Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 8:58 pm Post subject: Gaming and Consumer Rights
So, I have noticed a curious thing...
When people talk about morality in gaming, they usually talking about piracy and about gamer's obligation to be honest and buy games. Gaming magazines often lead moral crusades against the piracy.
This created a situation where developers are perceived as poor victims of evil pirates that need support and understanding of gamers.
On the other hand I have yet to see gaming journalists a moral crusade for customer rights, mainly for the right to a working, finished product.
Somehow it became acceptable to release faulty, bugged games. Sometimes games are still bugged/unfinished after a final path.
I see no justification for this state of things. If faulty product are sold, they should be marked as faulty products and their prices should be dropped accordingly. But, have anyone ever such thing happening in the gaming world?
After all, wouldn't writing that game faulty/unfinished would be a bad advertisement. Not only that, it would be admitting to something shameful. And most of game publishers/developers should be ashamed of what they are doing.
Isn't it ironic that the industry whose existence relies solely on honesty of its customers doesn't know the concept of customer rights or producers responsibility?
People for the Ethical Treatment of Software (PETS) announced today
that seven more software companies have been added to the group's
"watch list" of companies that regularly practice software testing.
"There is no need for software to be mistreated in this way so that
companies like these can market new products," said Ken Granola,
spokesperson for PETS. "Alternative methods of testing these products
are available."
According to PETS, these companies force software to undergo lengthy
and arduous tests, often without rest for hours or days at a time.
Employees are assigned to "break" the software by any means necessary,
and inside sources report that they often joke about "torturing" the
software.
"It's no joke," said Granola. "Innocent programs, from the day they
are compiled, are cooped up in tiny rooms and 'crashed' for hours on
end. They spend their whole lives on dirty, ill-maintained computers,
and are unceremoniously deleted when they're not needed anymore."
Granola said the software is kept in unsanitary conditions and is
infested with bugs.
"We know alternatives to this horror exist," he said, citing industry
giant Microsoft Corp. as a company that has become extremely
successful without resorting to any software testing. (Kirk Miller)
Lately it seems that companies release games, but they're really a pre-release until they can work out a patch... if they ever do. It seems to have become the norm. The consumer is the tester.
But there are exceptions to this rule: Blizzard seems to be the type of company that strives to release a final, final product. Of course they still release patches (every computer is different, so how could anyone not), but they seem to have a good model to go on.
Lately it seems that companies release games, but they're really a pre-release until they can work out a patch... if they ever do. It seems to have become the norm. The consumer is the tester.
IMO the main problem is that gamers have let it to become a norm. Somehow there's an ideology how games are great fun and shouldn't be treated by gamers like a luxurious good that they are and how gamers shouldn't demand quality. Developers can always say how poor they are or how "whining" about their unfinished games is bad and how we should forgive them anything. Just like we were their friends.
But we aren't friends. They are businessmen and we are customers.
Can you imagine a situation when a game costs for example - 40$ and a gamer comes and starts telling how poor he is, etc. and the developer sells him that game for 15$?
Because that's what gamers do for developers now.
That's because "fun" is the most important thing in the world...
Maybe there should be a law, a consumer law that protects the consumer from buy the crappy and overpriced games?
The software industry has all types of copy protection etc, and even use the law to hunt the pirates. Why is this only ONE way? Why not have protection for consumers?
A good idea would be that all games would come with a trial period of say one month, and if one like the game, one pay the money and get the license number that unlock the expire date for eternity. Some serious company use this already, and they obviously must sell quality software or non would buy the software after trial period. Only the company’s with dubious product would see no revenue, and that is what they deserve.
Can you imagine a situation when a game costs for example - 40$ and a gamer comes and starts telling how poor he is, etc. and the developer sells him that game for 15$?
You get your games for no charge I seem to recall.
Stalky
I like what you're saying.
My kids spend an absolute fortune ($80 - $120) on games they play for a week and then leave to gather dust.
The massive television/magazine/online advertising budgets of these companies make these games seem like the best thing ever released ... and of course have all the wizz bang graphics and nausea inducing fly around camera views that is "demanded" by the consumer.
At least now my kids play them on the XBox and leave my PC alone.
Maybe there should be a law, a consumer law that protects the consumer from buy the crappy and overpriced games?
Well there's already consumer protection in law. The problem is that most of players don't use it. A few years ago I bought Fallout Tactics. It turned out that it has some bug which crashed the game randomly. I got pissed off and returned it to store.
I wrote about it to a Polish gaming magazine about it (it was a magazine that had a long anti-piracy crusade) and they wrote that they never thought about about it and I'm right, but of course people shouldn't pirate because of it. Somehow they didn't care to launch a crusade against unfinished games.
AT_Stalky wrote:
The software industry has all types of copy protection etc, and even use the law to hunt the pirates. Why is this only ONE way? Why not have protection for consumers?
Because consumers aren't determined enough and have a twisted view of gaming - they see it mainly as their hobby/addiction/whatever, not as a normal product. Consumers may protect themselves mainly through denying their money to unscrupulous developers, which requires sacrificing the immediate reward of getting their favourite drug.
Another way would be a law that would force publishers to either withdraw faulty products or mark them as faulty products and sell them at decreased prices. I remember that polish distributor of collectors edition of Ultima VII continued to sell it despite that I have notified them that the game box/CD didn't include game manuals that were necessary to pass "copyright protection" questions.
AT_Stalky wrote:
A good idea would be that all games would come with a trial period of say one month, and if one like the game, one pay the money and get the license number that unlock the expire date for eternity. Some serious company use this already, and they obviously must sell quality software or non would buy the software after trial period. Only the company’s with dubious product would see no revenue, and that is what they deserve.
Somehow I think that majority of gamers would still buy them.
schrecken wrote:
Quote:
Can you imagine a situation when a game costs for example - 40$ and a gamer comes and starts telling how poor he is, etc. and the developer sells him that game for 15$?
You get your games for no charge I seem to recall.
Alas, no more betatester work/CC barter for me.
As for other games, I used to buy about one full-priced game every two months when I was a teenager - they used to cost 165 Polish Gold Pieces back then and I was one of the few people I known that could afford them.
I bought full priced Fallout, Fallout 2, Baldur's Gate, Baldur's Gate 2, Arcanum, Icewind Dale, Hind, Su-27 Flanker, etc., etc., etc.
Then I my mother's business stopped to be as profitable as it used to be and I had to limit my gaming spendings.
Now I mostly buy games when their prices reach 30-40 Polish Gold Pieces. Which I do rarely anyway as my money tends to get spent on manga, books, music CDs and other stuff that doesn't tend to do weird things.
I think I spend only 6 Polish Gold Pieces on new games this year - I bought WiTP:WPO in sales box in TESCO - I'm not playing it anyway, because I just discovered that I don't really like micro-managment grand strategy games.
I don't think I'll spend more on games this year, because I have to buy about 20 tomes of manga which is where most of my money goes now, because:
1. It has no bugs.
2. I can buy it after a week of saving money (i.e. carrying a heavy thermos full of tea and a heavy bottle of water and not eating any warm meal in school.).
I would buy some music CDs, but most of them are too expensive - they cost over 50 Polish Gold pieces.
There are some indie games I'd like to buy, mainly some of Spiderweb's cRPGs but they are way too expensive to me - 75-90 Polish Gold Pieces.
Generally I'm not going to buy games/music over 20$ until minimum hourly pay will become at least 5$ - which probably means not before hell freezes.
I think I spent much more on games last year - about 200 Polish Gold Pieces, but I was in better financial condition then and I still spent at least twice as much on comic books, books, music, etc.
So, as you like it and seem understand the consumer frustration with non satisfying games, how will Matrix / S3T handle the CCMT buyer who are not satisfied..
How about, let em have WaR (wich seem to be a much better product) for free as a compensation?
Does that sound like a workable and fair deal to you?
My kids spend an absolute fortune ($80 - $120) on games they play for a week and then leave to gather dust.
The massive television/magazine/online advertising budgets of these companies make these games seem like the best thing ever released ... and of course have all the wizz bang graphics and nausea inducing fly around camera views that is "demanded" by the consumer.
Schrecki the Matrix / S3T game developer thinks about desatesfy consumers right to get refund or get compensations:
schrecken wrote:
No it doesn't
But I am in no position to judge or have any input into such a decision making process.
And of course there is no way to judge when someone is being "dissatisfied" just to get free handouts.
I do see what you mean, and I think this sums up what has been pointed to here.
But this is also the core of the problem, how can a consumer prove hes dissatisfied? Why doe he have to?
Other goods that is sold, one just have to say one is dissatisfied (non ever asked me to prove im dissatisfied), and one get compensated, or can return the goods.
With software company’s we have to prove we are dissatisfied… And ofcose we cant..
I think this suggest that we really need stronger consumer rights when it comes to software, and mandatory/in the law triel time before have to buy software, thus only pay if we have tested it and think its good.
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Blah.
I'm glad I got CC4 for free on a gaming magazine cover CD. Otherwise that getting stuck in close combat thing would definitely qualify for compensation.
Losing whole units in close combat just because of buggy mechanic that makes unit freeze in proximity of enemy unit with "movement aborted because of attack" and crawl seeking cover despite that the unit isn't attacked because the enemy has frozen as well or is attacked only in close combat is frustrating and definitely diminishes entertainment value of the product.
General Gaming purchasing: Yes, but I mean one much take into account the expire date, and one pay money for the unlock of the expire date (trial/evaluation time), not for the game as such.
Specific CCMT: I think its been proven that the consumer have a right to be dissatisfied with CCMT, and even I have explained that it in detail, even so detailed that you have agree a remake would be done (witch has not been done yet): http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=4904 As a reminder, you can see at page 6 u actually agree to remake CCMT: Qoute Schrecken From page 6:
“”But back on topic.
S3T are looking at a further patch for CCMT.
If anyone can come up with a comprehensive list of needed fixes this will speed the process.
If you have found data anomilies let me know all of them... not a single line at a time
We currently have a short list but as time permits it is being extended.
We are not going to put out a patch a week as piecemeal fixes but a largish all encompassing patch is what is envisioned....
Consider that a small graphic change to 1 vehicle could mean a 30mb download or a single map alteration could be 100mb.
Posts like Bushmaster can pen T72 at 1240 metres don't help when the data shows otherwise... every shell fired is a roll of the dice.””
In short, I think the consumers of CCMT who are dissatisfied, would be satisfied with some form of compensation.
A suggestion Maybe? Offer the WaR to CCMT buyers at -30 dollar discount if they are dissatisfied, and if they take the offer there lisencumber is locked so they cant use the NEW patch (you promised we would get) and wich is so badly needed for CCMT… In that way they the consumer who are dissatisfied, and take the offer of get WaR for reduced price cant use the CCMTs fix that will later come, and thus u have not to worry they use 2 games and just pay for one. How does that sound?
(Edit Spelling comannions = complains)
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Sun Oct 26, 2008 1:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
Because you can copy the game and then return it as you are dissatisfied... but get to keep playing and keep the money.
If you return a DVD player that's it you have returned it.
It's a tricky question
And an irrelevant one. I heard it when I returned Fallout Tactics - I sent the cashier for his boss and in meantime another cashier appeared and accepted the game without problems.
The most atrocious thing was when I returned Ultima 7 that I mentioned earlier - they called to the Polish distributor and said that they'll accept it only I'll take one of their other games at the same price .
As for validity of it...
Ever heard of torrents?
Or bootleg CDs/DVDs?
It has nothing to do with the question you have mentioned and everything to do with avoiding consequences of selling a faulty product, which taking in account the state of games that are released now would be pretty brutal. A lot of non-software companies are trying to do this using various excuses.
I see the merit in the argument, but the simple fact is that no company (software compnay, clothing manufacturer, pen maker, car manufacturer, etc) can afford to do anything like this. They are relying on ethics and character of consumers because the potential for abuse are far to great.
Imagine if I had called Chevy and told them that after driving my car for a year, I told them that I was dissatisfied and wanted their newer and better model for free because the car that I purchased last year was a hunk of junk. But first, let me run it through my car cloning machine in case I want to drive it later.
Ultimately, you show your disatisfaction by not purchasing the newer and better product a company is offering. If you really want the product, you buy it. But if you really want to show disatisfaction, you don't but it...even though you really want it. I will never but a Chevy vehicle again after my experiences with one of their previous cars...even though their plugin electric car that is coming out could virtually eliminate gas for me because I typically drive less that 60 miles per day (stated range of a full charge)
So ultimately, it is up to consumers to show disatisfaction with a company, or there would eventually be no companies to make anything.
Imagine if I had called Chevy and told them that after driving my car for a year, I told them that I was dissatisfied and wanted their newer and better model for free because the car that I purchased last year was a hunk of junk. But first, let me run it through my car cloning machine in case I want to drive it later.
So thats your answer after reaing what I typed, in the post a bow, qouted for you here again:
AT_Stalky wrote:
A suggestion Maybe? Offer the WaR to CCMT buyers at -30 dollar discount if they are dissatisfied, and if they take the offer there lisencumber is locked so they cant use the NEW patch (you promised we would get) and wich is so badly needed for CCMT… In that way they the consumer who are dissatisfied, and take the offer of get WaR for reduced price cant use the CCMTs fix that will later come, and thus u have not to worry they use 2 games and just pay for one. How does that sound?
I see the merit in the argument, but the simple fact is that no company (software compnay, clothing manufacturer, pen maker, car manufacturer, etc) can afford to do anything like this. They are relying on ethics and character of consumers because the potential for abuse are far to great.
You mean relying on characters and ethics of people who chose to buy a game instead downloading it from torrents? I agree with you, you can't trust those cheating bastards .
CSO_Linebacker wrote:
Imagine if I had called Chevy and told them that after driving my car for a year, I told them that I was dissatisfied and wanted their newer and better model for free because the car that I purchased last year was a hunk of junk. But first, let me run it through my car cloning machine in case I want to drive it later.
CSO_Linebacker wrote:
Ultimately, you show your disatisfaction by not purchasing the newer and better product a company is offering.
Yeah, that's a fucking awesome idea.
There's nothing as fucking great as working hard for a whole fucking month and then putting all the free money into a defective product that can't be returned.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
.
.
