lawsuit.

Except for, you know, you waive the rights to take or participate in class action lawsuits when you accept the EULA *after* purchasing the game. But it's okay, they should have a digital copy of the EULA on some webpage for you to bring yourself up to date with it before you purchase it.

I win! I want a badge and a soda and chips!

 

[hermes]

...Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off...

I am all in favor of elitists being put down a notch, but if you honestly believe Sony or Microsoft are going to care or pressure a publisher/developer to support and go through certification for a new patch for a game years after release, you are in for a surprise.

You might as well ask for all Xbox 360 games to work on XBox One emulation...

 

[WeepingAngels]

...Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off...

I am all in favor of elitists being put down a notch, but if you honestly believe Sony or Microsoft are going to care or pressure a publisher/developer to support and go through certification for a new patch for a game years after release, you are in for a surprise.

You might as well ask for all Xbox 360 games to work on XBox One emulation...

I am Setsuna isn't even a year old.

 

[Orga777]

...Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off...

I am all in favor of elitists being put down a notch, but if you honestly believe Sony or Microsoft are going to care or pressure a publisher/developer to support and go through certification for a new patch for a game years after release, you are in for a surprise.

You might as well ask for all Xbox 360 games to work on XBox One emulation...

Well, for one thing most companies don't update console games after a specific point in time anyway unless it is something like Overwatch or whatnot. So there is literally no reason to even bother worrying about something like that happening on consoles. However, let us say it is only a year or so after release and the game is bricked by a bad update on a console (like is teh case in this example in the OP). That would not look well on anyone, especially Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. They would try and get it fixed as quickly as possible so people could play the game.

 

[hermes]

...Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off...

I am all in favor of elitists being put down a notch, but if you honestly believe Sony or Microsoft are going to care or pressure a publisher/developer to support and go through certification for a new patch for a game years after release, you are in for a surprise.

You might as well ask for all Xbox 360 games to work on XBox One emulation...

I am Setsuna isn't even a year old.

And, again, I am not making excuses for them.

I am only pointing out that, if this is his reasoning for console games being inherently better: because Sony and Microsoft would put pressure in a developer to fix something that affects a percentage of the people that play a relatively old and obscure game, he is deceiving himself.

The only exception would be if the update makes the game unable to launch for 100% of the users, in which case the certification process should ensure the patch is not released. But other than that, even if it is relatively widespread, console games outside medium to big budgets get very little support after release (less than on PC, since the publisher has to pay thousands of dollars to certify each patch).

 

[WeepingAngels]

...Heck, if any update on consoles broke the game from playing on the systems, Sony or Microsoft would have a conniption fit on the company that did the update because the bad press will piss them off...

I am all in favor of elitists being put down a notch, but if you honestly believe Sony or Microsoft are going to care or pressure a publisher/developer to support and go through certification for a new patch for a game years after release, you are in for a surprise.

You might as well ask for all Xbox 360 games to work on XBox One emulation...

I am Setsuna isn't even a year old.

And, again, I am not making excuses for them.

I am only pointing out that, if this is his reasoning for console games being inherently better: because Sony and Microsoft would put pressure in a developer to fix something that affects a percentage of the people that play a relatively old and obscure game, he is deceiving himself.

The only exception would be if the update makes the game unable to launch for 100% of the users, in which case the certification process should ensure the patch is not released. But other than that, even if it is relatively widespread, console games outside medium to big budgets get very little support after release (less than on PC, since the publisher has to pay thousands of dollars to certify each patch).

Since consoles share the same hardware, any update that breaks it for some consoles would break it for all. It would be caught before being released in most cases and if not, it would be dealt with. That is an advantage consoles have over PC. Now you say that if it were years later then the console makers wouldn't care but I say that it would still be stopped at certification. Has it ever happened that a console game was broken by a patch and never fixed?

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Extra Credits did a really good episode on preserving games. I think it's this one.


The gist of it is though, it's not as simple as you'd think.

 

[Orga777]

Since consoles share the same hardware, any update that breaks it for some consoles would break it for all. It would be caught before being released in most cases and if not, it would be dealt with. That is an advantage consoles have over PC. Now you say that if it were years later then the console makers wouldn't care but I say that it would still be stopped at certification. Has it ever happened that a console game was broken by a patch and never fixed?

Exactly this. Any patch that breaks a game would break it for all users. No way either Sony, MS, or Nintendo would allow something like that to happen without making a move to fix that.

 

[Kerg3927]

Now. You might technically be protected on some paper, but these are not really enforced by any public sector. Not to mention this would have to often be done across country borders. You would have to sue the billion dollar companies, with more lawyers than your IQ, to get something out of them. Even if that's a F.U.

/thread

Oh, well if Kerg3927 says the thread is over, then the thread must be over. Pack it up everyone.

 

[MrFalconfly]

The product was altered after purchase to the point that it no longer works on the same hardware it worked on at the time of purchase. Where do you stand with that?

Where do you stand with an amusement park removing rides and adding new ones? With gyms changing equipment?

You are avoiding the question with terrible comparisons, I think I have your answer.

If you updated your game, it's entirely on you that it doesn't work with your computer anymore. You had the option to not install the update, and you chose otherwise. Your action is what broke the game for your computer.

Steam auto updates and there is no way to turn off updates. Steam offers three options
1) Always keep this game up to date
2) Only update this game when I launch it
3) High Priority - Always auto-update this game before others

edit: Even if it auto-updated, it was still a choice of yours to enable (or not disable) auto-updates. That's not an excuse either.

It's not really a choice.

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

Let's make another analogy.

Your game is like your car, and the patch is like the car-maker doing a recall to fix some kind of flaw.

Here in Europe (at least here in Denmark), if the car then came back with a fault it didn't have before the recall (say, the transmission now seizes up, every 50km pf non-stop driving) you're entitled to either have that fault fixed free of charge, or get your money back.

I think the same should apply to games, and according to EU law, it partially does.

 

[Avnger]

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

Let's make another analogy.

Your game is like your car, and the patch is like the car-maker doing a recall to fix some kind of flaw.

Here in Europe (at least here in Denmark), if the car then came back with a fault it didn't have before the recall (say, the transmission now seizes up, every 50km pf non-stop driving) you're entitled to either have that fault fixed free of charge, or get your money back.

I think the same should apply to games, and according to EU law, it partially does.

Except the game didn't have any faults when patched. Not working on the specific PC configuration #3e04dc929a14 isn't something wrong with the game; it's something wrong with the rig. No game is ever guaranteed to work on every single PC. The day that becomes enshrined in law is the day that devs stop making PC games.

To try and not torture your new car analogy too much: The recall fix ended up slightly lessening the maximum torque in order to stop potential engine fires. Your home happens to have a very steep driveway that the unfixed vehicle could reach the top of. Now the car can't do that because of the lessened performance. The manufacturer sure isn't going to "unfix" your car for free, and you would never win in court arguing that not being able to reach the top of your drive requires compensation or is against your rights.

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

The game is unavailable physically. Are you listening to yourself? You think people who buy games on Steam should have no consumer rights?

Of course I listen to myself. It's my favorite thing in the world to do

Here's the problem with your reasoning. You have no rights to play any videogame you want. Again, we're still ignoring that offline mode would fix your issues, but I digress. People buying games on Steam have consumer rights (duh). However, the part of the Steam service is automatic updates. You have 2 options if you don't want your game to be auto-updated.

1. Don't buy the damn game. The fact that it's only sold on Steam means absolutely nothing; you don't have a right to use any product in any way that you want. The same way that me wanting to play Bloodborne would require buying a Playstation 4, so I'm SOL.

2. Run the game while in offline mode. Steam doesn't even attempt to try and update any games launched while in offline mode.

Your anger has nothing to do with your "rights" being stripped from you. You're just upset that Steam followed through on their update policy that you opted into.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Offline mode is a thing that exists. Games can't update if you launch it offline.

However, even if there truly was no way to stop auto-updates, you purchased a game that uses the Steam platform. You know that the Steam platform auto-updates. Don't complain when the game you purchased then redeemed on Steam proceeds to auto-update. Again, you made the decision to partake in this service.

Let's make another analogy.

Your game is like your car, and the patch is like the car-maker doing a recall to fix some kind of flaw.

Here in Europe (at least here in Denmark), if the car then came back with a fault it didn't have before the recall (say, the transmission now seizes up, every 50km pf non-stop driving) you're entitled to either have that fault fixed free of charge, or get your money back.

I think the same should apply to games, and according to EU law, it partially does.

Except the game didn't have any faults when patched. Not working on the specific PC configuration #3e04dc929a14 isn't something wrong with the game; it's something wrong with the rig. No game is ever guaranteed to work on every single PC. The day that becomes enshrined in law is the day that devs stop making PC games.

To try and not torture your new car analogy too much: The recall fix ended up slightly lessening the maximum torque in order to stop potential engine fires. Your home happens to have a very steep driveway that the unfixed vehicle could reach the top of. Now the car can't do that because of the lessened performance. The manufacturer sure isn't going to "unfix" your car for free, and you would never win in court arguing that not being able to reach the top of your drive requires compensation or is against your rights.

"Except the game didn't have any faults when patched. Not working on the specific PC configuration #3e04dc929a14 isn't something wrong with the game;"

In the eyes of European consumer protection laws, it very much IS something wrong with the game.

I feel so sorry for you yanks, that you've been duped to think otherwise.

"To try and not torture your new car analogy too much: The recall fix ended up slightly lessening the maximum torque in order to stop potential engine fires."

Fair enough, but according to EU law, you're now obliged to figure out a solution that both gives me that torque, and prevents engine fires.

"Your home happens to have a very steep driveway that the unfixed vehicle could reach the top of. Now the car can't do that because of the lessened performance. The manufacturer sure isn't going to "unfix" your car for free, and you would never win in court arguing that not being able to reach the top of your drive requires compensation or is against your rights."

I would win in a court, if it was a European court.