The Gamer's BILL OF RIGHTS

[jbunch07]

oh yeah, despite the fact i own many legit steam games (which i can prove if people demand it) i actually have cracks for it, for those times i have no internet connection and it decides it doesnt like me.

anything that can be made as a copy protection, someone can work around. Its simply not possible to make something that cannot be cracked, in the PC world.

but like you said if games didn't cost so much say 10-20 dollars a pop, then im sure there would be less pirating.

 

[a111087]

but like you said if games didn't cost so much say 10-20 dollars a pop, then im sure there would be less pirating.

yep, basic economics, if i cost less, more people buy it.

 

[btarunr]

Steam violates so many of those points. If this is implemented, several anti-piracy measures could fail, then they come up with Game Developer bill of rights.

 

[jbunch07]

Steam violates so many of those points. If this is implemented, several anti-piracy measures could fail, then they come up with Game Developer bill of rights.

This is why i don't use steam.

 

[ShadowFold]

of course this will never happen because of nazi game giants like EA who break pretty much all those

 

[Mussels]

Steam has it right because while it violates a few of those rules (barely, in a few cases) it DOES sell the games to you cheaper.

Steam requires an internet connection: only to install the game, and sign in (once a week or so, i think) and then you can go into offline mode and stay that way to play the game.

In australia at least, steam games are often less than half the price of the games in retail stores - having a wii and a few PC's, i sure as heck cant afford $90-$120 per copy (if i want to play multiplayer with people, i need (legally) one copy per system)



edit: What we need is to get away from the publishers. Have the game developers themselves host torrents of their own games (less bandwidth cost) with the game data being given FREE (under licence, of course) and you simply pay them to get the serial/CD Key. Lock the CD key to an email address/online account, and it'd cost far less than half of what it does to produce manuals, boxes, CD/DVD's and ship them across the world only to have the prices marked up more and more each step of the way.

 

[candle_86]

oh yeah, despite the fact i own many legit steam games (which i can prove if people demand it) i actually have cracks for it, for those times i have no internet connection and it decides it doesnt like me.

anything that can be made as a copy protection, someone can work around. Its simply not possible to make something that cannot be cracked, in the PC world.

they could, make games that only run off a DVD like a console, if you include them on Double Sided DVD's and unpack into memory you could bypass alot of it of cracks. Also encrypt the boot sector on the DVD.

 

[Mussels]

see the edit i made, candle.

The problem is that they already tried physical security measures on disks (PC and console) - on PC they just modify whatever file does the checking, on console they add modchips. security protection is almost useless against a dedicated cracker.

 

[3870x2]

There is no question as to if pirating is wrong, it is. I do it, they do it, she does it, you do it, its just a fact. Music, Photoshop (you all know what im talking about), flash, games, movies, etc... movies and music arent a big deal for me, because it seems to me that they are making plenty of money in hollywood regardless, photoshop not a big deal, if im not using it for commercial business, which is what the license is really meant for; no big deal, but us gamers need to come together and stop pirating games. Really, I have about 15 games i have bought and have not finished, or barely played. it is merely the fact that i want want want that i pirate, or go buy another game. Its a fact of life, but day by day i try to get my financial affairs in order, buy more music, pirate less games, and before long, i will see piracy disappear from my life. That is how i deal with it.

 

[a111087]

a dedicated cracker.

haha, it sounds very "clean" for such job

 

[candle_86]

see the edit i made, candle.

The problem is that they already tried physical security measures on disks (PC and console) - on PC they just modify whatever file does the checking, on console they add modchips. security protection is almost useless against a dedicated cracker.

but how many are gonna install a mod chip ect for there computer. If we use similar methods used on consoles for the PC it makes it harder, there is no way to stop a die hard. You have people stealing 5 dollar games, go look at a torrent site.

 

[ShadowFold]

I only pirate really old games I cant find in stores or games that I bought and the disc got scratched over the course of time.

 

[Mussels]

if they use the same methods (hardware security) on a PC, PC's can do it one of two ways: they can emulate it, they can crack the software aspect (unless they run their own OS, it has to be an executable file) or they can resort to hardware mods like in a console.

The guys who pirate $5 games are pretty sad, i'll give you that.

 

[imperialreign]

I completely agree with those points as well - looking back to the good-'ol-days when Wolf3D, DukeNukem, Quake and all were brand new to the market . . . all those points applied.


TBH, on the copy protection issue - this is the NUMBER 1 MOST AGGREVATING ISSUE FOR LEGIT USERS!!! Why deal with copy protection when as soon as the game is released, there are "fixed" .exe files available within 24hours. Hell, even when a game patch is issued, the fixed .exe is typically circulating the same day. Copy protection, at this point, is a waste of time and money that could be better spent of final polishing of the game itself. Although, I will at least give some respect and credit to the game developers who will remove copy protection at a later date through a patch. Doom3, for example, patch 1.31 (IIRC) removes the copy protection and you can finally put that CD and fixed .exe to rest.


Also agree on number 11. Years ago, we didn't have as many issues with programs not running correctly as we do nowadays. A lot of this, IMO, is due to how drastically different systems are today as well. 10 years ago, game developers designed around common system specs, because they didn't have the funding to go purchase the 1337 hardware, and most hardcore gamers then were building their systems from the ground up because it was cheaper than purchasing a pre-built - even when using only high-end components. Once hardware companies started getting involved and "donating" to the developers, min specs started becoming more and more demanding, and developers started designing around specific hardware. We saw the start of this trend with 3DFX and the Glide API, and look at the reputation that 3DFX earned and that it still stands and is still respected.

Systems today are drastically different, we have everything from the low-end pre-builts to the uber-1337 systems in the mix. The more varied systems become, the more issues arise with the software. And we wonder why new PC games tend to be so buggy, or only run well on certain hardware.

Partly also, I feel some of that blame can be shouldered by the publishers. The console game market moves fast, it doesn't take much time for a game to go from drawing board to store shelves, compared to PC games. Has a lot to do with how universal consoles are, so it's easier to code, design, and test a game when you know what 100% of the operating hardware and system restraints will be. The publishers are pushing PC games to keep up with console games, and the only way to do that is push sooner and sooner deadlines, and release games half-baked. Look at FEAR, for example - the first patch was issued on the same day the game was released to store shelves. The box itself even came with a little card stating that you needed to go to the developers website to obtain the patch. If they had given monolith another 3-4 weeks, there would've been no need for that kind of crap :shadedshu

 

[Deleted member 3]

thats a good point.

#11 Games should not be optimised to run on certain brands of hardware only.

What games actually run bad on certain brands of hardware on purpose? Support for extra features of certain brands isn't something negative. All those "the way it's meant to be played" games work perfectly on ATI.





It seems Stardock is one of the few companies that has any moral. They already had previous games that had no copy protection on purpose and the likes. They make things user-friendly. I hope the majority notices that. It's a fine example they set.

 

[Triprift]

Ill add another one to that

12. Aussie gamers shall have the right to reasonably priced latest games not the ripoffs we have atm.

 

[kid41212003]

I bought a game called "Company of Heroes", my old apartment didn't have high-speed internet, and I couldn't play the game because it couldn't update, I didn't intend to play online... I just wanted to play the single player campain.
So, I went to THQ website, sent them an email, they requested me a picture of my DVD case and CD key number, after they got that from me, they sent me another DVD for free, and with that new DVD, I didn't have to update the game to play it.

1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don’t work with their computers for a full refund.

This is Impossible. Beside, the system requirement already printed on the box of the CD/DVD cases.

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.

This is just peace of cake for them. They would just push the hardware requirement abit higher, and that's mean.

Asking for more, mean the prices for PC games will get higher => Less sale => PC games developers will go consoles => PC gamers cry in tears.

 

[Mussels]

kid - i think you're confused between min requirements and the min requirements on the box. A game like crysis is stretching the truth a bit far with its minimum requirements, as the game lags on the lowest settings on those systems.

Dan: we dont mean 'not run' we mean 'runs like ass on everything but' - lost planet didnt even work in DX10 on ATI cards for a long time, because someone dropped the ball there. There needs to be a lot more global testing of hardware in games development - not just their sponsors PC's.

 

[snuif09]

12: when you bought the cd, gamers have the right to play the game online instead of being told that your cd key is invalid (looks at his BF2 cd)

 

[Triprift]

the 10 one would be nice the only game ive got other than steam ones is UT3.

 

[kid41212003]

I argree with you about the System requirement that they printed on the box, It always incorrected/not true.
Crysis was selling at $49.99
It IS expensive. It has DX10, the most hardwares demanding game, EVERYONE knows this.
I mean, If I can't play this game at max setting and enjoy its beautiful, I wouldn't buy it. I wouldn't buy a game to play it at lowest setting, unless the gameplay is too good that picture quality doesn't matter, but I don't see this on Crysis.
Seriously, for PC gamers, they should feel the same way as I do.
For people that used to play games on Consoles, It's hard for them to adopt PC games.

If I have $49 to buy Crysis, and my hardwares can't run it at max setting. I will save that money.
And I never buy that game, I only played the demo, it gave me 20-25FPS at max setting.
If you think about it, alot people like COD4, it has beautiful picture and cost the same price as Crysis. But If you really spend your time and looking around details in both game. I would say COD4 is a rip-off, it's even more expensive than Crysis.
It has DX9, and the details are so far away from Crysis to price it at the same prices.
People are happy when their games run perfect on their system, and when some games can't, they kind of dislike it, and maybe bad mouth it.
I don't offend anyone where! Just want to tell you my oponions.

 

[jbunch07]

What games actually run bad on certain brands of hardware on purpose? Support for extra features of certain brands isn't something negative. All those "the way it's meant to be played" games work perfectly on ATI.





It seems Stardock is one of the few companies that has any moral. They already had previous games that had no copy protection on purpose and the likes. They make things user-friendly. I hope the majority notices that. It's a fine example they set.

Its not that games necessarily run bad, its just that some games are "optimized" to run better for certain companies. That's what we were getting at.

 

[newconroer]

Stardock has created The Gamer's Bill of Rights as a means to encourage game industry as a whole to adopt standards that support PC gamers.






Source

Hehe cute list.

Although it can easily be given this rebuttal by companies and developers:

We have the right to not have to waste time and resources on people who cannot be bothered to learn about computing; and / or realise that not everything is black and white.

 

[ascstinger]

It IS expensive. It has DX10, the most hardwares demanding game, EVERYONE knows this.

Just one little thing I had to point out, some PC gamers are clueless when it comes to hardware. Ive seen everything from GMA950 intel graphics to 8400gt's advertised as awesome gaming devices in combination with some celeron and a gig of ram.

 

[Triprift]

Lol so have i mon normally from Harvey Normans or Dick Smiths dont no what the equivalent in the states is but the golden rule never buy a pc from them places.