安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
1 
举报此帖
I absolutely agree with the point about consumer rights - I've banged on about it for years on here as any regular will tell you. I was a big advocate of saying that Valve would HAVE to get caught up with the then forthcoming EU laws on digital goods and the refund policy. A lot of people tried to shoot me down, and yet here we are in 2025 with the very thing being adopted as I said it would.
But aside from that, the the preservation angle is a good one too and equally important. I suspect you mean that it's just not a big thing for you, which is fine.
But is IS important.
Have you ever gone to or seen images from inside any development studio or offices? Go and Google them. You will often see rooms like chill out rooms or cafeterias where there's thing like arcade machines, or shelves on the walls with tons of games. RESEARCH.
It's not intended for them to be just a means to unwind and spend your lunch hour, it's for research. LOADS of studios have these.
That alone is one VERY VERY important reason for preservation because ALL art is iterative.
Go and look up interviews with any musician or other artists of your choice. Find one where they're inevitably asked for their influences and listen to what they say. Now imagine if they couldn't have that because of lack of access. It would be ♥♥♥♥ as we'd not be able to build on what went before.
For one big analogy consider this. I'm a big Beatles fan and they're a major reason I went into audio engeering. Back in those days, obviously they had no internet, but of course this also wasn't that long after world war 2 either, and places like Liverpool were in a rough state.
Lennon and McCartney have given lots of details about their early days of learning guitar and music. Liverpool had a lucky thing going where it had a thriving dock, and as such ships from the US would come over and there was a thriving black market for US rock and roll and blues records. Stuff we didn't get easily.
So Lennon and McCartney and others had access to these and they'd want to learn to play them. But here's the kicker - how do you learn to pay guitar when you have no internet, no magazines to speak of, a lack of access to any books that lay it out, and not being able to afford classical music tutelage?
You either make it up as you go along, which is extremely diffuclt and not a good idea, or you find other who might know a few tricks.
Paul McCartney tells one particular tale of hearing about a guy that someone knew had learned an E7 chord. A CHORD. So they found out where he lived, jumped on a bus across town, turned up at his door, knocked on it and asked him. The guy showed them and that's it.
This is what happens when you don't have adequate access to things.
You see the point?
Interesting April update from Ross Scott on the European "Stop Killing Games" initiative. GOG.com being crummy, Heineken (Heineken?!) also falling through...
Scott isn't throwing in the towel just yet -- if you're a citizen of a EU memberstate and haven't yet signed: https://www.stopkillinggames.com/eci
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3eK_3A7Xpg
GoG has to keep publishers happy as well to keep games on their store. The change in contact probably allowed upper management to have a look at what was being talked about.
Blatantly putting a campaign that paints big developers in a horrible light isn't a great business move if you want them to keep doing business with you.
Will not engage further.
Especially since GOG has huge reliance working with the big publishers to get games onto their preservation program, and getting old games onto their Store and even getting PC versions in some instances.
What GOG does in preserving games is far more important than what this initiative is going for, because what this initiative is going for really only affect the very rare game that gets the 'The Crew' type of treatment, where as GOG's preservation program affects a lot more games and a lot more gamers.
I can see why GOG doesn't want to this promotion thing, because it would put their far more important initiative and far more useful program at risk. The risk is not worth it at all.
So GOG was not being crumby at all, not even a little bit.
They already had the whole situation with the Warcraft games.
Now, to be fair, that was on Blizzard-Activision and not GoG, but it showed that developers/publishers can and will pull games from their program.
Advertising this initiative which has been known to paint big developers in a bad light would be a great way to destroy the goodwill they have with them.
As to the general point and to the general readership: the crummy bit is just GOG.com stringing along the organizers on empty promises for half a year or so.
Aligning yourself with a specific law or act isn't something to be done on a whim. That's something that needs to be reviewed and the risked weighed.
GoG has clients that need to keep happy if they want to keep getting old games to preserve themselves.
If that statement is considered "derailing" then this discussion should be locked.
Nobody ever said GOG.com was "scummy" or that they don't have the right or maybe even reasons for not wanting to join in.
It's just that they shouldn't then have promised to do so back in October. That the fact they did and as such strung along the organizers of the ECI for half a year or so is "crummy".