Live services EOS should offer an offline version as consumers are being ripped off

[xHans]

Hi everyone, in the wake of the recent EOS of trash mobile "gotcha" games Atelier Resleriana:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gachagaming/comments/1ib558s/end_of_service_for_atelier_resleriana_forgotten/

The game is going EOS without offering an offline version and many player who had invested their time and money on resources will lose everything. This happens all the time, while I personally only played that game on day 1, it is scummy and anti-consumer to see these companies get away with just pulling the plug after siphoning a lot of money off a loyal fanbase and they have nothing to keep in return. Just having the game with the story line quest in offline mode with the ability to get all the playable characters and skins should suffice and shouldn't be that hard to do imo.

If anyone has any connection with politicians, games urinalist or youtubers like assmongold or any other grifter with a big following to remind people that you don't own ♥♥♥♥ and to give visibility to this continuing problem maybe a change can happen. It would be nice if people get reminded every time a live service cash grab gets shut down.

Steam should not be allowing this to happen on their platform either.

[Jon the VGNerd]

Първоначално публикувано от Ben Lubar:

Първоначално публикувано от Jon the VGNerd:

See my previous post:

"Unfortunately for them, I'll just keep buying them through online stores, namely eBay, or other retro gaming sites whenever available besides Amazon. Chances of them finding me are pretty nonexistent, really. And if they do and try and take them from me well... let's just say that they're likely going to receive the Ubisoft treatment.

And if any other folks were to tell me that I'm not allowed to have fun with games and consoles, both new and old, then I'll simply keep on playing. I'm sure many folks who still play games they have with them will certainly agree with me."

If you were to say that to any and all eSport competitors around the world, there'd be laughter all around. And don't get me started on Reddit either.

How many times has a company tried to physically take games away from you that you now have to do this?

Thankfully never. Would they really put tracking devices on physical copies of games to monitor the buyers' locations?

[Ben Lubar]

Първоначално публикувано от Jon the VGNerd:

Първоначално публикувано от Ben Lubar:

How many times has a company tried to physically take games away from you that you now have to do this?

Thankfully never. Would they really put tracking devices on physical copies of games to monitor the buyers' locations?

How many times has a company taken away a game you bought on, say, Steam? The answer is also zero. Because Steam only revokes game licenses for reasons like payment fraud and refunds, which would imply that "you bought" or "taken away" was not applicable respectively.

[Jon the VGNerd]

Първоначално публикувано от Ben Lubar:

Първоначално публикувано от Jon the VGNerd:

Thankfully never. Would they really put tracking devices on physical copies of games to monitor the buyers' locations?

How many times has a company taken away a game you bought on, say, Steam? The answer is also zero. Because Steam only revokes game licenses for reasons like payment fraud and refunds, which would imply that "you bought" or "taken away" was not applicable respectively.

Exactly this. DiRT 3 and the OG Vice City were removed from sale, but I still have them in my library as I have long bought them years ago. Only time where they're permanently removed from the library is if I choose to completely remove them.

[SKARDAVNELNATE]

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

Първоначално публикувано от SKARDAVNELNATE:

Try treating those as optional and still complete your purchase. You'll find out how mandatory they are.

Someone forced you to buy a live service game? If not, then steps were indeed voluntary.

Unless I'm getting the game for free I would have to buy it in order to play it.
Are you somehow buying games without doing those steps?

Първоначално публикувано от crunchyfrog:

You can't change it afterwards.

Perhaps this will be a novel idea. What if talking about things that have already been and how we'd like to change them, results in things being different later on?

Първоначално публикувано от salva早晨享用的咖啡:

server not free

Easy fix, make the game not require a server.

[crunchyfrog]

Първоначално публикувано от SKARDAVNELNATE:

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

Someone forced you to buy a live service game? If not, then steps were indeed voluntary.

Unless I'm getting the game for free I would have to buy it in order to play it.
Are you somehow buying games without doing those steps?

Първоначално публикувано от crunchyfrog:

You can't change it afterwards.

Perhaps this will be a novel idea. What if talking about things that have already been and how we'd like to change them, results in things being different later on?

Първоначално публикувано от salva早晨享用的咖啡:

server not free

Easy fix, make the game not require a server.

It's not going to happen where things change afterwards, because I'm not talking about the game itself I'm talking about law and contracts.

And that is never going to happen because it would remove or render most of the agreement useless.

[Elucidator]

Atelier games have classicly always been singleplayer. Unfortunately companies are for profit parasites in practise, and so they have a wish to abuse any mental weakness anyone could have, which is why they use the fear of missing out phenomenon and other tactics to make you pay, and why they keep aspects of the game online, usually using gacha or other premium shop based things for this should-have-been-singleplayer work. This is also why they offer such work up temporarily because it garantees players and paying players.

[Zarineth]

Първоначално публикувано от SKARDAVNELNATE:

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

Someone forced you to buy a live service game? If not, then steps were indeed voluntary.

Unless I'm getting the game for free I would have to buy it in order to play it.
Are you somehow buying games without doing those steps?

I'm not sure if you don't understand the point or you intentionally run in circles.
At which point someone forced you to buy a game?
Unless someone di force you to buy a game, you didn't need to do it. If so, you didn't need to go through the steps.
Do you intentionally buy stuff you know you don't agree with, just to have something to complain?

It's also funny how you proved what I said in the part you ignored.

[SKARDAVNELNATE]

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

I'm not sure if you don't understand the point or you intentionally run in circles.

I'm quite sure that you don't understand what is being discussed.
Here is is the post that was originally quoted...

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

Is anyone forced to do the following for a live service game?

For step 1 maybe you add the game to your cart from the wish list.
For step 5 maybe you use Paypal.
But the other 5 of them are required to complete a purchase of any game on Steam.

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

At which point someone forced you to buy a game?

That question has a different subject from the one that was asked by Nx Machina.
Are you required to complete a purchase? No, but the original question assumes you will.
Are any of those steps required in order to complete a purchase? Yes.

[Zarineth]

Първоначално публикувано от SKARDAVNELNATE:

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

I'm not sure if you don't understand the point or you intentionally run in circles.

I'm quite sure that you don't understand what is being discussed.
Here is is the post that was originally quoted...

Първоначално публикувано от Nx Machina:

Is anyone forced to do the following for a live service game?

For step 1 maybe you add the game to your cart from the wish list.
For step 5 maybe you use Paypal.
But the other 5 of them are required to complete a purchase of any game on Steam.

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

At which point someone forced you to buy a game?

That question has a different subject from the one that was asked by Nx Machina.
Are you required to complete a purchase? No.
Are any of those steps required in order to complete a purchase? Yes.

Considering the context, I believe you are the one not understanding. But let's wait for Nx Machina to specify what they meant.

[Alasdair]

Corporate apologia is nothing short of a slave mentality or openly trolling for a negative response. Companies can't enforce a license for anything except service based games or uncracked denuvo games, and even then some of those games will eventually get private servers or cracked. The industry basically relies good will from the people, the money they get comes from good will as every purchase is effectively a donation to their coffers, rather than a genuine trasaction of value.

The idea people consent to something unethical therefore making it ok is nonsense. Contract law and things like this should have lines and regulations that prevent abuse, and secure customer rights. I don't know why people want to die on the hill of corporate tyranny and abuse of contract law.

[Alasdair]

Първоначално публикувано от Jon the VGNerd:

Първоначално публикувано от crunchyfrog:

Cool, prove that, because I can categorically say that is not true.

Prove to me where it says that for a start. Because I'd be surprised. I think you may be misreading it as referring to the service and not the product or you misunderstand law.

YOU CANNOT overrule statuory rights.

That's what that term on all contracts means "your statutory rights are not affected".

Statutory rights are your basic right and laws that apply to ALL products or sales.

Things like OWNERHSIP OF PRODUCT.

So soryy you're demonstrably wrong under the Consumer Rights Act. But that clause you're referring to I'll happily take a look at .

Can't wait until they start claiming that older, physical games are deemed as "licenses", just to spit on the faces of real gamers who truly care about retro and vintage games and consoles alike while also giving us gamers a bad name all at the same time.

Heaven forbid if there are people like those who get on my face and berate me, just because I'm playing a game on my PSP just to pass time and reduce boredom. IRL even.

yeah the "um acthually crowd." acts as if there's no difference between de jure and de facto. doesn't matter what the law is or the contracts they set up for their software is de facto they can't even stop people from making illegal copies of their software and using them with out ever having paid for it to begin with. if them nor the state can't stop completely unlicensed copies, they won't be stopping licensed copies people bought and paid for from being used.

[crunchyfrog]

Първоначално публикувано от Alasdair:

Първоначално публикувано от Jon the VGNerd:

Can't wait until they start claiming that older, physical games are deemed as "licenses", just to spit on the faces of real gamers who truly care about retro and vintage games and consoles alike while also giving us gamers a bad name all at the same time.

Heaven forbid if there are people like those who get on my face and berate me, just because I'm playing a game on my PSP just to pass time and reduce boredom. IRL even.

yeah the "um acthually crowd." acts as if there's no difference between de jure and de facto. doesn't matter what the law is or the contracts they set up for their software is de facto they can't even stop people from making illegal copies of their software and using them with out ever having paid for it to begin with. if them nor the state can't stop completely unlicensed copies, they won't be stopping licensed copies people bought and paid for from being used.

Here's a funny thing which many don't realise.

While it might be TECHNICALLY illegal for anyone to copy a game, note the wording of most laws in the western world.

It hangs on "you may not redistribute this". So, the crux here is that even if you copied games and kept them for yourself, there's ♥♥♥♥ all they can do.

Not just because of the law in this regard but even in the places there may be something saying that's illegal, how the ♥♥♥♥ do they police such a thing? They can't just come to your house without some form of reasonable suspicion or warrant maybe.

This is another reason why any cases that publishers ever did against people were people file sharing (or copying physically) to a crazy degree. I would bet it would be incredibly difficult to succeed in any case that had someone with say, a few hundred copies of something but only one of each and no evidence of redistribution.

Still, this is rather a moot point as there's no way they can retroactively claim old games are a licence, nor can they prevent you selling physical games either. Retroactive things can't happen contractually.

[Crazy Tiger]

Първоначално публикувано от Zarineth:

Първоначално публикувано от SKARDAVNELNATE:

Unless I'm getting the game for free I would have to buy it in order to play it.
Are you somehow buying games without doing those steps?

I'm not sure if you don't understand the point or you intentionally run in circles.

They're being obtuse and dense on purpose.

[Alasdair]

More like your argument is fundamentally dishonest, You don't even have to buy something to comment on it, I don't gamble, I can call out gambling basically same argument, lecturing someone on gambling being bad and you not reading into the house edge because you said gambling is bad and shouldn't exist "if you don't like the contract you don't have to sign it." isn't an argument. people have a right to say it shouldn't exist or be regulated, much like gambling. Completely dishonest argument.


Just because the contract is written doesn't mean it should be honored or that it's god's law. I don't think any contract that writes away someones rights should be respected and consumer rights should be put in place that trump any consumer rights people try to bypass with contract law. Companies shouldn't trump the state, companies shouldn't bypass laws with contracts, the only thing a citizen should be is accountable to the state not a contract for a product. Giving a company the effective ability to try to write law and compel behaviour is a mistake.

I am a republican, I reject feudalism I reject monarchism, these companies are not the state they are not elected, they should not be effectively writing law with their contracts, the state should be the ultimate thing that trumps all else and it should be so to protect the people from predators like these companies who would abuse them and set institutions that bypass their power and protections.

[Crazy Tiger]

Първоначално публикувано от Alasdair:

more like your argument is fundamentally dishonest, You don't even have to buy something to comment on it, I don't gamble, I can call out gambling basically same argument, lecturing someone on gambling being bad and you not reading into the house edge because you said gambling is bad and shouldn't exist., just because the contract is written doesn't mean it should be honored. I don't think any contract that writes away someones rights should be respected and consumer rights should be put in place that trump any consumer rights people try to bypass with contract law. Companies shouldn't trump the state, companies shouldn't bypass laws with contracts, the only thing a citizen should be is accountable to the state not a contract for a product. Giving a company the effective ability to try to write law and compel behaviour is a mistake. I am a republican, I reject feudalism I reject monarchism giving these companies more power is no different from giving quasi feudal states powers, these companies are not the state they are not elected, they should not be effectively writing law with their contracts, the state should be the ultimate thing that trumps all else and it should be so to protect the people from predators like these companies who would abuse them.

That's a lot of words to say "things aren't as I want it, why doesn't the world bend to what I want?".

Also funny that this user talks about others being dishonest and then proceeds to tell that agreed contracts don't have to be honered, which is dishonest to begin with.

Even funnier is people thinking that "consumer rights" only exist for consumers protection. They don't, they also exist to protect sellers and manufacturers.