Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darkening Kaos]

     It's also called an EULA.

[BFEL]

It's also called a EULA. hilarious farce meant to remove all possibility of reprisal for blatant refusal to practice anything resembling good business that any court with half a shred of decency will throw out instantly

FTFY.

[Neonivek]

     It's also called an EULA.

Ahh the EULA...

Completely non-legal in this country for multiple reasons. It literally cannot be enforced or attempted to enforce because this country actually has contract law that attempts to protect the consumer.

But my major issue with the EULA, excluding the standard EULA evil, is the fact that... in a JUST world... they make you sign the EULA in advance or display the EULA on the box. But even then it could STILL be fine IF you could return the game if you didn't agree with the contract.

It is the equivalent of buying a car and then finding out you can't drive it until you sign another secret contract they put in the glove box and not being able to return it because like heck they are going to let you take back your money.

[Darkening Kaos]

    Mine was quicker and less redundant.....

    Ninja edit: Just by installing the software, or even opening the packaging, it is understood that you have accepted the conditions of any EULA enclosed within.  It is nasty and common.

[BFEL]

     It's also called an EULA.

Ahh the EULA...

Completely non-legal in this country for multiple reasons. It literally cannot be enforced or attempted to enforce because this country actually has contract law that attempts to protect the consumer.

Wish my country was as sane as yours.

[Rez]

snip

'

qed on EULA's.

[etgfrog]

I think its been an attempt to bypass the patent that console makers(in the US) have to pay for putting a video game on a tv. Instead of allowing games on their consoles, they only allow services to be put onto there, which explains the whole getting rid of backwards compatibility. Other possibilities include trying to curb piracy, adding social media into the game to try to expand the customers that way, or even the possibility of not wanting to deal with retail stores.

[jhxmt]

...or even the possibility of not wanting to deal with retail stores.

Not wishing to deal with retail stores (I assume you mean brick-and-mortar stores, here) doesn't have a solid link to games-as-service, though.  It's entirely possible to sell games as a product via online-only distribution, without entering the murky depths of games-as-services.  See GOG for one example.  Humble Store for another.

I tend to agree with previous posters - I see this as a low-minded and transparent attempt to move to a locked-in model, cutting off both the 'drain' of second-hand sales as well as the scourge of piracy.  I don't think the former is something that deserves to be cut off, and I don't think the latter will see this as anything more than a minor speed bump (see: SimCity 5 for a particularly laughable example).

Ultimately, if you're selling me the game as a service then I expect the same rights that I would have for any other service (e.g. right to sue for misrepresentation), and I expect you to have the same rights that you would have (e.g. increased liability, for a start).  I'd also expect pricing to react appropriately (e.g. I am not paying £50 for a 'service' that may or may not last me several months of entertainment value, whereas I might pay that for a product that I would own).

An example of the 'increased liability' expectation: if you sell me a game as a service (e.g. via Steam), and I attempt to log into that game and play it but am unable to do so because your infrastructure cannot handle the demands of many people logging in at once (e.g. SimCity again), then you have failed to deliver the service and I should be fully entitled to a refund, without any debate over the matter.  Similarly, if you discontinue e.g. multiplayer servers for a 'service' that I have paid for, then I should be entitled to a refund (presuming you did not state at my time of purchase the date that you would discontinue that part of the service).

"We might close these servers down at any point in the future" doesn't count.  By that logic, anybody pirating your 'service' might choose to pay for it at any point in the future, too.    (Not condoning that logic, but if the cap fits...)

[BFEL]

Similarly, if you discontinue e.g. multiplayer servers for a 'service' that I have paid for, then I should be entitled to a refund (presuming you did not state at my time of purchase the date that you would discontinue that part of the service).

Well, as much as I hate this model and want to fire homing castration missiles at the people in charge of it, I do have to recognize that we probably shouldn't expect something that requires constant upkeep like a server to remain forever without interruption. Though I certainly think companies should have to very plainly give an "end date" for their servers as you posited, whether at purchase, or with a...lets say one year grace period so that people will know "If I buy this game now, I won't have it in a year" and ESPECIALLY for things like subscription based MMOs where a person could theoretically be duped into buying a subscription or even a more expensive lifetime membership literally the day before the game goes dark forever.

[jhxmt]

I do have to recognize that we probably shouldn't expect something that requires constant upkeep like a server to remain forever without interruption.

Oh, absolutely.  I'd be perfectly happy with a pro-rata refund (or discount at time of purchase) to represent the fact that, unlike a product, part of the service I'm being sold will be time-limited. 

Edit: also, stealing "homing castration missiles" for future use.  Excellent phrase.

[BFEL]

I love it when EULAs say things like 'If a part of this EULA is voided, the rest is still valid', despite the fact that's not how it works.

There are some EULAs that literally claim dominion over the universe.
Apparently they expect the Earth to be conquered by locusts and then the aliens see their crazy document and just accept that the game is absolutely off limits for all bug-people.

[Neonivek]

I love it when EULAs say things like 'If a part of this EULA is voided, the rest is still valid', despite the fact that's not how it works.

Please my favorite part is that they hold the ability to change any and all parts of the contract without telling you and that your signature is still valid.

Could you just imagine that being in any other contract and it being valid... EVER?

[Shooer]

Please my favorite part is that they hold the ability to change any and all parts of the contract without telling you and that your signature is still valid.

Could you just imagine that being in any other contract and it being valid... EVER?

That's actually... quite common.

[Sharp]

Unfortunately it's not illegal to make these contracts even though they can be pretty ridiculous, however enforcement of contract can be challenged so it's not actually like South Park's Human Cent-iPad, if there is something silly in a EULA and the company tries to enforce it then that can be taken to court.

[nenjin]

Please my favorite part is that they hold the ability to change any and all parts of the contract without telling you and that your signature is still valid.

Could you just imagine that being in any other contract and it being valid... EVER?

That's actually... quite common.

Yes, it's especially common when there is zero parity between consumer and producer.

Put another way. My company regularly negotiates contracts worth between several hundred thousand dollars and a million every year.

If we put a stipulation like that into our contract, we'd have zero business. Zero. All of the businesses we negotiate with would tell us to go jump in the Lake Of Fire.

The only reason customers get put through this is because they have no advocate on their behalf other than their wallet. And since there isn't any competition for SPECIFIC GAME X, gamers are treated like a captive audience with regards to any contract they're presented.