Stardock announces "PC/Gamer's bill of rights"

[WraithETC]

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don?t work with their computers for a full refund.

2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.

3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game?s release.

4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.

5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer.

6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won?t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent.

7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.

8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.

9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.

10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.


Sounds good too bad no one will follow it except stardock. I would like to be able to sell my non MMO pc games like their console counterparts also.

 

[Maleficus]

never gonna happen.

 

[ixelion]

Yup it isn't going to happen. Social responsibility and respecting consumer rights isn't profitable.

 

[nakedfrog]

It sure sounds great.

 

[mindcycle]

I agree that most of those probably won't be adopted by big publishing companies, but Stardock is definitely making a good move here IMO. They are addressing issues that are a very real concern for PC users. If it gets enough press and people speak up about it the big guys may take notice.. you never know.

I'm all for Stardock and they're view of the industry.

 

[FuryofFive]

well alot of those EA is notorious for....
as for the Min req., its called min req. for a reason 🙂 adequate is based on opinion., minimum is also subjective to each person.
-requireing a cd to play is a easy and effective way of detering alot of piracy. id rather put the cd in then go through all the crappy security protection software that needs to be installed 🙂

as for

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don?t work with their computers for a full refund.

2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.

i am all for those 😉

 

[Dorkenstein]

Sounds like big talk. Aren't these also the people who make WindowBlinds?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: FuryofFive
-requireing a cd to play is a easy and effective way of detering alot of piracy.

Easy, sure. Effective, it's not. It might be if cd-cracks weren't so easily acquired online by a simple google search or at one of the standby sites. But they are, so it's useless. I use the no-cd crack for all the games that I legally buy anyway. The manufacturer shouldn't make me jump though that hoop, it just pisses off the customer as one more annoyance. Stardock sees this.

 

[FuryofFive]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: FuryofFive
-requireing a cd to play is a easy and effective way of detering alot of piracy.

Easy, sure. Effective, it's not. It might be if cd-cracks weren't so easily acquired online by a simple google search or at one of the standby sites. But they are, so it's useless. I use the no-cd crack for all the games that I legally buy anyway. The manufacturer shouldn't make me jump though that hoop, it just pisses off the customer as one more annoyance. Stardock sees this.

effective because most users dont do this. or want to. sure alot do. but alot dont 🙂 i guess its hit or miss really
i dont believe ive cracked my legal games.. the ones i usually play or have played never required a disc...
Quake 2, UT2004,CSS,COD4,TF2...

 

[LumbergTech]

i dont think that the devs are required to update their games unless there is a bug or 500

but i agree with the rest

 

[Fox5]

Stardock releases a lot of updates, but I don't know if I would consider them meaningful. Generally, they're patches, not content updates.

 

[rivan]

Comments/feelings about Stardock aside, if you like this, vote with your wallet. It's the only thing the industry will pay attention to.

 

[Maleficus]

Originally posted by: rivan
Comments/feelings about Stardock aside, if you like this, vote with your wallet. It's the only thing the industry will pay attention to.

which is another reason it will fail because so many people buy any crappy game a 'triple a' studio releases.

 

[Modelworks]

This has about as much chance as being implemented by other companies as EA does at winning the best publisher award.

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: Fox5
Stardock releases a lot of updates, but I don't know if I would consider them meaningful. Generally, they're patches, not content updates.

They've released of maps, gameplay changes and additional content on top of the bug fixes for Sins of a Solar Empire.

 

[Bateluer]

Sounds like a great idea, but it will never get off the ground. There's no short term profit in it.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Fox5
Stardock releases a lot of updates, but I don't know if I would consider them meaningful. Generally, they're patches, not content updates.

Some of their patches for Galactic Civ 2 actually added a few gameplay features which were initially available in the paid expansions.

They believe that expansions should add actual content. But patches should make the current game more playable. Even if it means adding some convenience features which normally only come with an expansion pack.

Cavedog also did this with TA:Kingdoms. The expansion pack updated the game to version 3.0 and that added some stuff like smarter hotkeys and unit updates. (The blimps became smaller, faster, and cheaper).

BUT, you didnt have to buy the expansion pack. You could just download the patch and get all those gameplay improvements free.

Interestingly enough, Cavedog went under. :frown:

 

[Dorkenstein]

I still have a cavedog baseball cap I won from them.

 

[TheVrolok]

That's all well and good, and sounds great. But it's not happening.

 

[Wag]

I read that on Next-Gen too. Good luck to them.🙁

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: Fox5
Stardock releases a lot of updates, but I don't know if I would consider them meaningful. Generally, they're patches, not content updates.

They've released of maps, gameplay changes and additional content on top of the bug fixes for Sins of a Solar Empire.

And several AI improvements. That's important to anyone who plays strategy games.

 

[CKent]

Publishers are only nice to pirates. People who buy their games must be made to suffer.

 

[Daverino]

Sounds great if they ever managed to make a game I want to buy. Seriously, we'll put up with a lot of crap if we have a fun time playing the game. That's really the bottom line.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
Sounds like big talk. Aren't these also the people who make WindowBlinds?

They also made Sins of a Solar Empire and the Galactic Civilizations series, both of which sold well and received high marks.

 

[LS8]

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don?t work with their computers for a full refund.

How is it the stores fault that you didn't read the system requirements on the box?

2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.

I agree with this.

3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game?s release.

Sorry but no. If the product "is finished" (see #2) then the developer has no obligation to make any additions to the product and if they do they are within their rights to charge for them.

4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.

I agree with this.

5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer.

I agree with this. Inevitably what will happen though is developers will make their "high end" requirements the "entry" requirements and people will come on forums like AT and bitch and moan.

6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won?t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent.

I agree 100%!

7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.

Download from who/where? You expect the developer to setup an FTP server with all their software for you to DL whenever you want? Who pays for the bandwidth? If you lose your media you should pay $5 to the dev for them to mail you replacement media or pay $5 to re-download.

8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.

I agree, but I don't really see this happening.

9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.

If you buy any game with "online" in the title you should know better. This is nonsense.

10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.

If people weren't installing software on multiple PCs that have a single user LA then this wouldn't be a problem. If the EULA says the software is for a single PC then that is what it means. If you want to play it on another PC in the house it will require it's own license.