Nana we will only do this if a few people say yes. I realise it's short notice and a crappy day. But don't worry, I will be back in a couple months and we can do it right
Also thanks for pandemic impressions, sounds great will buy!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusGAF 7 - We hang out IRL now and be social and shit. (Also, Adrian's Revenge)
- Thread starter HolyCheck
- Start date
- Status
Nana we will only do this if a few people say yes. I realise it's short notice and a crappy day. But don't worry, I will be back in a couple months and we can do it right
Also thanks for pandemic impressions, sounds great will buy!
reptilescorpio
Member
I pay a tiny amount of money for hours and hours of entertainment that might not be accessible at some possible point in the possible future compared to paying a shitload more for physical copies of games that will give me around the same amount of entertainment hours that will hopefully still function in a few years time if I spend time making sure it remains in good condition and whatever tool that is used to get the entertainment to run is still in functional condition after spending time making sure it remains in said condition.
Considering how fucking flimsy this generation of hardware has been I don't mind going digital if the value/cost ratio is in my favour, especially on PC where if I do get locked out I can be damn sure that tens of thousands of other people have uploaded a copy of the game I paid money to play.
I would prefer companies to ignore trying to squelch the second hand market and look to how Valve (heh) have turned games into a service where you WANT to hold onto your copy because you are fairly certain that Valve will ADD some value to that game for free. Hard for EA to see why they should keep the Madden 2011 servers up though when they want people to spend another %60 on Madden 2012! Gotta convince them to give up their 'outdated' copy. The problem for consumers in an industry where their supplier of choice tend to be public companies that have to maximise profits to avoid being sued by their shareholders for being too consumer friendly.
Can't agree enough, love the smell and feel of a good book but now I have like 100 awesome books stored in my Kindle for if I get the itch to read a certain section of a book or if we suddenly have to go for an hour long drive somewhere and I feel like zoning out.
Also my future self will thank me for not wrecking my wrists from holding massive books!
That is what email is for my friend!
The people with the guns? Didn't you play Fallout! All those books will be burnt to cook our radroach dinners and then TELL stories around the fire!
Something being 'legal' does not make it morally right. A criminal can get away with a plea bargain for serious crimes, and end up with a lesser charge than the victim if they name names and are found in contempt of court, for example.
Whether something is enforceable or not in terms of licensing is another matter. The terms a rights holder would like to enforce at times are often in direct conflict with fair use of a product. That is neither fair nor right, regardless of the law.
I'm amused/concerned at the implication that "moving on" is conflated with accepting a strict limitation that goes beyond what is reasonable for a company to enforce. If someone wants to revoke a license, they can now do so remotely without any justification, or without any recourse to the customer now that class action lawsuits are allegedly banned.
It's exactly the same as the umpire making up the rules to suit himself, then joining in the game and penalising anyone else who plays because why the fuck not.
Yes, we've been over these semantics before and I think we agreed last time that "this disc and everything on it is mine, but I can't copy and distribute it".
I'll just leave it at this: if a rights holder ever decides that I can no longer have the "license" I apparently paid for, then they must refund me the original launch price I paid (not the new value).
If they refuse, then the only recourse I have is obvious.
Publishers need to stop treating customers like endless sacks of money and actually respect their custom. If they ever go down the path of stealing what they have been paid for (as EA and Zynga have already done, for instance), then good luck getting repeat custom.
I hope those companies fail, and especially their legal departments.
What are the examples you're thinking of here? I'm drawing a blank.
reptilescorpio
Member
Shutting down games with a weeks notice so all the paid content people lashed out on ends up being some shitty "credit" towards something in another Freemium game.
Also, I really dont like the general push to control how people enjoy their entertainment.
If I want to read a book or listen to music, I should be able to do so anywhere. If I want to lend a game or cd to a friend, I should be able to. If I want to see a film then I should be able to find the original version and not some bastardised remake only that changes key events and adds in retrospective rubbish.
Publishers do not realise that all art, music, culture etc is all, sooner or later, part of the public domain. Yes, yes - that doesn't confer the right to make millions of copies yourself. It does imply however that should the rights holder refuse to enable people to obtain legal copies and share them with friends without jumping through unreasonable hoops - then they have no real authority stopping people from seeking alternatives.
Sooner or later, actual important media is going to be lost not because of tragedies of war, sackings of libraries or museums, and the ravages of time - but simply because of the stubbornness of rights holders to let people enjoy various works of art.
It's culture (however vapid) held to ransom by corporate parasites.
If I want to read a book or listen to music, I should be able to do so anywhere. If I want to lend a game or cd to a friend, I should be able to. If I want to see a film then I should be able to find the original version and not some bastardised remake only that changes key events and adds in retrospective rubbish.
Publishers do not realise that all art, music, culture etc is all, sooner or later, part of the public domain. Yes, yes - that doesn't confer the right to make millions of copies yourself. It does imply however that should the rights holder refuse to enable people to obtain legal copies and share them with friends without jumping through unreasonable hoops - then they have no real authority stopping people from seeking alternatives.
Sooner or later, actual important media is going to be lost not because of tragedies of war, sackings of libraries or museums, and the ravages of time - but simply because of the stubbornness of rights holders to let people enjoy various works of art.
It's culture (however vapid) held to ransom by corporate parasites.
That's not an example!
EA stole people's copies of games like Dragon Age 2 (arguably a public service) because people complained about its quality on EA forums and got banned by heavy handed moderators/"community managers". Thus terminating their Origin account and removing their ability to legally play the game. And others on their account.
Zynga did what reptile outlined. Edit: I think they also did a bit more, but theyre fuckwits anyway so the burden of evidence is much lower for zynga. They are abunch of plagiarists anyway, so I would argue they have zero rights to any of the money theyve been making at all.
reptilescorpio
Member
What example were you looking for? Consumer paid money to Zynga for in-game tent. Zynga removes access to said tent in exchange for MAYBE a pillow in another unrelated game, if they are feeling nice. Consumer no longer has tent that they liked the colour of.
Fixed
Fixed
I don't think that's exactly what happened, but yeah, forum account bannings locking you out of your games is pretty bad.
What was the game though?
codswallop
Member
But EA are benevolent because they're giving us The Old Republic for free! Right?
It doesn't?
reptilescorpio
Member
Didn't one guy get his Origin account permabanned because someone else replied to his post with a bunch of expletives? I think I read that on RPS.
EDIT: NOT permaban, 3 day ban. Which became a permaban when he questioned them over it in the live chat support.
Finding the Zynga thing now, there was a GAF thread on it.
EDIT: Zynga games last year, 4 games closed down with 4 weeks notice. Players told that what real world money they spent in last 90 days will be credited if they start playing another Zynga game (not sure of the list of acceptable games) plus 10%, so if they spent $30 on tents they now have $33 to spend on corn and maize. Any money spent before that 90 day mark is not credited.
Better than nothing at all but if you liked Warstorm but not any other Zynga game you are out of luck.
It happened with multiple games IIRC. Memory escapes me, however the account of it is pretty accurate. Either way, no recourse for the customer and theyre left with coasters.
As for zynga, who knows what game. It could have been any of their stupid ville games.
edit:
No, but it needs spelling out. Incidentally there was a case years ago where some linux code was found in windows xp/98. Point being, use of that code under copyleft/open source agreement which states clearly that the code could be legally used anywhere (with appropriate credit given), so long as the same licensing applied to the whole product the code was used for. ie that edition of windows should have been open source according to microsoft accepting the terms of use by including the code.
Funny how consumers are expected to adhere to license requirements, yet corporations are not.
This was another case, good memory.
Marshmellow
Member
Danoss, how did you go with your experience of dota 2 last night?
Did it improve? were those guides/links helpful?
Did it improve? were those guides/links helpful?
My favourite scumbag moment at the hands of EA:
No words.
The guides you, Evlcookie and Rahk posted were indeed very helpful, and I appreciate the effort. I don't wish to start another discussion on how I, or my interpretations or feelings towards the game are wrong, but I'll sum it up by saying that I dislike the game greatly.
No words.
The guides you, Evlcookie and Rahk posted were indeed very helpful, and I appreciate the effort. I don't wish to start another discussion on how I, or my interpretations or feelings towards the game are wrong, but I'll sum it up by saying that I dislike the game greatly.
I can think of two words:
Challenge Everything
This is one of dozens of reasons why I will never ever ever buy an EA game.
edit: how did that get there I am not good with cats
Whoops
I dunno. I think class action lawsuits serve a good purpose and shouldnt be banned.
How else will serious fraud like the RROD debacle, OtherOS removal and fifa/xbl hackings get resolved in a case where it's only ever going to be (multiple cases of) one person versus Sony/Microsoft/EA legal teams?
I dunno. I think class action lawsuits serve a good purpose and shouldnt be banned.
How else will serious fraud like the RROD debacle, OtherOS removal and fifa/xbl hackings get resolved in a case where it's only ever going to be (multiple cases of) one person versus Sony/Microsoft/EA legal teams?
Oh yeah I totally agree in that regard, MS should have gotten reamed for RROD. But things like "the mass effect 3 ending sucked" really just cheapens the whole thing.
Pretty sure that's fixed now: http://www.cinemablend.com/games/EA...u-Can-Now-Access-Your-Games-Banned-41417.html
Planet_JASE
Member
I agree with everything you said in the above paragraph apart from the last sentence. I'm not sure if you put it there for a laugh or if you mean it but you don't actually have a right to decide what form of a movie or book or play an artist or company releases or needs to keep in print. In fact, that point is the antithesis of your whole argument. What makes you feel you have the right to tell an artist which form of his art you prefer and needs to make available for you but is unable to dictate terms to you?
According to the higlighted quote there:
My only Origin game is BF3, which I don't play because I don't like it. But, say I played it a lot and was banned, well, tough shit for me.
codswallop
Member
First someone confuses me and Holy, and now me and Danoss?
... does this mean Holy and Danoss are the same person? I've never seen them in the same room together.
... does this mean Holy and Danoss are the same person? I've never seen them in the same room together.
Melbgaf Meetup Maybe
Okay so instead of Monday whenever now we are looking at Friday arvo, as coincidentally cods and I are both going to game masters at acmi. Also maybe beer and food.
Maybe Rezbit
Maybe cods
Maybe banana
Any interest in this last minute once in a lifetime event?
Okay so instead of Monday whenever now we are looking at Friday arvo, as coincidentally cods and I are both going to game masters at acmi. Also maybe beer and food.
Maybe Rezbit
Maybe cods
Maybe banana
Any interest in this last minute once in a lifetime event?
That is for the courts though, you can't pre legislate what is frivolous.
When a particular work of art transcends the original vision and becomes a culturally significant work, it should remain available to all who want. We all know the obvious example I'm referring to.
But just to make a conceited example, had Da Vinci come back to life now, would he be allowed to retouch La Gioconda?
A serious, simplified question here ...
If everyone agreed not to pirate works of art, what possible purpose could DRM, agressive IP protection and distribution restriction (be it of products in certain regions, or older editions of a work) serve?
To me, the only reason such practices exist is to fix prices and limit consumer choice and accessibility. Everything is done in the name of preventing piracy, but it sure as shit doesn't stop it.
If everyone agreed not to pirate works of art, what possible purpose could DRM, agressive IP protection and distribution restriction (be it of products in certain regions, or older editions of a work) serve?
To me, the only reason such practices exist is to fix prices and limit consumer choice and accessibility. Everything is done in the name of preventing piracy, but it sure as shit doesn't stop it.
I was watching a doco on Margaret Olley the other day and she used to do this all the time. Someone tried to make the argument that it was no longer hers to alter, but she did anyway.
But did she own those works any more or had someone purchased them?
None. You are right. Unfortunately we will never be able to test that.
Here's a question. Should people be paid more than once for the same work?
codswallop
Member
Didn't he paint over stuff all the time?
I think they can be IF they have to do extra work to make it available on other devices, or if more work goes into a directors cut.
I don't think his works had entered into a global or even trans-national consciousness in his own lifetime.
It wasn't clear.
^^^^^^ Jurassic park can't come quick enough!!!
I don't think its to prevent piracy altogether..... just to limit illegal copying to the fringes.
only motivated and knowledgeable people take the effort to bypass protections.
I don't think its to prevent piracy altogether..... just to limit illegal copying to the fringes.
only motivated and knowledgeable people take the effort to bypass protections.
They just need to add Aussie Rules, Cricket and Rugby to the Olympics!
Based on recent performances, we wouldn't win gold in any of those.
Yeah, we got destroyed by the English in the last Aussie Rules tournament.
codswallop
Member
Well at least we'll get a medal in one of those since there will be less than three countries that enter.
We lost the last International Rules series 2-0!
International Rules =! Aussie Rules.
How is the Australian Aussie Rules team's form looking?
codswallop
Member
The only way we have a chance at winning is when we make up the rules as we go along.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked