Good Old Games: Pirates Are Our Competition, Not Steam

[Jamous]

Not going to lie there is a part of me that is utterly terrified of the eventuality of Steam going darkside. I sincerely doubt it'll happen, but still, the option's there...

GOG is, however, an excellent alternative to it. Unfortunately it's a moot point for me as Steam is my main platform.

Ya know whats funny? If you primarily buy games off of GoG you don't need any platforms!

Imagine that. Not needin extra software to run the software you legally own instead of only holdin a license to games that you don't own on Steam accordin to Valve.

I know, but currently the benefits of Steam outweigh the downsides. They do great sales, I don't often have any issues with them and it's getting the point with many games where I -NEED- Steam to play them, regardless of whether I want to buy it off Steam or not (Skyrim, Total War, Borderlands, etc.). Not only that you have to ask yourself. Whilst they -could- dick everyone over and shut down Steam, why would they? It only serves to make Valve more money, and it would also be ridiculously out of character for a usually pretty decent company. I'm not saying the situation's perfect, playing games offline is still a huge issue for instance, but it's certainly not bad.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

because it's my game and I shouldn't need permission to install it.

It isn't your game though.

You are renting it for a one time licensing fee with restrictions. People haven't actually bought games since the late 90s early 2000s.

 

[Magmarock]

because it's my game and I shouldn't need permission to install it.

It isn't your game though.

You are renting it for a one time licensing fee with restrictions. People haven't actually bought games since the late 90s early 2000s.

Technically that is true, but it's a bunch of BS. If you pay for something it should be yours. Also it's worth mentioning that is some countries the practice of such licenses is illegal. Vavle was actually taken to court in Germany for this. I wish more countries cared about their consumer rights.

 

[Magmarock]

i always assumed in the best case of steam going under that the publishers and developers might patch the game to make it playable

It's always bad to assume. It's especially bad o assume good will from the gaming industry.

Steam is very good for people who live in the US, not so for people who don't. They don't enforce fair prices among publishes and seeing as how big they are; they probably should.

Yeah, but why would they do that? I mean, sure. It'd fit with the perception of Valve, but why would they bother making it a reality?

I guess Valve don't care for their foreign consumers. No matter, there's always GOG which will be getting the Witcher 3. Speaking of I'm not sure it's even fair to call Vavle a games compeny anymore. I mean there's delays but this is starting to remind me of Dukenukem.

 

[Strazdas]

a very refreshing look at things. Ah, GOG, i dont use you, but i completely and fully support what you stand for.

"understand that not all pirates are criminals, they are just trying to cut through all the DRM restrictions and simply play the games they want to."

Longino I love you. Well said and I admit I torrent games I own to get around the DRM because it's my game and I shouldn't need permission to install it.

sadly, that is a criminal offense thanks to the laws companies lobbied.

Valve seem like a company who would do their best to release their games to you but I guess the problem is that in the situation where Steam is closing down they're probably in a horrible cataclysmic mess where what few staff that remain basically aren't even providing for their families. Devoting coding time to a solution for everyone (and even paying for bandwidth to distribute the solution) might not even be feasible.


I wonder if they would get in any legal trouble as well. Their are a lot of third-party publishers who force you to sign up with steam because they're using the steamworks DRM. Presumably Valve sold them that service, or agreed to give it to them in exchange for tying people into their steam accounts more. I wonder if those contracts would allow Valve to ever disable the DRM if they so chose.

valve said they already got the solution programmed. all they would need to do is push a button to launch the patch. the bandwtich problem is real though, but i am willing to bet some good guy is going to mirror it even if valve collapses.

Hell from my limited knowledge of pirated games, aren't they more complex than that? I thought you generally had to muck about with ISOs and mounting virtual discs and all that jazz. Sounds like hassle to me. Pff I thought those pirates were supposed to be providing a service.

when it comes to games basically it is a click-donwload. click-mount, click-install, click-apply crack (not always necessary, some inhalations come pre-cracked), click-play.

I don't actually do that, as I'm not sure how much my ISP monitors torrent traffic, but I can say that if I lost a game and had to get it from a torrent site, I'd be like Longino and not feel bad about it. That's the *only* time I'd do it, though. Otherwise, DEATH TO THE PIRATES!

very little.
1. most ISP do not have capital to put hardware in place to even begin such efforts, they would go bancrupt. there is A LOT of torrent trafic. They tried to force that in my country and 10 largest ISPs came and said they may as well clsoe thier doors down because its either that or doubling the prices, and in the end the law failed.
2. a lot of torrent traffic is legal. most MMOs update via torrent protocol. there is a lot of public domain and freeware going around via public domain. plenty of smaller program makers use torrent to share the installation as they save up on hosting costs because users host for them. people talking about torrents seems to always ignore that a HUGE chunk of torrent traffic is perfectly legal. Torrent protocol is the most efficient file transfer protocol we have to date.
3. most pirate traffic is encrypted now, so even if monitored it would not say anything really. at best it could tell you the tracker your connecting to. of course there are open traffic, as encrypting take extra processing power, but that was maybe actual 10-5 years ago, not with current computing power. so the amount of open traffic diminished.
4. even if they track torrent traffic, theres so much data that it would be very hard to sift through it.

You're right, installing a game off an ISO would actually be an extra couple of steps. You can throw in one step more if the torrent is in a split rar.

torrents havent used split rars for years now. an exception is programs, where release groups imagine that thier triple-split rar files (imagine a split rar in a split rar in a split rar) is somehow make the files "less visible". split rars were used back when technology wanst reliable enough and people with very slow internet (think dialup) needed to download smaller files one by one. it is obsolete now. heck, the "scene" is usually late for the party and it does not do it anymore even.

I know, man, I was agreeing with you. But using a crack to circumvent DRM on a legitimately purchased game is still usually a breach of the EULA.

OBreach of eula gets you banned in multiplayer, btu thats about it. it has no legal power.

With your standard torrent service you have to scroll through torrents to find one you like..

you have never visited a torrent site have you....

I'd disagree. A lot of GOG's library requires workarounds or fixes to work on modern PCs. Some of the game straight up do not work, yet GOG sells them with little warning.

This is another decent reason why its not as popular as Steam. Piracy is one thing, selling games that straight up don't work anymore is another.

i dont use GOG, but talking to peopel that do i got an impressing that GOG takes games that as you say wont run on modern PCs, and actually make them playable before release. For example Dungeon Keeper installer no longer works from the original disc because it says "you have no windows installed" (even though the game is supposed to work on DOS too). GOG version works. though the fans have created an altered version (kinda mod but more like a re-build) which allows much more (liek high resolution) and stuff which is what i used (it actually took the files from the disc witohut need of instalation). but the point is GOG usually fixes this stuff.

And lets not forget that GoG does actually sells "pirated" games. There were quite a few cases where the games executable was a crack created by some pirate group.

Cracks are public domain and can be used and sold by anyone. Cracks are not technically illegal. they are illegal only if they allwo you to play a game you would not normally (as in you dont have to buy it). when Securom failed, the company taking care of costumemr support often used No-CD cracks as fixes for players, sometiems even linking them to site where the crack originated (securom is obsolete now but yeah). if the crack works better than original launcher (for exampel fails to recognize modern windows), there is no problem using that.

Technically that is true, but it's a bunch of BS. If you pay for something it should be yours. Also it's worth mentioning that is some countries the practice of such licenses is illegal. Vavle was actually taken to court in Germany for this. I wish more countries cared about their consumer rights.

if you pay for a taxi the taxi belong to you? if you pay for a flight you own the plane? if you pay taxes for police you own police? do you understand the concept of service?

 

[frizzlebyte]

I don't actually do that, as I'm not sure how much my ISP monitors torrent traffic, but I can say that if I lost a game and had to get it from a torrent site, I'd be like Longino and not feel bad about it. That's the *only* time I'd do it, though. Otherwise, DEATH TO THE PIRATES!

very little.
1. most ISP do not have capital to put hardware in place to even begin such efforts, they would go bancrupt. there is A LOT of torrent trafic. They tried to force that in my country and 10 largest ISPs came and said they may as well clsoe thier doors down because its either that or doubling the prices, and in the end the law failed.
2. a lot of torrent traffic is legal. most MMOs update via torrent protocol. there is a lot of public domain and freeware going around via public domain. plenty of smaller program makers use torrent to share the installation as they save up on hosting costs because users host for them. people talking about torrents seems to always ignore that a HUGE chunk of torrent traffic is perfectly legal. Torrent protocol is the most efficient file transfer protocol we have to date.
3. most pirate traffic is encrypted now, so even if monitored it would not say anything really. at best it could tell you the tracker your connecting to. of course there are open traffic, as encrypting take extra processing power, but that was maybe actual 10-5 years ago, not with current computing power. so the amount of open traffic diminished.
4. even if they track torrent traffic, theres so much data that it would be very hard to sift through it.

Wow, thanks for the in-depth response, Strazdas. Very informative. And I was actually aware that a lot of torrent traffic is legal; that's how I downloaded my IndieGameStand copy of Alan Wake, after all.

I just wish Bittorrent had a better rep than it does. In the mainstream, it still carries the stench of illegality for a lot of people that it really shouldn't have.

 

[Strazdas]

I just wish Bittorrent had a better rep than it does. In the mainstream, it still carries the stench of illegality for a lot of people that it really shouldn't have.

games make you killers, tv destroy your brain, torrent is evil, rock and roll will raise the devil, basically everythign has bad rep anyway.

capcha: been there
indeed, i have.

 

[Something Amyss]

I guess Valve don't care for their foreign consumers. No matter, there's always GOG which will be getting the Witcher 3. Speaking of I'm not sure it's even fair to call Vavle a games compeny anymore. I mean there's delays but this is starting to remind me of Dukenukem.

I'm not sure they care about their customers, period. I think they mostly look as good as they do because they stand alongside such humanitarian luminaries as Electronic Arts and Microsoft.

As for the game company part, don't they have a couple games coming out? I've never cared much for Valve games, not being as enamoured with the FPS as most people, but I could have sworn they had a couple games coming out in between not releasing Episode 3 and (insert other title with 2 at the end here). Fair point if I'm wrong, but I could swear they did.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

If you pay for something it should be yours.

So renting apartments shouldn't be a thing? Or just if you rent an apartment you're allowed to burn it down and the owner of the property who apparently isn't an owner, is also not allowed to say anything to stop it because you paid them money?

Things aren't that simple.

Also it's worth mentioning that is some countries the practice of such licenses is illegal.

Some countries also force little girls to marry pedophile rapists because a thousand year old book said so. What other countries legal systems do is not an argument that can be used to determine what is or isn't right.

Vavle was actually taken to court in Germany for this. I wish more countries cared about their consumer rights.

And what about the companies and the hundreds of employees who's livelihood depends on them?

Follow this chain of logic:

You are allowed to buy a game, ipso ergo you own the rights to that game and can do whatever you want with it.

You are allowed to buy blank DVDs. Which again, you own the rights do and can do with what you please.

You are allowed to buy a DVD writer. Again rights, ect ect.

Now because you fully own all the content and all the pieces and there are no licensing rights to stand in your way. You are completely allowed to copy off DVDs and then compete directly with the actual game creators. You could sell them in ziplock bags on a street corner for 5$ And then what? The developer has to sell them for a buck? And you lower your price to 50 cents because buying bulk discs is so cheap you can still turn a profit so why not?

And yeah there are people who would do that. Because people are assholes. And the people buying from them would write it off as it is the assholes problem and that they are just the consumer. Because human beings are experts at passing the buck. And now the developer can't sell their game for a profit and they can't pay the 100k a year it takes to keep the average programmer on with benefits and pay.

That is why when you buy a song or a book/story or a computer game, anything that is fairly easy to manufacture or disseminate, you aren't actually buying it. Because in this day and age intellectual property is more complex than I BOUGHT IT SO I SHOULD OWN IT! It isn't like a table or a computer; where creating it takes a bunch of equipment and a high degree of skill and a long time working. And because it is so simple, the creators. The author, the lead guitarist, the programer, and yes even the dirty publishers who put their money on the line funding all of those other people, all rely on licensing rights to protect their livelihoods against the guy with 500$ worth of equipment and a lack of forethought.

They aren't doing it because they are assholes. They are doing it because they have been forced down that road and there really aren't any better options. They license the rights to you pretty much forever and unless people are total assholes and do illegal stuff like chargeback on a game that was delivered to them in a functioning condition, they really don't ever take away that right.

Oh and bringing suit means nothing. Anyone can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean they won. I have family friends who got sued by their neighbors for 'having too many friends.' I had a teacher who's best friend was murdered by a drunk driver when she was a kid; that driver then sued the parents of the little girl she killed for 'emotional distress of having killed a person.' Being brought to court means fuck all.

And it wasn't Germany that brought them to court. It was a consumer rights group, VZBV. And guess what? They already brought the same suit against Valve years ago, alleging the same complaint. It went to the German Supreme Court and they sided in favor of valve and the licensing rights of intellectual property.

 

[Magmarock]

If you pay for something it should be yours.

So renting apartments shouldn't be a thing? Or just if you rent an apartment you're allowed to burn it down and the owner of the property who apparently isn't an owner, is also not allowed to say anything to stop it because you paid them money?

Things aren't that simple.

Also it's worth mentioning that is some countries the practice of such licenses is illegal.

Some countries also force little girls to marry pedophile rapists because a thousand year old book said so. What other countries legal systems do is not an argument that can be used to determine what is or isn't right.

Vavle was actually taken to court in Germany for this. I wish more countries cared about their consumer rights.

And what about the companies and the hundreds of employees who's livelihood depends on them?

Follow this chain of logic:

You are allowed to buy a game, ipso ergo you own the rights to that game and can do whatever you want with it.

You are allowed to buy blank DVDs. Which again, you own the rights do and can do with what you please.

You are allowed to buy a DVD writer. Again rights, ect ect.

Now because you fully own all the content and all the pieces and there are no licensing rights to stand in your way. You are completely allowed to copy off DVDs and then compete directly with the actual game creators. You could sell them in ziplock bags on a street corner for 5$ And then what? The developer has to sell them for a buck? And you lower your price to 50 cents because buying bulk discs is so cheap you can still turn a profit so why not?

And yeah there are people who would do that. Because people are assholes. And the people buying from them would write it off as it is the assholes problem and that they are just the consumer. Because human beings are experts at passing the buck. And now the developer can't sell their game for a profit and they can't pay the 100k a year it takes to keep the average programmer on with benefits and pay.

That is why when you buy a song or a book/story or a computer game, anything that is fairly easy to manufacture or disseminate, you aren't actually buying it. Because in this day and age intellectual property is more complex than I BOUGHT IT SO I SHOULD OWN IT! It isn't like a table or a computer; where creating it takes a bunch of equipment and a high degree of skill and a long time working. And because it is so simple, the creators. The author, the lead guitarist, the programer, and yes even the dirty publishers who put their money on the line funding all of those other people, all rely on licensing rights to protect their livelihoods against the guy with 500$ worth of equipment and a lack of forethought.

They aren't doing it because they are assholes. They are doing it because they have been forced down that road and there really aren't any better options. They license the rights to you pretty much forever and unless people are total assholes and do illegal stuff like chargeback on a game that was delivered to them in a functioning condition, they really don't ever take away that right.

Oh and bringing suit means nothing. Anyone can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean they won. I have family friends who got sued by their neighbors for 'having too many friends.' I had a teacher who's best friend was murdered by a drunk driver when she was a kid; that driver then sued the parents of the little girl she killed for 'emotional distress of having killed a person.' Being brought to court means fuck all.

And it wasn't Germany that brought them to court. It was a consumer rights group, VZBV. And guess what? They already brought the same suit against Valve years ago, alleging the same complaint. It went to the German Supreme Court and they sided in favor of valve and the licensing rights of intellectual property.

Oh my god that has way too much put into it. Look, if you going to take things to the absolute extremes like renting property and compare it to buying a video game, that's just silly. If you're going to be charged upwards of $50 or $100 for a game you shouldn't need to deal with online DRM to use it. I don't call the phone company to make a call and I don't connect my TV to the internet to use it either. DRM servs the publishers not the consumers.

As for lively hoods, well if you're lively hood involves taking away the rights of others then I can't see see myself defending it. It's like saying "yeah he's a thief but that's his lively hood you know."

Game publishers have been getting more and more desperate to ruin consumer rights (remember SOPA and PIPA) and I am no longer connived piracy has anything to do with it. I think it's more to do with killing the competition of self publishing. Vavle are starting to look more and more like Microsoft and in the way they do things. This kind of business practice leads to so many probables and you're not helping annoying by apologizing for it.

It's gotta stop, especially with services like GOG that prove that we really don't need Steam and big publishers.

 

[porous_shield]

Even if Steam and GoG don't have the same catalogue of games, they are still competing. Money I spend on GoG isn't money I spend on Steam, or vice-versa.

I think GoG is a better service than Steam since when I buy a game its mine to play instead of having to use Steam's finicky offline mode; I've only ever been able to get it to work for about two weeks before it tries and make me log in again. I love older games but I still have a much larger library of games on Steam than GoG simply becacuse I played most of the games in GoG's library that I've wanted to play and still have the discs for them.

I don't sweat Valve going under and I'm glad they're not a publicly traded company and don't have share holder hopps to jump through.

 

[Magmarock]

Look, if you going to take things to the absolute extremes like renting property and compare it to buying a video game, that's just silly.

Oh God you're one of those people who doesn't read or basically lacks reading comprehension skills. Give me a sec I'm going to buckle up for the next three posts as you struggle to figure out what has been said.

No one compared renting property to videogames. You said and I quote "If you pay for something it should be yours." You didn't say if I pay for a videogame it should be mine. You said if I pay for 'something.' A statement which I patently pointed out to be false and ridiculous. You don't automatically get ownership of something just for paying money.

If you're going to be charged upwards of $50 or $100 for a game you shouldn't need to deal with online DRM to use it.

Why? Because you don't want to?

I don't call the phone company to make a call

But you route calls through their substations. Which is why there was a big hullabaloo about recording/spying on calls by the US government. Because you are connecting to stations that the phone companies have set up and run and they can monitor through traffic in order to route calls correctly from place to place.

So when you make a phone call you sent it through a series of wires or bounce it off of a series of satellites run by the phone company that send your call to where you want it to go allowing you to use a phone.

When you play an always online DRM videogame you send data packets to a server run by whatever company is running it, and they send back an activation signal.

It's not exactly the same but it is pretty close and it completely invalidates your statement/comparison.

and I don't connect my TV to the internet to use it either.

You don't? I certainly do. Commercials are for plebes.

DRM servs the publishers not the consumers.

Publishers serve the consumers. That's what a business is. They make things that consumers want and we buy them. And without their capital we wouldn't have the games we do.

As for lively hoods, well if you're lively hood involves taking away the rights of others then I can't see see myself defending it.

What rights have been taken away? You're making things up that don't exist. Just because you want something to be real doesn't mean that it is.

There are no protections in the constitution guaranteeing you don't have to license a product to use it.

There are no protections in the amendments about such rights.

There are no such protections in the consumer protection laws.

The Supreme Court of the United States says you do not have any such right.

You're literally just imagining some right that does not exist and saying 'o my God the corperashuns is taking mai rigtes.' The same thing is happening to me bro. Corporations already are infringing on my right to wander around in their factories taking notes. It's like man isn't this a free country? Lyke why can't I walk anywhere I want? Capitalist pigs.

It's like saying "yeah he's a thief but that's his lively hood you know."

No it isn't. There is no comparison to be made. You have paid money for a license to use a product. They don't take that product away from you in pretty much any cases, because they are not assholes.

If you metaphor was to be even remotely accurate the thief would have to sell you a product then totally let you use it according to the agreement you made with him without infringing on your use of it. That doesn't sound like a thief at all. Probably because it isn't one.

Game publishers have been getting more and more desperate to ruin consumer rights (remember SOPA and PIPA) and I am no longer connived piracy has anything to do with it.

Yes and it got shot down so what is your point? Lets go through some of my own.

1) Game publishers are not congress. Congress submitted this law not the publishers.

2) Congress and the game publishers aren't the only people allowed to do anything. This is a system of checks and balances that push the country towards the middle point. Which is why it didn't pass.

3) If it did pass it is subject to judicial review which could very very easily have found against it for any myriad of reasons such as violation of the right to free speech(which is an actual right. Like from the constitution and everything. I didn't make it up like some people.)

I think it's more to do with killing the competition of self publishing.

And how would it do this?

Copyrighted unique material created by private developers with intent to distribute it through their own website can't be infringed on unless it was like a game about fucking children or something. And even then it would probably have to include pictures of actual children.

This kind of business practice leads to so many probables and you're not helping annoying by apologizing for it.

Again, with the not reading.

Apologizing would be "yeah man I know they steal your games and you are totally right but I'm sorry that they are doing that and they don't mean nothing by it."

This is not an apology. The last post was not an apology. And pointing out that you are wrong might be annoying to you; but I'm sorry, because you're wrong. Being correct in the future will probably make things less 'annoying' for you. Publishers aren't stealing your games; point me to one time when someone was locked out of their games without illegally using chargeback to steal from the developer/publisher. You're imagining rights that don't exist, that high courts around the world have said don't exist. Point me to the law that says you have whatever consumer rights you think you have.

Oh and pro tip bro, you should read GOGs ToS some time. Boy are you in for a disappointment.

Oh for crying out loud. What's annoying me is that you're taking any of this in. I don't care what GOG's terms of service are, I can keep my games from GOG I can't from Steam it's as simple as that.

As for the law that points out consumer rights, well I do happen to have a case for you. The case of iinet an Australian based ISP that was being sued by 7 Hollywood studios for allying it's users to access the pirate bay. In the USA ISP are forced to block such websites.


The supreme court ruled in favor of iinet unanimously stating that an ISP can not and will not be held accountable for the actions of their users. This was a victory for not only national business rights but also consumer rights. Another consumer right is your right to return and or get refunded over defective goods or goods there were purchased under false advertising. In other words if you by an xbox 360 and it red rings outside of warranty you still have the right to get a refund for it due to the manufacturing fault.

Granted you do have to jump though some hoops, but no matter what the warranty says if you buy some that breaks inside of 3 ears due to a manufacturing fault you are entitled to a refund that is your right here.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

Oh for crying out loud. What's annoying me is that you're taking any of this in. I don't care what GOG's terms of service are, I can keep my games from GOG I can't from Steam it's as simple as that.

You can 'keep' your games from both services. Just because they don't have DRM doesn't change the licensing rights for anything that isn't freeware.

Also I'm not even sure what "What's annoying me is that you're taking any of this in" even means. It annoys you that I'm taking what in? You aren't completing the thought(which isn't surprising.)

As for the law that points out consumer rights, well I do happen to have a case for you. The case of iinet an Australian based ISP that was being sued by 7 Hollywood studios for allying it's users to access the pirate bay. In the USA ISP are forced to block such websites.

Oh hey person who apparently lives outside of the US and has done absolutely no research beyond someone told me something that agrees with my world view therefore it must be 100% right and I have no need to check up on it or ensure it is even true before spouting it off.

Lets try again shall we?

The supreme court ruled in favor of iinet unanimously stating that an ISP can not and will not be held accountable for the actions of their users. This was a victory for not only national business rights but also consumer rights. Another consumer right is your right to return and or get refunded over defective goods or goods there were purchased under false advertising. In other words if you by an xbox 360 and it red rings outside of warranty you still have the right to get a refund for it due to the manufacturing fault.

Granted you do have to jump though some hoops, but no matter what the warranty says if you buy some that breaks inside of 3 ears due to a manufacturing fault you are entitled to a refund that is your right here.

What in the holy hell are you even talking about? This is a discussion about your "right" to own videogames instead of licensing them. Absolutely none of your cases were on point or relevant to the discussion at all. I don't give a shit if ISPs are allowed to provide access to websites. That in no way advances your argument that you have a right to buy and own games instead of leasing them. I don't give a crap that you can return defective goods. That in no way advances your argument that you have a right to buy and own games instead of leasing them.

It's like if we were arguing over speed limit laws and you started telling me about how by law you have to get your car smog checked. I don't give a shit. It has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. I have never said nor will I ever say that you have zero consumer protections. There are plenty of consumer protections: "Among them are the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Truth in Lending Act, Fair Credit Billing Act, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act."

You have failed to provide any relevant information that says you have such a right(because you don't,) to own a game instead of leasing it. So either show me the laws and court cases that actually pertain to that topic or shut up about your imaginary "rights." I'll do you a favor though, there aren't any such laws or legal precedents. You're making up "rights" that don't exist and are completely unsupported from a legal standpoint in any way shape or form; and no amount of telling me about unrelated shit is going to change that.

 

[Magmarock]

Oh for crying out loud. What's annoying me is that you're taking any of this in. I don't care what GOG's terms of service are, I can keep my games from GOG I can't from Steam it's as simple as that.

You can 'keep' your games from both services. Just because they don't have DRM doesn't change the licensing rights for anything that isn't freeware.

Also I'm not even sure what "What's annoying me is that you're taking any of this in" even means. It annoys you that I'm taking what in? You aren't completing the thought(which isn't surprising.)

As for the law that points out consumer rights, well I do happen to have a case for you. The case of iinet an Australian based ISP that was being sued by 7 Hollywood studios for allying it's users to access the pirate bay. In the USA ISP are forced to block such websites.

Oh hey person who apparently lives outside of the US and has done absolutely no research beyond someone told me something that agrees with my world view therefore it must be 100% right and I have no need to check up on it or ensure it is even true before spouting it off.

Lets try again shall we?

The supreme court ruled in favor of iinet unanimously stating that an ISP can not and will not be held accountable for the actions of their users. This was a victory for not only national business rights but also consumer rights. Another consumer right is your right to return and or get refunded over defective goods or goods there were purchased under false advertising. In other words if you by an xbox 360 and it red rings outside of warranty you still have the right to get a refund for it due to the manufacturing fault.

Granted you do have to jump though some hoops, but no matter what the warranty says if you buy some that breaks inside of 3 ears due to a manufacturing fault you are entitled to a refund that is your right here.

What in the holy hell are you even talking about? This is a discussion about your "right" to own videogames instead of licensing them. Absolutely none of your cases were on point or relevant to the discussion at all. I don't give a shit if ISPs are allowed to provide access to websites. That in no way advances your argument that you have a right to buy and own games instead of leasing them. I don't give a crap that you can return defective goods. That in no way advances your argument that you have a right to buy and own games instead of leasing them.

It's like if we were arguing over speed limit laws and you started telling me about how by law you have to get your car smog checked. I don't give a shit. It has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. I have never said nor will I ever say that you have zero consumer protections. There are plenty of consumer protections: "Among them are the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Truth in Lending Act, Fair Credit Billing Act, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act."

You have failed to provide any relevant information that says you have such a right(because you don't,) to own a game instead of leasing it. So either show me the laws and court cases that actually pertain to that topic or shut up about your imaginary "rights." I'll do you a favor though, there aren't any such laws or legal precedents. You're making up "rights" that don't exist and are completely unsupported from a legal standpoint in any way shape or form; and no amount of telling me about unrelated shit is going to change that.

Oh for the love of... right I'm saying this one more time. I simply stated that you should have the right to keep what you buy because it's your property. And because I used the word "property" you came along with "Well technically it's not property because licenses and blah blah blah"

Who cares what the licenses agreement says, more importantly who even understands what it says. POINT IS, with GOG I keep my games with Steam I don't.

If you can't wrap your head around that, then I can't help you. Also no I will not go through all the trouble of researching all this legal nonsense just to prove a point. If you want a real case of someone obtaining ownership of intellectual property from a company you can go look for it your self. I'm sure there are plenty of cases for you.


MY argument is based on principles where as your argument is based on legal technicality regarding copy rights. A legal system that is hasn't been updated since the 70s hence why there are so many problems with it such who owns the rights to what and of course this stupid argument. I can not and will not respect copy right law until it's changed to meet with the times.

Now please don't bother me about this again.

 

[J Tyran]

Yeah I'm not sure GOG could get much more convenient.

The only thing they are lacking is a method for people not using any kind of card, there is no real excuse for it nowadays with any current account offering a debit card and pre-paid cards just about every where but there are still Luddites around.

 

[evilneko]

Yeah I'm not sure GOG could get much more convenient. Unless you're wanting to patch/mod games that you've bought (which is none of their concern so nothing they can/should deal with) it really is a case of click to buy - click to download - click to install - click to play.

Hell from my limited knowledge of pirated games, aren't they more complex than that? I thought you generally had to muck about with ISOs and mounting virtual discs and all that jazz. Sounds like hassle to me. Pff I thought those pirates were supposed to be providing a service.

Mounting an ISO is as easy as:

Downloading and installing Virtual CloneDrive (free).
Right-click ISO, click mount.

Come to think of it I think Windows 8 has this built-in with no need for 3rd-party software. I have it anyway, since VCD gives me more control.

 

[Genocidicles]

Sure until GOG takes them away for lets see... oh right "any reason."

What games has steam stolen from you?

If Steam ever goes down you lose all the games you had on the service. GOG games can be copied, so if GOG ever goes down then all the games on my hard drive aren't going to disappear.

I won't be able to download them from their website any more, but if I'm clever and make a copy of every game I download from there then that'll never be an issue.

 

[Magmarock]

I simply stated that you should have the right to keep what you buy because it's your property.

Yes, and you don't buy videogames, so they are not your property.

Who cares what the licenses agreement says

Attorneys, judges, law enforcement agents, juries, game developers, CEOs, programmers, writers, artists, publishers, investors, members of any body tasked with the creation of laws(eg. Congress or the Duma,) data miners, advertisers, average every day gamers.

more importantly who even understands what it says.

People with basic English skills?

They write them in English so it's really easy you just have to know the meanings of words and be able to string them together. I know it's a novel concept! For example "You agree that GOG may terminate your log in access to the Service, including your user name and password, at any time for any reason without prior notice or liability." Feel like you can break that down? Sound the words out. I believe in you.

POINT IS, with GOG I keep my games with Steam I don't.

Sure until GOG takes them away for lets see... oh right "any reason."

What games has steam stolen from you?

If you can't wrap your head around that, then I can't help you.

I can easily wrap my head around the fact that neither GOG nor Steam actually sell you games and you are only leasing them, albeit with less restrictions from steam, which you would know if you could read simple sentences in EULAs or make posts without outright lying like 'omg ISPs ban websites in the US.'

Also no I will not go through all the trouble of researching all this legal nonsense just to prove a point.

That's probably good because if you tried to find a law or a precedent that agreed with you, you would be researching for eternity. Much better just to make up lies, refuse to read any contradictionary opinions, go off topic, and then repeat your original argument like it hasn't been disproved on a basic objective factual basis 5 times over, already.

If you want a real case of someone obtaining ownership of intellectual property from a company you can go look for it your self. I'm sure there are plenty of cases for you.

There aren't. It's always 'purchased' with restrictions. I don't live in Somalia and I'm assuming neither do you.

MY argument is based on principles where as your argument is based on legal technicality regarding copy rights.

Read my posts. Try again. It is 100% principle which you ignored. The gaming industry would be wrecked by your belief system. I believe in protecting the producers, the developer, the programmers, the writers, the artists. The people you would throw under a bus competing against your imagined legal theft system.

A legal system that is hasn't been updated since the 70s hence why there are so many problems with it such who owns the rights to what and of course this stupid argument.

Just like every argument you've made in this thread, yeah; proceed.

I can not and will not respect copy right law until it's changed to meet with the times.

Now please don't bother me about this again.

Oh hey at least now you're not going on about the 'rights' that you don't have. At least now I know the next argument you have on this subject you will know that you're outright lying in the back of your head. I mean it won't stop you from lying anyways. But that kind of weakness does wonders to hurt self esteem, assuming of course that you aren't a sociopath, and actually feed bad about lying. Maybe that isn't too likely considering the proclivity by which you do it and how you ignorantly keep blundering forward with the same lies even when caught making them.

Here in Australia you can't actually sign away your consumer rights, so no mattewrwhat the end user license agreement says, if a company violates those rights you can still take them to court and you can look this up if you don't believe me. Now leave me alone.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I simply stated that you should have the right to keep what you buy because it's your property.

Yes, and you don't buy videogames, so they are not your property.

Who cares what the licenses agreement says

Attorneys, judges, law enforcement agents, juries, game developers, CEOs, programmers, writers, artists, publishers, investors, members of any body tasked with the creation of laws(eg. Congress or the Duma,) data miners, advertisers, average every day gamers.

more importantly who even understands what it says.

People with basic English skills?

They write them in English so it's really easy you just have to know the meanings of words and be able to string them together. I know it's a novel concept! For example "You agree that GOG may terminate your log in access to the Service, including your user name and password, at any time for any reason without prior notice or liability." Feel like you can break that down? Sound the words out. I believe in you.

POINT IS, with GOG I keep my games with Steam I don't.

Sure until GOG takes them away for lets see... oh right "any reason."

What games has steam stolen from you?

If you can't wrap your head around that, then I can't help you.

I can easily wrap my head around the fact that neither GOG nor Steam actually sell you games and you are only leasing them, albeit with less restrictions from steam, which you would know if you could read simple sentences in EULAs or make posts without outright lying like 'omg ISPs ban websites in the US.'

Also no I will not go through all the trouble of researching all this legal nonsense just to prove a point.

That's probably good because if you tried to find a law or a precedent that agreed with you, you would be researching for eternity. Much better just to make up lies, refuse to read any contradictionary opinions, go off topic, and then repeat your original argument like it hasn't been disproved on a basic objective factual basis 5 times over, already.

If you want a real case of someone obtaining ownership of intellectual property from a company you can go look for it your self. I'm sure there are plenty of cases for you.

There aren't. It's always 'purchased' with restrictions. I don't live in Somalia and I'm assuming neither do you.

MY argument is based on principles where as your argument is based on legal technicality regarding copy rights.

Read my posts. Try again. It is 100% principle which you ignored. The gaming industry would be wrecked by your belief system. I believe in protecting the producers, the developer, the programmers, the writers, the artists. The people you would throw under a bus competing against your imagined legal theft system.

A legal system that is hasn't been updated since the 70s hence why there are so many problems with it such who owns the rights to what and of course this stupid argument.

Just like every argument you've made in this thread, yeah; proceed.

I can not and will not respect copy right law until it's changed to meet with the times.

Now please don't bother me about this again.

Oh hey at least now you're not going on about the 'rights' that you don't have. At least now I know the next argument you have on this subject you will know that you're outright lying in the back of your head. I mean it won't stop you from lying anyways. But that kind of weakness does wonders to hurt self esteem, assuming of course that you aren't a sociopath, and actually feed bad about lying. Maybe that isn't too likely considering the proclivity by which you do it and how you ignorantly keep blundering forward with the same lies even when caught making them.

Here in Australia you can't actually sign away your consumer rights, so no mattewrwhat the end user license agreement says, if a company violates those rights you can still take them to court and you can look this up if you don't believe me. Now leave me alone.

Usually the precedent is that you can't sign away your rights unless a law explicitly says you can.

This is true for most of the commonwealth.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

Here in Australia you can't actually sign away your consumer rights, so no mattewrwhat the end user license agreement says, if a company violates those rights you can still take them to court and you can look this up if you don't believe me.

You can't sign away rights in America either. Fortunately the 'right' you keep saying you have is not actually a right at all; has never been one and never will be one. So no matter what the EULA says, you are still wrong.

Now leave me alone.

I'm trying to have a discussion, you're trying to have the last word. Leave yourself alone, and stop acting like a child.

If Steam ever goes down you lose all the games you had on the service. GOG games can be copied, so if GOG ever goes down then all the games on my hard drive aren't going to disappear.

I won't be able to download them from their website any more, but if I'm clever and make a copy of every game I download from there then that'll never be an issue.

Which works fine for most GOG games, as they are small in size. But is a difficult thing to apply to larger games. AAA stuff coming out these days is often 20-40 GB in size. So you would have to have a gigantic install file saved, plus the game size, you would be looking at around 60 GB for every game you have installed and 30 GB for uninstalled. The ability to download whenever you want is crucial for people who don't want to buy massive amounts of storage, burn their own game installer CDs for storage or purchase only physical copies instead of using digital distribution.