It's Valve, not Rockstar you should be angry with

[Sperber]

Rockstar only lost the license to sell and distribute those songs as new copies of their game. That's nothing unusual per se.

The problem is that Valve doesn't have the ability to distinguish between licenses bought before and after that specific date. Also, even when you previously bought the game, they can't legally allow you to re-download the same version of it, as that would be considered distribution in the eyes of the copyright holders (whether justified or not, that's a matter for lawyers).

So their only way out is to force that patch to all of their customers, even those that just want to keep their already downloaded game files. THIS is what you should be upset about.

I'd say this is another good argument for services like GOG - what you've downloaded, you get to keep and play without having patches forced on you.

[adams_apple]

They didn't lose any license, it's a complete breach of contract on the record labels' part. Rockstar should sue for that. It would be one thing if the game was re-released in a new incarnation, but you can't just sign away your songs and then later just weasel out of it.

[[L²] Burnett]

Good statement. GOG is a cool new upcoming alternative to steam. +Support

[SonsOfLiberty86]

"Rockstar only lost the license to sell and distribute those songs as new copies of their game. That's nothing unusual per se."

It's unusual because it's never happened to any other game on Steam, ever. I've been on Steam for 11 years and I've never seen this happen, not once.

"The problem is that Valve doesn't have the ability to distinguish between licenses bought before and after that specific date."

False - they were able to do it with Vice City. New buyers didn't get unlicensed songs, old buyers still got to keep and re-download those songs that new buyers didn't get. It worked for Vice City, why can't it work here?

"Also, even when you previously bought the game, they can't legally allow you to re-download the same version of it, as that would be considered distribution in the eyes of the copyright holders (whether justified or not, that's a matter for lawyers)."

False again - see previous response to last statement.

"So their only way out is to force that patch to all of their customers, even those that just want to keep their already downloaded game files. THIS is what you should be upset about."

No, they do not have to do this. They didn't have to do it with Vice City so they shouldn't have to do it here. THIS is what we should be upset about...

[Sperber]

Well, regardless of how Rockstar was forced to cut out those songs, they could have just updated the distribution file on Valve's Servers to legally comply. So if you ever wanted to download it again, you wouldn't get those songs - but that's your own risk when you delete your local content. Valve offers re-downloads of purchased games as a service to the customers, but it's not guaranteed forever.

Unfortunately they decided to not support game files on a client that differ from those on their servers, for whatever reason. So ... keep that in mind the next time you have other options.

That said ... who still plays this old game anyway?

[[L²] Burnett]

Have you ever heard of San Andreas Multiplayer - acronym: SA-MP ? There are a lot folks out there who likes and play the game. Arguing about the player base is the wrong instance, we should focus on Rockstars actions.

[Discussions_Acc]

Sperber님이 먼저 게시:

The problem is that Valve doesn't have the ability to distinguish between licenses bought before and after that specific date.

Do you really think they don't keep track of when which account bought something? I take any bet that they store date and time.

Sperber님이 먼저 게시:

Also, even when you previously bought the game, they can't legally allow you to re-download the same version of it, as that would be considered distribution in the eyes of the copyright holders

So why can I still download Deadpool? Just to name one example.

Sperber님이 먼저 게시:

That said ... who still plays this old game anyway?

And there goes your credibility. No more questions.

[d34th66]

Sperber님이 먼저 게시:

Also, even when you previously bought the game, they can't legally allow you to re-download the same version of it, as that would be considered distribution in the eyes of the copyright holders

So why can I still download Deadpool? Just to name one example.


i redownloaded deadpool...?

[Sperber]

SonsOfLiberty86님이 먼저 게시:

False - they were able to do it with Vice City. New buyers didn't get unlicensed songs, old buyers still got to keep and re-download those songs that new buyers didn't get. It worked for Vice City, why can't it work here?

Fair question. With Vice City, they actually stopped selling the game for a while and than re-released the new version as a complete "new" game, so your old copies didn't update to the new version.

Not sure why they don't do the same feat here. Maybe because they want owners of the previous version to still be able to re-download a playable version which they could only distribute in the cut version. Maybe they just were just too lazy to give those accounts an automatic free license key to the new version.

Regardless: you don't see Rockstar-agents going from house to house, confiscating all the physical copies of the game, do you? It's Valve that's causing this.

[Gigadweeb]

It wasn't Valve's fault that Rockstar removed 1920 x 1080 and made steering with mouse and inverse mouse default.

[addicted]

SonsOfLiberty86님이 먼저 게시:

False - they were able to do it with Vice City. New buyers didn't get unlicensed songs, old buyers still got to keep and re-download those songs that new buyers didn't get. It worked for Vice City, why can't it work here?

This, I see no proper reason to cripple all the copies on steam, it's also very unethical, in my opinion.

[Emily Howard]

FL Burnett님이 먼저 게시:

Good statement. GOG is a cool new upcoming alternative to steam. +Support

Upcoming? GOG is so old now they don't sell any old classics anymore and of course a good alternate way to get games without the DRM trash.

[sh4jesusfreak]

Steam, prepare to lose several users

[Meturoido]

LesserGer님이 먼저 게시:

FL Burnett님이 먼저 게시:

Good statement. GOG is a cool new upcoming alternative to steam. +Support

Upcoming? GOG is so old now they don't sell any old classics anymore and of course a good alternate way to get games without the DRM trash.

I think he means GOG's Galaxy.

[Emily Howard]

Ōkami님이 먼저 게시:

LesserGer님이 먼저 게시:

Upcoming? GOG is so old now they don't sell any old classics anymore and of course a good alternate way to get games without the DRM trash.

I think he means GOG's Galaxy.

Could be possible.

[GRIMM]

Actually, it is Rockstars call on this. Not Valve's.