What they're doing is illegal (at least in Europe)

[Notabene]

Ever wonder why, when a game is removed from the Steam store or even banned you can still play it granted it does not required online servers? It's not be nice: you purchase something and no-one has a right to remove it from you.

Games, or in fact music, movie, books, whether they are digital or physical are bound by exactly the same centuries old laws (no matter what EULAs said especially in Europe): you're purchasing a licence of unlimited access and use of a copy of a product.

And that's why, in order to avoid being sued and automatically losing, Steam and other store front will always let you redownload a game you purchased.

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The question has always is: despite the outcry, who will really have the money to sue them and 100% win, since WB is counting on it being no-one. Hint: consumer association and specialized lawyer cabinets. I can tell you I've participate to a few of those and even european hearings on the topic of lootboxes: if WB is sued they're screwed.

So instead of having degenerate looney's at the management of the game, they should instead either leave the local vs. AI or multiplayer options if they want to suspend temporarily the online and updates, otherwise, I know a few people who will start scrutinizing the historic, announcement and EULAs (none of these matter in this case anyways) to make a bit of a dent in the studio....

[Deathraven13]

Originally posted by Notabene:

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The game is free to play so you didn't have to purchase anything and the game was advertised as early access.

So if you have spent money on this game it's your fault, learn from your mistakes in order to avoid that in the futur.

[Schorsch Wadschinken]

I don't think this is illegal yet, although I believe it should be. At any rate our politicians have never paid enough attention to digital goods

However, the game itself was a free license, you didn't purchase it. Also, slight correction, Steam wouldn't need to let you redownload games indefinitely. The laws say they need to give users a reasonable amount of time to download their digital software, which is maybe a couple weeks. If a digital store ever shuts down, you should absolutely make sure to download and store everything you want to keep, they have no obligations to allow you to keep downloading anything

Anyway, I really don't know what the laws for digital items in games entail, and there's nothing in our laws that say anything about it. Politicians have just been sleeping on it and it allows companies to be extremely anti-consumer about it with zero repercussions. Keep in mind that Destiny 2 disables entire DLC campaigns for their customers and faces no legal consequences over it

[TemmieNeko]

Originally posted by Notabene:

Ever wonder why, when a game is removed from the Steam store or even banned you can still play it granted it does not required online servers? It's not be nice: you purchase something and no-one has a right to remove it from you.

Games, or in fact music, movie, books, whether they are digital or physical are bound by exactly the same centuries old laws (no matter what EULAs said especially in Europe): you're purchasing a licence of unlimited access and use of a copy of a product.

And that's why, in order to avoid being sued and automatically losing, Steam and other store front will always let you redownload a game you purchased.

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The question has always is: despite the outcry, who will really have the money to sue them and 100% win, since WB is counting on it being no-one. Hint: consumer association and specialized lawyer cabinets. I can tell you I've participate to a few of those and even european hearings on the topic of lootboxes: if WB is sued they're screwed.

So instead of having degenerate looney's at the management of the game, they should instead either leave the local vs. AI or multiplayer options if they want to suspend temporarily the online and updates, otherwise, I know a few people who will start scrutinizing the historic, announcement and EULAs (none of these matter in this case anyways) to make a bit of a dent in the studio....

not even going to read this, bc you are wrong.


sorry.
the Eu laws protect you from certain things, but you aren't getting anything out of this situaiton.
they said it was a n open beta, nobody was forced to pay for anything, and they stated they " HOPE " this is the final launch. and it clearly wasnt/.
'

also, there's tons of games that sell early acess ( like, acces it actually eaerly, as a ful game - before general public - ) and THOSE are allowed in Eu as well. Any game that sold a pre-order bonus that let you play ahead of sceheudloed launch, seven if there was a gap where you couldnt play between the time your EA ended and the launch began - its still legal in Europe.

[Carnatux]

To be fair every time you booted up it clearly said it was a beta but no one bothers to read pop-ups anymore even if they contain important info. Still a crappy/scummy way to handle this though

[Diarrhea Blaster]

Originally posted by Deathraven13:

Originally posted by Notabene:

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The game is free to play so you didn't have to purchase anything and the game was advertised as early access.

So if you have spent money on this game it's your fault, learn from your mistakes in order to avoid that in the futur. :DMCJester2:

I've been around a while, and looked at many games. I've never seen a game removed like this.

You used to have beta tests for games that would happen months before release. Then Early Access started, where unfinished games came out to get more funding. Sometimes progress might be wiped from earlier versions to the final 1.0 version.

I've never seen anything like this. If the game was beta, sure, the money you spent will return when 1.0 comes out. But this is Early Access, it's not a beta, it's not meant to be paused.

[Diarrhea Blaster]

Originally posted by Carnatux:

To be fair every time you booted up it clearly said it was a beta but no one bothers to read pop-ups anymore even if they contain important info. Still a crappy/scummy way to handle this though

Veiled Experts has Play Beta Now with a release date of 2023.
This says Play Now with a release date of Jul 19, 2022.

I thought this was early access, but apparently it was already released. I recall a beta prior to the release, but you shouldn't list on the store page as an actual beta.

People just throw beta and early access around as the same these days anyways.

Glad I didn't spend any money at least. Pretty cool to buy something and lose access to it on a whim from the devs.

edit: almost forgot my favorite part, "season 2" on a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ beta XD

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by Deathraven13:

Originally posted by Notabene:

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The game is free to play so you didn't have to purchase anything and the game was advertised as early access.

So if you have spent money on this game it's your fault, learn from your mistakes in order to avoid that in the futur. :DMCJester2:

Lol, the amount of shilling in this post is just scary, and to think they did it for free

[Nooneyouknow]

Originally posted by Diarrhea Blaster:

I've been around a while, and looked at many games. I've never seen a game removed like this.

Final Fantasy XIV ring any bells?

[Drimon]

Originally posted by Notabene:

If you dont know the law Just stfu...This is Just stupid.
Dont pretent to be clever and Talk about ♥♥♥♥ you know nothing about.

[Inuakurei]

Originally posted by Nooneyouknow:

Originally posted by Diarrhea Blaster:

I've been around a while, and looked at many games. I've never seen a game removed like this.

Final Fantasy XIV ring any bells?

FF14 1.0 was never removed. It was playable all the way up to 2.0 release, they kept updating it while working on the 2.0 overhaul. I think 1.0 ended at patch 1.4 or something.

Also to OP, its not illegal at all. Plenty of online games, paid and free, have shut down for good with no way to play them at all. By your logic, the shutdown of Evolve, Battleborn, Bleeding Edge, Gwent, Dirty Bomb, Law Breakers, S4 League, Spellbreak, Flyff, Gunbound, Infinite Crisis, Hood Outlaws and Legends, Breach, Pagan Online, Gigantic, Exsteel, Battleborn, Hyper Scape, Heroes of Newerth, Crowfall, Scavengers, Master x Master, Artifact, and every other online game ever to go offline are all illegal as well.

Furthermore, you'll still be able to play Multiversus offline against bots. So even if OP's argument held any water, it wouldn't apply to Multiversus.

[BigTplaysGamesTTV]

The game isnt being removed... its being taken down from onlien services. In theory we'll still be able to play the game offline right? thus they arent taking anything away to the point of illegality.

I DO feel this tho. I promise this isnt an argument post. I think theyre making a stupid decision that will kill their game.

[Lord Wholesome]

Originally posted by Notabene:

Ever wonder why, when a game is removed from the Steam store or even banned you can still play it granted it does not required online servers? It's not be nice: you purchase something and no-one has a right to remove it from you.

Games, or in fact music, movie, books, whether they are digital or physical are bound by exactly the same centuries old laws (no matter what EULAs said especially in Europe): you're purchasing a licence of unlimited access and use of a copy of a product.

And that's why, in order to avoid being sued and automatically losing, Steam and other store front will always let you redownload a game you purchased.

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The question has always is: despite the outcry, who will really have the money to sue them and 100% win, since WB is counting on it being no-one. Hint: consumer association and specialized lawyer cabinets. I can tell you I've participate to a few of those and even european hearings on the topic of lootboxes: if WB is sued they're screwed.

So instead of having degenerate looney's at the management of the game, they should instead either leave the local vs. AI or multiplayer options if they want to suspend temporarily the online and updates, otherwise, I know a few people who will start scrutinizing the historic, announcement and EULAs (none of these matter in this case anyways) to make a bit of a dent in the studio....

Yeah but that's the thing, fellow dutch person. You didn't purchase anything. It's a free to play game. You don't have a license of purchase or anything. Thus there's also no product that you own or that you're entitled to use whenever you deem fit. Not in a legal sense.

Most of what you mentioned thus far will be cast aside as your complaints don't hold up against the state the game is released in and with all the information they've given you. Furthermore, it'll return at a later date.

Besides that, should you decide to make use of microtransactions within said game being in state X, that doesn't give you the right or license to make use of it forever. It's deemed a service. Like buying a coffee. Because if that's how it worked then any game with microtransactions that is online-only would fall under the same scrutiny and should thus be sued. But that simply doesn't happen. Not for lack of trying either. It just doesn't work out in court.

You're welcome to dislike the company's decision to pull the game back though. We all do, after all. But you have no actual legal case here I'm afraid.

[Nooneyouknow]

Originally posted by Inuakurei:

Originally posted by Nooneyouknow:

Final Fantasy XIV ring any bells?

FF14 1.0 was never removed. It was playable all the way up to 2.0 release, they kept updating it while working on the 2.0 overhaul. I think 1.0 ended at patch 1.4 or something.

Also to OP, its not illegal at all. Plenty of online games, paid and free, have shut down for good with no way to play them at all. By your logic, the shutdown of Evolve, Battleborn, Bleeding Edge, Gwent, Dirty Bomb, Law Breakers, S4 League, Spellbreak, Flyff, Gunbound, Infinite Crisis, Hood Outlaws and Legends, Breach, Pagan Online, Gigantic, Exsteel, Battleborn, Hyper Scape, Heroes of Newerth, Crowfall, Scavengers, Master x Master, Artifact, and every other online game ever to go offline are all illegal as well.

Furthermore, you'll still be able to play Multiversus offline against bots. So even if OP's argument held any water, it wouldn't apply to Multiversus.

FFXIV shut down on 11-11-12. ARR launched 8-24-2013. It was offline 9 months. Some players were selected to move from the live servers to the ARR alpha, but even that had a month of downtime.

[Notabene]

Originally posted by Many-Named:

Originally posted by Deathraven13:

The game is free to play so you didn't have to purchase anything and the game was advertised as early access.

So if you have spent money on this game it's your fault, learn from your mistakes in order to avoid that in the futur. :DMCJester2:

Lol, the amount of shilling in this post is just scary, and to think they did it for free

They're either paid fake account, or beyond degenerate zoomers which is why it's important to beat the privilege youth into sense, too much privilege and degeneracy we've tolerated

[Notabene]

Originally posted by Lord Wholesome:

Originally posted by Notabene:

Ever wonder why, when a game is removed from the Steam store or even banned you can still play it granted it does not required online servers? It's not be nice: you purchase something and no-one has a right to remove it from you.

Games, or in fact music, movie, books, whether they are digital or physical are bound by exactly the same centuries old laws (no matter what EULAs said especially in Europe): you're purchasing a licence of unlimited access and use of a copy of a product.

And that's why, in order to avoid being sued and automatically losing, Steam and other store front will always let you redownload a game you purchased.

Now onto another topic: false advertisement. The fact that this game is being discontinued for a year (no matter the excuses) WHEN you purchased it under the pretense that it was beta, being evidently false advertisement since nobody was aware and in fact there is mtxs and season passes, makes things worse for WB.

The question has always is: despite the outcry, who will really have the money to sue them and 100% win, since WB is counting on it being no-one. Hint: consumer association and specialized lawyer cabinets. I can tell you I've participate to a few of those and even european hearings on the topic of lootboxes: if WB is sued they're screwed.

So instead of having degenerate looney's at the management of the game, they should instead either leave the local vs. AI or multiplayer options if they want to suspend temporarily the online and updates, otherwise, I know a few people who will start scrutinizing the historic, announcement and EULAs (none of these matter in this case anyways) to make a bit of a dent in the studio....

Yeah but that's the thing, fellow dutch person. You didn't purchase anything. It's a free to play game. You don't have a license of purchase or anything. Thus there's also no product that you own or that you're entitled to use whenever you deem fit. Not in a legal sense.

Most of what you mentioned thus far will be cast aside as your complaints don't hold up against the state the game is released in and with all the information they've given you. Furthermore, it'll return at a later date.

Besides that, should you decide to make use of microtransactions within said game being in state X, that doesn't give you the right or license to make use of it forever. It's deemed a service. Like buying a coffee. Because if that's how it worked then any game with microtransactions that is online-only would fall under the same scrutiny and should thus be sued. But that simply doesn't happen. Not for lack of trying either. It just doesn't work out in court.

You're welcome to dislike the company's decision to pull the game back though. We all do, after all. But you have no actual legal case here I'm afraid.

I should've made some precision: when you buy content within a F2P game, beta or not, the complementary (F2P) licence which is not bound by these conditions actually automatically turns into a legal licence since the business selling the product can't prevent you from accessing it as soon as there's a purchase action and receipt.

There's lot of precedent and cases lost by companies in Europe for this very reason.