Proposal by EU for 2 year guarantee

[Lützow]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

So your saying if the “individual” finds no personal entertainment value after 7-14 days irregardless of functionality of the software they should get their money back.

Why setting individuals in quotation marks? Actually I was refering to typical videogames with an average playtime of about 20h, being sold for 50 bucks.

My personal stance is, that a full price game should have a long-term entertainment value.

[DuckofTindalos]

And then the videogame business would become a rental business, because nobody would ever buy a videogame to keep for longer than 13 days anymore. Nobody.

[Lützow]

Actually the game business 'is' a rental business where I live. As I can rent almost every mainstream title from video store, supposed it doesn't need a steam activation. However, I'm not advocating a free ride but would like to see more titles with longevity again, worth to be purchased.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

The future of games development has been called into question after the EU Commission suggested developers provide a two year guarantee.

[snip]

At present, licensed software is exempt from EU legislation that forces firms to offer "a minimum 2-year guarantee on tangible movable consumer goods".

[snip]

At present, retailers are not obliged to give a refund on a video game that has a bug or glitch that prevents a user completing a game. If the proposals become law, this could change as users would have the right "to get a product that works with fair commercial conditions".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8044125.stm

This is another example of a knee-jerk reaction to a miscommunicated media story about an issue that they don't fully understand. The future of the gaming industry has been "called into question" after the EU commission "suggested developers provide a two-year guarantee"? Re-read it, and ask yourselves, "does this actually mean jack all squat"?

Hint: it doesn't.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Lützow

ORIGINAL: Sarge

So your saying if the “individual” finds no personal entertainment value after 7-14 days irregardless of functionality of the software they should get their money back.

Why setting individuals in quotation marks? Actually I was refering to typical videogames with an average playtime of about 20h, being sold for 50 bucks.

My personal stance is, that a full price game should have a long-term entertainment value.

I agree with Sarge here. $50 for 20 hours entertainment is not a bad price.

And I would think he put "individual" into quotations because the length of time it takes a player to complete a game is only relative to the individual. If you bought Bioshock and played it in 20 hours and I bought it and played it in 40...the game is the same game...but I "appear" to have gotten more value out of it, right? Ergo the value is relative.

[SireChaos]

ORIGINAL: SireChaos

Since to my knowledge software does not degrade from use, a guarantee over a certain time period does not make much sense.

Two arrangements that, in my mind, would make sense are:

1) For a certain period - two years, for example - the producers have to devote a certain amount of resources to fixing bugs and customer support and stuff. Or alternatively, they have to pay for the cost of someone else fixing the bugs in their game. No more "We´ve earned enough with this one, we´re off to the next project, dear customer, sucks to be you".

2) Some definite rules are set up which sort of bugs give the customer the right to have his money back, as well as rules detailing that with certain bugs with impair but do not destroy gameplay, customers get part of their money back.

On second (or third) thought...

3) A kind of reverse-period guarantee is instituted: producers guarantee that, after a certain period (say, one month or three months) after it is published, a game is bug-free. Everyone who bought before that is compensated with a portion of the price for their work as beta-testers.

[Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Lützow

ORIGINAL: Sarge

So your saying if the “individual” finds no personal entertainment value after 7-14 days irregardless of functionality of the software they should get their money back.

Why setting individuals in quotation marks? Actually I was refering to typical videogames with an average playtime of about 20h, being sold for 50 bucks.

My personal stance is, that a full price game should have a long-term entertainment value.

Judge is correct, I was pointing out how your idea of warranty was a matter of individual opinion and imposable to regulate any number of exploitations.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

If only we could get a two year guarantee on government working as expected...

Let's not insert politics here again, okay?

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Sarge
Judge is correct, I was pointing out how your idea of warranty was a matter of individual opinion and imposable to regulate any number of exploitations.

This is right on the money. Whose standard determines whether the software is "defective?" If the user's opinion is the benchmark, such a requirement opens all kinds of silly possibilities, not the least of which is Junior Johnny Rockstar's ability to buy a game, play it to exhaustion, then claim spuriously that it was defective and obtain a refund.

Underneath all this, I smell another surreptitious, European attempt to get into Microsoft's pants...

[Doggie]

The Kommisars at ther EU are now going to protect the proletariat from exploitation by the evil capitalists.

Yeah, that'll work.[8|]

All you "citizens of the world" should prepare yourself to pay double and triple what you're paying now, because the guardians of the working class will have to add on some more taxes to enforce the new age of enlightment.

[Obsolete]

I guess games like Big Rig's Truckracing would have some problems with profits under these new implementations '

[Erik Rutins]

Ok, guilty as charged, I should have been more careful in my reply. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so allow me to issue a warning to myself. [8D]

[wworld7]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Ok, guilty as charged, I should have been more careful in my reply. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so allow me to issue a warning to myself. [8D]

Is this the same as being put on "Double-Secret Probation"?

If yes, than the I believe Erik needs to organize a Toga Party...

[Perturabo]

ORIGINAL: Doggie

The Kommisars at ther EU are now going to protect the proletariat from exploitation by the evil capitalists.

So...
In your world, producer is always right and customer is always wrong?

And things like "laws" that forbid returning defective games are okay?
Somehow everyone else has to provide a finished, defect-less product or notify client about defects, but game developers are singled out as ones that have a license for doing poor work and claiming that they are selling a great product, claim that product has objective properties that it doesn't have, even after they were proven that it doesn't have them, etc.

[killroyishere]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And then the videogame business would become a rental business, because nobody would ever buy a videogame to keep for longer than 13 days anymore. Nobody.

I disagree because for 15+ years we had the refund right and gaming continued through the 80's and well into the mid 90's before the refund policy changed. Everybody isn't a pirate, but, I think we all want a fair shake in the pc gaming world. It's always been about the greed from the publishers and the developers over these last 10 years (no refunds, calling a sale a license instead of product bought, now intrusive DRM and copy protection and who knows what we don't know about) and I'm rather happy to see something is finally going to be done and I certainly hope it makes it over the pond to America as well.

An honest consumer is still going to be an honest consumer just like we were back in the 80's and up to now. The only people I think who would abuse this system are those that 'think' about how it can be abused. I'll return what doesn't work and that's all.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: killroyishere
An honest consumer is still going to be an honest consumer just like we were back in the 80's and up to now. The only people I think who would abuse this system are those that 'think' about how it can be abused. I'll return what doesn't work and that's all.

And we all love you for being so honest, but your faith in the good will of the masses is appalling.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Perturabo
And things like "laws" that forbid returning defective games are okay?
Somehow everyone else has to provide a finished, defect-less product or notify client about defects, but game developers are singled out as ones that have a license for doing poor work and claiming that they are selling a great product, claim that product has objective properties that it doesn't have, even after they were proven that it doesn't have them, etc.

All you are going to do is create more work for that species of pond scum known as "lawyers."

This is an arena where the marketplace has to sort itself out. The practice of releasing unfinished, buggy products must sink or swim on its own merits. Nasty protection schemes must either be tolerated or lead to the consumer saying, "Sorry, no sale." The extent to which software is "defective" ought to be determined by the relationship between seller and buyer, not by imposition of external regulatory imperatives..

Nobody is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy defective products or those that contain unwanted features. Do what I do. Refuse to buy new computer wargames until you are sure that the product is finished and stable. My rule of thumb is to hold off on new software releases for at least one year. I do my research and pay attention to forum commentary and reviews during that time, and I try to make an informed purchasing decision.

That said, like many, I am thoroughly sick and tired of the crap that frequently finds its way into the computer wargame marketplace. I think that most of the original promise offered by computer-style wargames has been lost, and I have largely stopped buying them.

This may not be the end for the business, but it sure is starting to look like that's the direction it's headed to me.

[Doggie]

ORIGINAL: Perturabo


So...
In your world, producer is always right and customer is always wrong?

In my world, people that don't know Sham Wow is just a piece of sheepskin have got more money than sense. The producer offers good for sale, nobody is forcing the customer to buy it. Unless the producer is a bunch of fascists in the EU, then they're gonna shove their product down your throat whether you want it or not.

And things like "laws" that forbid returning defective games are okay?
Somehow everyone else has to provide a finished, defect-less product or notify client about defects, but game developers are singled out as ones that have a license for doing poor work and claiming that they are selling a great product, claim that product has objective properties that it doesn't have, even after they were proven that it doesn't have them, etc.

Things like "laws" that let people buy stuff, play with it for two years and then return it for a full refund means the people that make stuff will quit making it, and then you'll be asking the EU to force people to make stuff for the betterment of mankind, even if they have to go hungry to do it. Stalin tried that and it didn't work out.


I know you don't care if Rutkins has to take a night job at Burger King so he can afford to keep you entertained, but he's fortunate enough to live in the United States, where people are still free to do what they want and get paid for it, at least for now.

So you keep on advocating hope and change and power to the people, and us filthy capitalists will keep feeding you and providing you with consumer good for you to bitch about until you make the mistake of trying to frog march us into the world court. Good luck with that.

[Arctic Blast]

ORIGINAL: killroyishere

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And then the videogame business would become a rental business, because nobody would ever buy a videogame to keep for longer than 13 days anymore. Nobody.

I disagree because for 15+ years we had the refund right and gaming continued through the 80's and well into the mid 90's before the refund policy changed. Everybody isn't a pirate, but, I think we all want a fair shake in the pc gaming world. It's always been about the greed from the publishers and the developers over these last 10 years (no refunds, calling a sale a license instead of product bought, now intrusive DRM and copy protection and who knows what we don't know about) and I'm rather happy to see something is finally going to be done and I certainly hope it makes it over the pond to America as well.

An honest consumer is still going to be an honest consumer just like we were back in the 80's and up to now. The only people I think who would abuse this system are those that 'think' about how it can be abused. I'll return what doesn't work and that's all.

You might...most won't. A policy like that would be so utterly abused as to be completely useless.

[killroyishere]

ORIGINAL: Arctic Blast

ORIGINAL: killroyishere

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And then the videogame business would become a rental business, because nobody would ever buy a videogame to keep for longer than 13 days anymore. Nobody.

I disagree because for 15+ years we had the refund right and gaming continued through the 80's and well into the mid 90's before the refund policy changed. Everybody isn't a pirate, but, I think we all want a fair shake in the pc gaming world. It's always been about the greed from the publishers and the developers over these last 10 years (no refunds, calling a sale a license instead of product bought, now intrusive DRM and copy protection and who knows what we don't know about) and I'm rather happy to see something is finally going to be done and I certainly hope it makes it over the pond to America as well.

An honest consumer is still going to be an honest consumer just like we were back in the 80's and up to now. The only people I think who would abuse this system are those that 'think' about how it can be abused. I'll return what doesn't work and that's all.

You might...most won't. A policy like that would be so utterly abused as to be completely useless.

I'm amazed it almost sounds like all of you would do something like this since you think the masses would? I would think the masses are just as honest as the next guy and only the pirates would continue to be pirates and of course abuse it.

I feel though change has to come like anything else. The internet is getting out of hand with viruses and spyware and intrusive files for games etc. etc. Laws are going to have to be made and will be made to gain control of it I'm sure. Control is coming I'm sure as well over everything.

Just as you can exclaim the masses will abuse it the masses of publishers and developers have been abusing it for 10 years now. Why is it right for them and not the consumer? I've always felt laws were made to make everyone 'accountable' for their actions. I see these laws as making publishers and developers accountable for their actions since they haven't been for 10 years now.