Valve Triumphs Over German Consumer Group

[freaper]

For a company that claims to value the consumer, they sure seem to dislike the idea of us owning video games and doing things people normally do with things they own.

Y'know, like returning a game if it turns out to be shit, which is increasingly becoming the case with new releases on Steam, since the idea of quality control goes completely over their heads, or reselling or giving away a game once you've put enough time into it, which once you've played a game through several times is a pretty damn appealing option.

You don't rent movies directed by Adam Sandler just like you don't buy games that look like obvious turds.

OT: I thought Germany was pretty strict when it came down to consumer rights? At least they're doing something about this wonky classification of videogames.

Funny you should use a comparison to renting movies, because that's exactly what Valve (and the rest of the industry minus GoG, Humble Bundle, and a few other groups on the fringes) is trying to turn "sales" of video games into: a rental. And anything that reinforces the legality of EULAs is one step closer to that being as true in reality as it is on that BS pile of legalese.

The day I won't be able to access the games I bought online will suck. Luckily, that day hasn't come yet. I don't see Steam or Origin or whoever denying access to their customers without yearning for PR suicide, so I'm not really bothered atm.

 

[AstaresPanda]

Never said anything about valve getting a free pass coz of "sales" but thank you for putting words in my mouth. They dont treat us like shit its that simple. No it should not be a case of better fo 2 evils BUT next to everyone else valve is still alot better. Maybe a somepoint they will give us some kinda a system to trade or sell your games, maybe you gotta own said game for x amount of time before you are allowed to sell it i dont know. BUT like somone else has pointed out it'll ruin shit. Have you seen how cheap trading cards and other bullshit go for ? And anyway have we forgot that for a very long time now we've not been able to really sell our old pc gamnes. coz the fucking cd key is already linked to blah blah blah.

 

[Zipa]

I don't see how this is Valve's fault, reselling of PC games has not been allowed since way before Steam or even Valve themselves existed. You couldn't trade in a physical copy in a store because CD keys were a thing.

 

[Strazdas]

But not everyone likes every game out there. They will also sell off titles they will never play again. I know I won't touch games that I love because I've played them to death.
People might also not be so keen on having a gigantic playlist that takes forever to look through.
Games that are gathered up in large enough numbers will go down in price so much that it will make Steam sales look like extortion rates.

Not everyone buys every game out there. whats your point?
People selling off things they dont want to use anymore? the horror? oh, wait, thats happening all over for thousands of years. you say you wont touch games you like, what makes you think others will?
Gigantic playlits are not a problem. make a category, shove it all in, minimize, there you got rid of scroll bar. thats what i do with games i "finished".
The prices will not go down in such for people would not consider it worth selling at such prices. and if it does that means noone wants that game, which is fair enough.

Except that Used game sales made up for 2 billion dollars for Gamestop and they got all of that money for themselves. Money that could have gone to helping game companies instead. Gamestop also doesn't like the notion of losing that part.

Gamestop, know for ripping off its costumers everywhere they can, made profit? you dont say.
Of course a basically monopoly of used games sales dont want to loose being monopoly, DUH.
Besides, used game pay should go to used game owner instead of some corporate middleman anyway.

Games also can't exactly be compared to other stuff.

Neither can cars, neither can trees, neither can buildings, neither can chiars, you get the point. The thing is, they are all PRODUCTS.

You have this item that will never degrade no matter what and always be the same.

Not only that is not true but also irrelevant.

Stores that sell used stuff only, can only carry a limited amount of stuff and most of the time they don't even sell the stuff and have to get rid of it.
Steam removes that part. They will be on the store for a life time. They can carry an infinitive amount of items. It'll be super easy to find the cheapest seller too.

So, better?

You can see things dropping in price the moment there are too many of them. I'm willing to bet Half-Life 2 would be priced less than a dollar on the Steam market if resale was allowed. It has nothing to do with the quality of the game. It's all about how many of it there exist on the market. Too many and the price drops. Simple.

Only as long as the seller is willing to part with it for less than a dollar. And thats how economy works you know, large supply means drop in prices.
Besides, your given example - Half-life 2 is a 10 years old game. if they havent made thier profit on it now then maybe they shouldnt have released it in the first place (i know HL made profit, but my saying apples to all games).

Then we also have VAC banned games or MMORPG games. You can't just sell those.

This can be applied per account instead. MMORPGs run on subscriptions or microtransactions anyway.

 

[viranimus]

Yuu have failed to understand the difference between buying on steam and buying retail. It does not matter how many words you write it will not change the fact that games on steam are only available via steam. You can only access the games via steam's service. Valve is not the rights holder, EULAs are still between the rights holder and the end user, valve has no part in that. Valve set the rules on what you can and cannot do on its service, steam. Valve are fee to set those rules in any way it likes within the law. This court case was not about the fairness or otherwise of steam rules but a foolish waste of money in an attempt to say steam is not a service when it plainly is a service.

Spoiler: Albino Boo

No, I fully understand it the difference and in fact point to the fact there is a difference. Not because there is a real difference but because Steam is trying to manufacture an artificial difference where there is none. A client for distribution do not a service make. (Oh and btw, you are wrong too because there are games that are bought on steam that you CAN access without the client. Off the top of my head Binding of Issac, as if you have the least lil bit of tech savvy you can find the root installation folder and access the game from there)

Steam does not offer a service. They offer distribution. Period. If steam was a service as I stated before It would BE a service. Like Hulu, Netflix, where all content was made available Or like Service based games such as MMOs. Steam does not sell a service. No one pays steam to access steam. They pay steam when they want to purchase an individual product which Steam gladly distributes. Does anyone pay Amazon for the ability to shop on Amazon??? Of course not because distribution and service are NOT the same thing, especially when the products sold on Steam are sold in the same manner as products. In fact, it even has an offline mode. That alone kills any possibility of it being a service.

Let me be clear with this. People do not pay to access steam. There is no Steam access fee. All the content sold on steam is sold individually as products. It does not matter how many times you say it, or how you point to individual motivations in it, Steam is not a service, It never has been a service, it never will be (at least under its current model) a service. Steam sells products, No differently than Walmart, Game, Gamestop, Amazon, ect. They are a form of product distribution. Steam does not sell exclusively proprietary content. They sell all sorts of products that are in fact available elsewhere and in alternative formats.

THAT is why this case and others like it are coming up, because the rules they set are NOT within the law. They are trying to dodge laws. Thats why these cases are filed. You cannot be a retailer selling individual products and pretend you offer a service to try and keep from being governed by laws protecting the products you sell and the consumers who buy them. That is exactly what you are trying to justify on steams behalf and that shows why this is the furthest thing from a waste of money. Because Steams industry dominance comes from many people who would apologize for them and try to obscure what they are doing as perfectly legal commerce when it is trying to undermine the rules of commerce.

They dont treat us like shit its that simple.

Spoiler: AstaresPanda

Uhm, what do you call an organization who agrees to distribute content and accepts terms for the transaction, then decides they want to change the terms of the transaction after the transaction has been completed and hold the content purchased hostage until you agree to the change of those terms?

Yes, its that simple.

The reason Steam is popular is simply because , consumers seem to prefer steam. so everyone wants to get their game on steam. I mean GoG is nice but they do have rather twitchy compatibility and support, Origin... meh, won't even mention origin. So yeah, they are the preferred platform and they are the preferred platform for a reason...


I really do like how being successful automatically makes you the bad guy, I mean let's be frank., success in business requires, good decision, cooperation by the ton and a light sprinkling of ruthlessness..

Spoiler: BigTuk

Three things

A: Steam is the "preferred" distribution platform for no other reason than having the largest library. Which makes them the most lucrative platform for Developers because it is giving their product access to the largest single point of access of customers, which grows their library even larger.


B: LOL @ GOGs compatibility and support being twitchy. ROFL@ suggesting Steam can even hold a candle in comparison.

C: It is not that steam is successful. Its because Steams success is in part because of manipulating the rules of the game against consumers in seemly and unlawful ways.

An old saying

How you win is just as important as IF you win

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

For a company that claims to value the consumer, they sure seem to dislike the idea of us owning video games and doing things people normally do with things they own.

Y'know, like returning a game if it turns out to be shit, which is increasingly becoming the case with new releases on Steam, since the idea of quality control goes completely over their heads, or reselling or giving away a game once you've put enough time into it, which once you've played a game through several times is a pretty damn appealing option.

You don't rent movies directed by Adam Sandler just like you don't buy games that look like obvious turds.

OT: I thought Germany was pretty strict when it came down to consumer rights? At least they're doing something about this wonky classification of videogames.

Funny you should use a comparison to renting movies, because that's exactly what Valve (and the rest of the industry minus GoG, Humble Bundle, and a few other groups on the fringes) is trying to turn "sales" of video games into: a rental. And anything that reinforces the legality of EULAs is one step closer to that being as true in reality as it is on that BS pile of legalese.

The day I won't be able to access the games I bought online will suck. Luckily, that day hasn't come yet. I don't see Steam or Origin or whoever denying access to their customers without yearning for PR suicide, so I'm not really bothered atm.

Question: can you resell your game? If the answer is anything but yes, it's not a sale, it's a rental at best. For that matter, have you ever read those EULAs? They're basically 10 pages of "you are not buying this game, you are renting it." Except they use the legalistic term of "licensing." A rental is just a specific kind of license to use, which EULAs effectively fall under.

 

[Zefar]

Not everyone buys every game out there. whats your point?
People selling off things they dont want to use anymore? the horror? oh, wait, thats happening all over for thousands of years. you say you wont touch games you like, what makes you think others will?
Gigantic playlits are not a problem. make a category, shove it all in, minimize, there you got rid of scroll bar. thats what i do with games i "finished".
The prices will not go down in such for people would not consider it worth selling at such prices. and if it does that means noone wants that game, which is fair enough.

Vast majority of the sales happen because people think it's a good price for the game but only end up buying something they don't like. This is far to common on Steam and there are a lot of people who just haven't touched most of their games.
The difference with selling other stuff is that they wear and tear. PC games do not. You can't keep reselling a car as it'll break down, it'll get worse over time and it'll become a risk to drive. A PC game will be the same after the last patch no matter how long it's passed.
Gigantic playlist is a problem for a lot of people. I read about users whining like little babies about a random free weekend game show up in their play list. If they can trim off the stuff they do not like they will do that.
They will also sell them for lower than what the store offer.

Indie games are specially in for a whole lot of trouble. Humble Bundle will practically kill the income of any Indie developer that joins it because they buy the game for a penny and then sell them for half the current price on Steam store.

As for game dropping to a fraction of it's cost = no one wants it. Not really. If it had gone on a normal sale it would still sell copies. But with users selling it they would push the price to almost nothing.

Gamestop, know for ripping off its costumers everywhere they can, made profit? you dont say.
Of course a basically monopoly of used games sales dont want to loose being monopoly, DUH.
Besides, used game pay should go to used game owner instead of some corporate middleman anyway.

But this is just to show you how much their stores where able to take away from game developers. Now think about Steam with 6-7 million active users doing it in ONE store.

Neither can cars, neither can trees, neither can buildings, neither can chiars, you get the point. The thing is, they are all PRODUCTS.

All of those things can be worn out. They are not in unlimited amount. Costs to ship and so much more. Video games on Steam does not do any of that.

Not only that is not true but also irrelevant.

How can this be irrelevant?

So, better?

If you want to kill the PC gaming market.

Only as long as the seller is willing to part with it for less than a dollar. And thats how economy works you know, large supply means drop in prices.
Besides, your given example - Half-life 2 is a 10 years old game. if they havent made thier profit on it now then maybe they shouldnt have released it in the first place (i know HL made profit, but my saying apples to all games).

But Half-Life 2 still goes on sale from time to time and it will sell copies. If the user market pushed it down to below a dollar Valve would be losing out on a lot of sales for it.

This can be applied per account instead. MMORPGs run on subscriptions or microtransactions anyway.

But if VAC bans are by account you'll have these cheaters buying VAC banned games on a new account and cheat again. It is amazing how you can not think of the problems with this.

But if there is a law that prohibit you to sell MMORPG every developer would build their game so that it acts like a MMORPG and then can't be sold off. Because you'd basically be selling the free account you signed up for.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Games also can't exactly be compared to other stuff.

Actually, they can and they are.
They're an "Information Good", just like all other forms of media, and they have their own economic rules and behaviors.

Which is why I am utterly baffled at the Berliner ruling here.
"Audiovisual components" suddenly render it moot from protection it grants to software? WHAT??? What makes the non-media software any less of software??

That's like saying an MP3 file of music isn't music because the MP3 isn't printed on a sheet.
There must be some very specific criteria for "software" to qualify under consumer protection laws in Europe (or at least Germany), because otherwise this ruling is asinine.

Question: has anybody ever lost less net money from reselling a game than purchasing it at sale value on steam?

Total revenue for the developer/publisher and Steam would plummet, without question, if licenses were resell-able and/or transferable. A Steam sale still gives the developers some revenue, however small, while 2nd hand transactions give nothing, no matter how large. (Steam however, could charge a transferal fee and benefit from this; as it does on everything sold in its user marketplace)
Given Steam's breadth of service, I suspect it would collapse under the cost of running it if this were enforced.

It's a Faustian ordeal.
Steam sales are amazing and promote growth that the consumer DOES benefit from, but it comes at the cost of control.

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

Over the last DECADE???
A decade ago, Steam was brand new; a tiny fraction of its current size. It really didn't start growing like a weed until around 2007.

 

[misg]

Agree or disagree with this decision, the simple fact is being able to trade games on steam would force them to raise prices for longer. Frankly I don't care about selling my games I bought. One thing people don't seem to consider when they rage against Steam here, is even if you could sell them, Valve would have no responsibility in keeping them updated for you if you did sell them and if you wanted to reactivate the game on steam they could charge you for it. is setup is the best system out there. Show me another way of buying games better then Steam, with fairly reasonable DRM, great service in keeping games up to date, and awesome sales. Valve has to work in the laws that are currently in place. I think Valve has done a great job in moving gaming forward for gamers. Without Valve we probably wouldn't have GoG.com or HumbleBundle.com. We would probably still be paying to redownload games from sites like Direct2drive and have to manually download updates.

 

[freaper]

For a company that claims to value the consumer, they sure seem to dislike the idea of us owning video games and doing things people normally do with things they own.

Y'know, like returning a game if it turns out to be shit, which is increasingly becoming the case with new releases on Steam, since the idea of quality control goes completely over their heads, or reselling or giving away a game once you've put enough time into it, which once you've played a game through several times is a pretty damn appealing option.

You don't rent movies directed by Adam Sandler just like you don't buy games that look like obvious turds.

OT: I thought Germany was pretty strict when it came down to consumer rights? At least they're doing something about this wonky classification of videogames.

Funny you should use a comparison to renting movies, because that's exactly what Valve (and the rest of the industry minus GoG, Humble Bundle, and a few other groups on the fringes) is trying to turn "sales" of video games into: a rental. And anything that reinforces the legality of EULAs is one step closer to that being as true in reality as it is on that BS pile of legalese.

The day I won't be able to access the games I bought online will suck. Luckily, that day hasn't come yet. I don't see Steam or Origin or whoever denying access to their customers without yearning for PR suicide, so I'm not really bothered atm.

Question: can you resell your game? If the answer is anything but yes, it's not a sale, it's a rental at best. For that matter, have you ever read those EULAs? They're basically 10 pages of "you are not buying this game, you are renting it." Except they use the legalistic term of "licensing." A rental is just a specific kind of license to use, which EULAs effectively fall under.

I'm a hoarder
I've got plenty of games IRL that I haven't touched in a decennial but that I will (most likely) never sell. I know that others expect other things from their preferred online stores, but as long it doesn't influence me negatively, I don't care. I'm pretty sure that that is also the opinion of the silent majority.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

For a company that claims to value the consumer, they sure seem to dislike the idea of us owning video games and doing things people normally do with things they own.

Y'know, like returning a game if it turns out to be shit, which is increasingly becoming the case with new releases on Steam, since the idea of quality control goes completely over their heads, or reselling or giving away a game once you've put enough time into it, which once you've played a game through several times is a pretty damn appealing option.

You don't rent movies directed by Adam Sandler just like you don't buy games that look like obvious turds.

OT: I thought Germany was pretty strict when it came down to consumer rights? At least they're doing something about this wonky classification of videogames.

Funny you should use a comparison to renting movies, because that's exactly what Valve (and the rest of the industry minus GoG, Humble Bundle, and a few other groups on the fringes) is trying to turn "sales" of video games into: a rental. And anything that reinforces the legality of EULAs is one step closer to that being as true in reality as it is on that BS pile of legalese.

The day I won't be able to access the games I bought online will suck. Luckily, that day hasn't come yet. I don't see Steam or Origin or whoever denying access to their customers without yearning for PR suicide, so I'm not really bothered atm.

Question: can you resell your game? If the answer is anything but yes, it's not a sale, it's a rental at best. For that matter, have you ever read those EULAs? They're basically 10 pages of "you are not buying this game, you are renting it." Except they use the legalistic term of "licensing." A rental is just a specific kind of license to use, which EULAs effectively fall under.

I'm a hoarder
I've got plenty of games IRL that I haven't touched in a decennial but that I will (most likely) never sell. I know that others expect other things from their preferred online stores, but as long it doesn't influence me negatively, I don't care. I'm pretty sure that that is also the opinion of the silent majority.

I don't sell my games either (buy used, yes. Reserve the right to return a non-functioning product? Absolutely.), but civil rights are a zero sum game, and this is an attack on them. It's wrong, and if the silent majority are apathetic, that's nothing new. But they're the first ones to complain when something they actually care about gets taken, even if the first step was the thing they called the rest of us hysterical for saying was wrong, and the current step is a direct result of that one.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Damn it Germany. You're meant to be cool.

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

Please explain. Last I checked it is still a service for buying games that has massive sales occasionally. Any 'loss of quality' is only addition of bad content, but that doesn't take away from the core service.

 

[Magmarock]

Damn it Germany. You're meant to be cool.

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

Please explain. Last I checked it is still a service for buying games that has massive sales occasionally. Any 'loss of quality' is only addition of bad content, but that doesn't take away from the core service.

Well Steam kind of suck for anyone living outside the US and Canada. On top of that, while I'm not expecting every game to be perfect and sure you'll always end up with some stinkers. Steam just seems to have lost all sense of quality control.

Some games they sell don't even work because they haven't been patched which in my opinion should be illegal to sell without some sort of refund policy in place.

finally there's DRM now I have a great internet connection, but it still bothers me that Steam has more control over my games then I do.

 

[Vigormortis]

Okay, no, you cannot use triumph for the friggin' bad guys. This is not a triumph, anymore than Hitler's invasion of Poland was a triumph. It's a gorram travesty.

From zero to Godwin in under 1.5 pages. Impressive.

If there's one thing the Escapist community does well it's hyperbole.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On a side note, even though I've had to say it way too many fucking times, I'm going to repeat it again:

When you buy a game from Steam (or most DDs), you own the game. All the EULAs and TOSs in the world can't change the fact that you have your own copy of the games files stored locally. EA, Valve, CD Projekt, and the rest can't break into your home, into your computer, and take those file back.

Now, if you're so incredibly stupid, ignorant, and irresponsible as to not bother downloading, storing, and creating backups of any and all games you buy from DD services the moment you make your purchase, then...well...

Then you deserve to have those games taken away, quite frankly.

 

[Strazdas]

Question: can you resell your game? If the answer is anything but yes, it's not a sale, it's a rental at best. For that matter, have you ever read those EULAs? They're basically 10 pages of "you are not buying this game, you are renting it." Except they use the legalistic term of "licensing." A rental is just a specific kind of license to use, which EULAs effectively fall under.

Yes, under current laws i can resell the game and steam is technically holding my game hostage agaisnt the law.
EULAs are not legal documents. They are void in any legal dispute because they were not actually signed (pressing i agree doesnt count as signing in legal matters), and if they would be, you must sign it BEFORE the purchase to it have any legal meaning.

Vast majority of the sales happen because people think it's a good price for the game but only end up buying something they don't like. This is far to common on Steam and there are a lot of people who just haven't touched most of their games.

People buying things they dont like or need? And we should all suffer because there steam profits from idiots?

The difference with selling other stuff is that they wear and tear. PC games do not. You can't keep reselling a car as it'll break down, it'll get worse over time and it'll become a risk to drive. A PC game will be the same after the last patch no matter how long it's passed.

This is meaningless when talking about any product that isnt physical. Like, you know, movie distribution rights, that are being resold on regular basis. and it will become more and more irrelevant as 3D printers get popular.
And its not even true, have you ntoiced all those people complaining about lack of backward compatibility?

Gigantic playlist is a problem for a lot of people. I read about users whining like little babies about a random free weekend game show up in their play list. If they can trim off the stuff they do not like they will do that.
They will also sell them for lower than what the store offer.

just checked, free weekend stuff does not appeal on the list, sounds like a bug to me, fair for complaining.
like i siad, categories fix this problem, and if people really dont want thier games anymore they should just get rid of them (as in sell them, donate them, what have you). Oh, wait, they cant.

Indie games are specially in for a whole lot of trouble. Humble Bundle will practically kill the income of any Indie developer that joins it because they buy the game for a penny and then sell them for half the current price on Steam store.

Because people buying it on humblebundle certainly does not undercut steam price? for indie games visibility is priority number one, and that would only increase visibility.

But this is just to show you how much their stores where able to take away from game developers. Now think about Steam with 6-7 million active users doing it in ONE store.

they are not "taking away" from developers. they are taking away from users by underpaying them and then selling the used games at new game price. your point seems to argue that it somehow destroys developers, except that is not true in every other product we create.

All of those things can be worn out. They are not in unlimited amount. Costs to ship and so much more. Video games on Steam does not do any of that.

yes they do. Compatibility issues with new hardware and OS can easily account for degradation (there are games that literally refuse to run on modern hardware, for example Scarface). There are also shipping costs, the costs of holding a server for the transfer. Yes, they are lower, and that is GOOD, because that means the user spends less to trade in the market. I can perfectly understand steam taking a 10% cut of every resale for keeping the marketplace up or something like that. This has worked in the past.

If you want to kill the PC gaming market.

you are yet to prove that it would do so. and if PC market providing same legal rights to consumers as every other market would kill it, its not a healthy market now is it.

But Half-Life 2 still goes on sale from time to time and it will sell copies. If the user market pushed it down to below a dollar Valve would be losing out on a lot of sales for it.

Im sure Half-ife 2 has turned a profit now. I dont see a problem with this.

But if VAC bans are by account you'll have these cheaters buying VAC banned games on a new account and cheat again. It is amazing how you can not think of the problems with this.

And they will get VAC banned again.
and how is that different from, say, making new account and buying that game now?

But if there is a law that prohibit you to sell MMORPG every developer would build their game so that it acts like a MMORPG and then can't be sold off. Because you'd basically be selling the free account you signed up for.

nothing prevents me to sell a MMORPG. i can take a disc from WOW and sell it to somone, and he would have WOW.
besides, only 1 MMO managed to get away with pay for the disc and pay for subscription and didnt recieve a massive "why are you robbing us" backlash so far and thats WOW. many others tried and failed. ESO is also trying but its too early to tell yet.

Agree or disagree with this decision, the simple fact is being able to trade games on steam would force them to raise prices for longer.

quite the opposite. That would force them to lower the price to compete with resellers.

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

This is simply false. I have been using steam since its "Beta" days in 2003/2004 (granted with breaks because at one point i just told it to fuck off and deleted it and actually lost that account too). and oh boy how much better it is than it was a decade ago, you wouldnt believe in the tales i can tel you.
And there will be no "next crash".

When you buy a game from Steam (or most DDs), you own the game. All the EULAs and TOSs in the world can't change the fact that you have your own copy of the games files stored locally. EA, Valve, CD Projekt, and the rest can't break into your home, into your computer, and take those file back.

Now, if you're so incredibly stupid, ignorant, and irresponsible as to not bother downloading, storing, and creating backups of any and all games you buy from DD services the moment you make your purchase, then...well...

Then you deserve to have those games taken away, quite frankly.

We deserve to have games taken away by not creating our own "pirated" copies of games that in most countries is still actually illegal? (i know some countries got laws and even special taxes to compensate the authors that enable one to make a backup copy, but in most it is still illegal to copy it to the point of if you scratch the CD too bad buy another one).
Yes, we are incredibly stupid that we do not break the law to make an illegal copy of a game that we own anyway and dont only because illegal action from Valve.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Question: can you resell your game? If the answer is anything but yes, it's not a sale, it's a rental at best. For that matter, have you ever read those EULAs? They're basically 10 pages of "you are not buying this game, you are renting it." Except they use the legalistic term of "licensing." A rental is just a specific kind of license to use, which EULAs effectively fall under.

Yes, under current laws i can resell the game and steam is technically holding my game hostage agaisnt the law.
EULAs are not legal documents. They are void in any legal dispute because they were not actually signed (pressing i agree doesnt count as signing in legal matters), and if they would be, you must sign it BEFORE the purchase to it have any legal meaning.

Vast majority of the sales happen because people think it's a good price for the game but only end up buying something they don't like. This is far to common on Steam and there are a lot of people who just haven't touched most of their games.

People buying things they dont like or need? And we should all suffer because there steam profits from idiots?

The difference with selling other stuff is that they wear and tear. PC games do not. You can't keep reselling a car as it'll break down, it'll get worse over time and it'll become a risk to drive. A PC game will be the same after the last patch no matter how long it's passed.

This is meaningless when talking about any product that isnt physical. Like, you know, movie distribution rights, that are being resold on regular basis. and it will become more and more irrelevant as 3D printers get popular.
And its not even true, have you ntoiced all those people complaining about lack of backward compatibility?

Gigantic playlist is a problem for a lot of people. I read about users whining like little babies about a random free weekend game show up in their play list. If they can trim off the stuff they do not like they will do that.
They will also sell them for lower than what the store offer.

just checked, free weekend stuff does not appeal on the list, sounds like a bug to me, fair for complaining.
like i siad, categories fix this problem, and if people really dont want thier games anymore they should just get rid of them (as in sell them, donate them, what have you). Oh, wait, they cant.

Indie games are specially in for a whole lot of trouble. Humble Bundle will practically kill the income of any Indie developer that joins it because they buy the game for a penny and then sell them for half the current price on Steam store.

Because people buying it on humblebundle certainly does not undercut steam price? for indie games visibility is priority number one, and that would only increase visibility.

But this is just to show you how much their stores where able to take away from game developers. Now think about Steam with 6-7 million active users doing it in ONE store.

they are not "taking away" from developers. they are taking away from users by underpaying them and then selling the used games at new game price. your point seems to argue that it somehow destroys developers, except that is not true in every other product we create.

All of those things can be worn out. They are not in unlimited amount. Costs to ship and so much more. Video games on Steam does not do any of that.

yes they do. Compatibility issues with new hardware and OS can easily account for degradation (there are games that literally refuse to run on modern hardware, for example Scarface). There are also shipping costs, the costs of holding a server for the transfer. Yes, they are lower, and that is GOOD, because that means the user spends less to trade in the market. I can perfectly understand steam taking a 10% cut of every resale for keeping the marketplace up or something like that. This has worked in the past.

If you want to kill the PC gaming market.

you are yet to prove that it would do so. and if PC market providing same legal rights to consumers as every other market would kill it, its not a healthy market now is it.

But Half-Life 2 still goes on sale from time to time and it will sell copies. If the user market pushed it down to below a dollar Valve would be losing out on a lot of sales for it.

Im sure Half-ife 2 has turned a profit now. I dont see a problem with this.

But if VAC bans are by account you'll have these cheaters buying VAC banned games on a new account and cheat again. It is amazing how you can not think of the problems with this.

And they will get VAC banned again.
and how is that different from, say, making new account and buying that game now?

But if there is a law that prohibit you to sell MMORPG every developer would build their game so that it acts like a MMORPG and then can't be sold off. Because you'd basically be selling the free account you signed up for.

nothing prevents me to sell a MMORPG. i can take a disc from WOW and sell it to somone, and he would have WOW.
besides, only 1 MMO managed to get away with pay for the disc and pay for subscription and didnt recieve a massive "why are you robbing us" backlash so far and thats WOW. many others tried and failed. ESO is also trying but its too early to tell yet.

Agree or disagree with this decision, the simple fact is being able to trade games on steam would force them to raise prices for longer.

quite the opposite. That would force them to lower the price to compete with resellers.

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

This is simply false. I have been using steam since its "Beta" days in 2003/2004 (granted with breaks because at one point i just told it to fuck off and deleted it and actually lost that account too). and oh boy how much better it is than it was a decade ago, you wouldnt believe in the tales i can tel you.
And there will be no "next crash".

When you buy a game from Steam (or most DDs), you own the game. All the EULAs and TOSs in the world can't change the fact that you have your own copy of the games files stored locally. EA, Valve, CD Projekt, and the rest can't break into your home, into your computer, and take those file back.

Now, if you're so incredibly stupid, ignorant, and irresponsible as to not bother downloading, storing, and creating backups of any and all games you buy from DD services the moment you make your purchase, then...well...

Then you deserve to have those games taken away, quite frankly.

We deserve to have games taken away by not creating our own "pirated" copies of games that in most countries is still actually illegal? (i know some countries got laws and even special taxes to compensate the authors that enable one to make a backup copy, but in most it is still illegal to copy it to the point of if you scratch the CD too bad buy another one).
Yes, we are incredibly stupid that we do not break the law to make an illegal copy of a game that we own anyway and dont only because illegal action from Valve.

In a sane country with sane laws you'd be right. Unfortunately Germany, up to now one of the most sane of all when it comes to that area of the law, just disagreed with you.

 

[Vigormortis]

We deserve to have games taken away by not creating our own "pirated" copies of games that in most countries is still actually illegal? (i know some countries got laws and even special taxes to compensate the authors that enable one to make a backup copy, but in most it is still illegal to copy it to the point of if you scratch the CD too bad buy another one).
Yes, we are incredibly stupid that we do not break the law to make an illegal copy of a game that we own anyway and dont only because illegal action from Valve.

Creating backups is NOT illegal. In fact, many of the DD clients in question; notably Steam; have utilities built into the client that give the users everything they need to make backups.

If you can point me to legitimate laws or legislation that actually, specifically prohibits the creation of backups, then I will stand corrected.

Otherwise, I stand by my earlier post.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

We deserve to have games taken away by not creating our own "pirated" copies of games that in most countries is still actually illegal? (i know some countries got laws and even special taxes to compensate the authors that enable one to make a backup copy, but in most it is still illegal to copy it to the point of if you scratch the CD too bad buy another one).
Yes, we are incredibly stupid that we do not break the law to make an illegal copy of a game that we own anyway and dont only because illegal action from Valve.

Creating backups is NOT illegal. In fact, many of the DD clients in question; notably Steam; have utilities built into the client that give the users everything they need to make backups.

If you can point me to legitimate laws or legislation that actually, specifically prohibits the creation of backups, then I will stand corrected.

Otherwise, I stand by my earlier post.

Well, there's the DMCA. It only allows backups if you don't have to circumvent any form of DRM to make them, because Hollywood paid some good bribes that year -- er, I mean made some campaign donations.

 

[Magmarock]

This is just getting too much Steam's quality has declined drastically over the last decade and will probably contribute heavily to the next crash.

This is simply false. I have been using steam since its "Beta" days in 2003/2004 (granted with breaks because at one point i just told it to fuck off and deleted it and actually lost that account too). and oh boy how much better it is than it was a decade ago, you wouldnt believe in the tales i can tel you.
And there will be no "next crash".

Okay you got me at the Steam being better now then then, but it's gotten a lot worse since I started using it. Steam used to sell games at $50 now it's $80 and above.

Along with the influx of unfinished games and what will be an influx of Steam machines, I am more convinced then ever the next major crash will happen before 2014 is over. It won't kill the industry no, but it will result in job losses and studio closes.

 

[Signa]

But if VAC bans are by account you'll have these cheaters buying VAC banned games on a new account and cheat again. It is amazing how you can not think of the problems with this.

And they will get VAC banned again.
and how is that different from, say, making new account and buying that game now?

Because right now, the banned player will still have to buy a new copy. If used games were allowed, then he could pay himself to get unbanned. There would be literally no down side to getting banned, because you could just keep moving your game to the next account. There might be a chance of Valve taking a cut of the sales if resales were set up, but 15% of the cost of the game is FAR better than 100% of the cost. Hell, he could sell it for $.01 and Valve wouldn't be able to take a percentage of the sale, because it's too small of a number.

Look, I'm all for consumer rights too, but the other guy was right, you're not thinking this through. There's too many problems with allowing resales in a digital world. I hope that one day someone will figure out a way to allow it, but that time isn't now with the current laws, and Valve's current marketplace system isn't the place for it.