Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for I've Got The News Blues

Real Name I've Got The News Blues   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Dec 26, 2009, 02:06
Total Comments 326 (Amateur)
User ID 55423
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >


News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
31. The plaintiff is a shill but who for? Mar 26, 2010, 13:16 I've Got The News Blues
 
BobBob wrote on Mar 26, 2010, 13:12:
I wonder if the person filing this lawsuit has any connection with the publishers.
There is a good chance he is a shill for a game publisher, but there is a greater chance that he is a shill for the lawyer or firm which filed this lawsuit since it seeks class action status.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
30. Re: GameStop Used Game Lawsuit Mar 26, 2010, 13:14 I've Got The News Blues
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 26, 2010, 12:54:
Don't you think letting the common man sell mp3s is a dangerous, dangerous precedent?
No because the legal resale of a purchased copy of a copyrighted work has been the law in the U.S. for at least one hundred years.

What would stop me from putting an mp3 on my iPod then selling it to someone else without removing it?
existing copyright law and the threat of a lawsuit from the copyright holder
If that is not enough of a deterrent, then the problem is your disregard for the law not the lack of one.

Don't you think this is why PC game rentals never caught on?
They never caught on because the game publishing industry bribed congress to pass a law outlawing them. DRM/copy-protection makes PC game rentals technologically viable (just look at Gametap as a example), but the game industry doesn't want them to cannibalize new game sales, i.e. why would a consumer pay $50 for a game that they will only play through once and never touch again when they could rent it for $5 and do the same thing? That's why Gametap doesn't offer new releases. Piracy has nothing to do with it. It's about maximizing profit. The existence of rentals would severely hurt the selling price and the volume of sales for new game releases.

The problem is you're then taking rights away from the people actually doing the creating.
We're not taking anything away from creators at all. As I pointed out, the right of first sale has existed for at least 100 years. What copyright holders are trying to do is steal from the public by taking away this right and the right of the public to have works enter the public domain while they are still viable and useful properties. Copyright was designed as a limited monolopy for the creator of a work as an incentive to create such works before that work would enter the public domain and become the property of society for the benefit of all without limit. Copyright was NOT devised as an unlimited gravy train for creators and their descendents so that they could endlessly profit and control the works they created. Such perversion of copyright law actually creates the disincentive to create new works because old ones can be milked for profit virtually forever.

No one here seems to mind that GameStop doesn't really deal with PC games used. Where's the uproar over that?
I mind, but you're the first one to bring it up in this thread as that is not the subject of this news article.

This comment was edited on Mar 26, 2010, 14:22.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
26. Re: Let's burn down the libraries too! Mar 26, 2010, 12:55 I've Got The News Blues
 
Verno wrote on Mar 26, 2010, 12:46:
On the flip side, do you expect that you should be allowed to resell your theater tickets?
First, that's not the flip side of anything much less my argument. Second, I already can resell theater tickets. They just won't fetch much of a price if the performance for which they are good has passed. Third, theater tickets aren't a copyrighted work (aside from the design of the ticket if it is on paper or a physical media) and they aren't analogous to a video game.

Different forms of copyrighted material need to be treated differently
A video game is no different from music, a book, or a movie in terms of basic consumption by a consumer. Yes, publishers of books, movies, and music could also attach free one-time use offers to their products for additional content, but that doesn't affect the fundamental right of the consumer to resell his purchased copy of such a book, movie, or music. Video games should be no different. The copyright holder of a video game should not be able to attach additional restrictions or prohibitions to such sale or transfer through EULA's or other means. Only copyright law should dictate such limits.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
24. Re: GameStop Used Game Lawsuit Mar 26, 2010, 12:46 I've Got The News Blues
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 26, 2010, 12:42:
Do you think you should be able to for any of these?
Yes. A consumer should be able to resell or transfer the single copy of the work they purchased just as they can with copyrighted works affixed to physical media.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
20. Let's burn down the libraries too! Mar 26, 2010, 12:41 I've Got The News Blues
 
Bludd wrote on Mar 26, 2010, 12:25:
I think selling and buying used games is worse than piracy where no money changes hands. When you buy and sell used games, the makers and publishers of the games don't get a dime, but someone else does thus profiting on someone else's labor.
We need to burn down all the libraries too because that is the government spending taxpayer money to harm the publishing industry by sharing books, newspapers, and magazines, and letting people read them without buying them.

Remember whenever you play a video game without paying for it, the child of a game developer or publisher starves to death.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GameStop Used Game Lawsuit
17. Class Action Nonsense Mar 26, 2010, 12:34 I've Got The News Blues
 
This complaint is a typical attempt at a class action lawsuit. If it is approved by the court for class action status (and it probably will be since it is well written and makes a decent argument), then I predict that the result of this lawsuit will be a settlement in which tens of millions of dollars in legal fees will be awarded to the plaintiff's attorneys, the original plaintiff (James Collins) will receive a relatively small cash payout of a few thousand dollars, and the rest of the members of the class (Gamestop customers who submit the forms to be part of the settlement) will receive discount coupons off future Gamestop purchases.

So, hurray for consumers! Once again the American legal system works. I can't wait to get my coupon for 10% off at Gamestop.

This comment was edited on Mar 26, 2010, 14:16.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Serious Sam HD Demo Plans
3. It's not worth $15. Mar 25, 2010, 23:37 I've Got The News Blues
 
kibbled wrote on Mar 25, 2010, 21:54:
The game is $15.00 on steam. I would say it is worth it without the demo.
It's not worth it if you have the original game. If you've played the original game, you've played this one: same maps, weapons, and gameplay. The graphical improvements aren't great, and I actually prefer the look of the original game because it fits better with the over-the-top cartoonish gameplay. The HD version also takes away from the original in terms of some multiplayer funtionality (no dedicated server) and the fact that it requires Steam and uses Steam's DRM whereas the original release has no DRM and uses Gamespy for the master server. With the original release you can share a copy with friends or family for LAN or online play. You can't do that with the HD release since it is tied to Steam.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Free Game for Silent Hunter V Owners
22. Re: Free Game for Silent Hunter V Owners Mar 25, 2010, 21:55 I've Got The News Blues
 
Profit wrote on Mar 25, 2010, 18:09:
they're gamesplanet/metaboli copies
I'm surprised because the Ubisoft store for at least U.S. customers is rebranded Direct2Drive.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4 DRM
53. Re: EA on C&C4 DRM Mar 25, 2010, 02:11 I've Got The News Blues
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 24, 2010, 14:37:
We've seen how well other online-only games have done in the past. Shadowrun, I'm looking at you.
Shadowrun has bot and LAN play for offline.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4 DRM
52. So what's youre next gig? Mar 25, 2010, 02:08 I've Got The News Blues
 
EAJeffGreen wrote on Mar 24, 2010, 12:24:
It wasn't an "official" statement, nor sanctioned by anyone, believe me.
Jeff, good luck with your job search.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ubisoft Games off UK Steam, DRM Blameless
10. Valve could refuse additional DRM. Mar 20, 2010, 14:53 I've Got The News Blues
 
DG wrote on Mar 20, 2010, 08:58:
Whether you wish to tolerate the DRM is your decision, not Valves.
No, it is ultimately Valve's decision as Valve sets the criteria of what games it offers on its service. Valve could refuse to offer Ubisoft's or any developer's or publisher's games on Steam which use additional DRM. Valve doesn't do this because it wants to make money from those sales, and it knows that large publishers like Ubisoft wouldn't cave on this issue. But, Valve could refuse them just as other digital distributors such as Direct2Drive refuse to carry games which use Steam's DRM. As plenty of small, independent game developers can attest, Valve has no trouble refusing to offer their games on Steam.

This comment was edited on Mar 20, 2010, 15:01.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Consolidation
9. Re: Morning Consolidation Mar 19, 2010, 18:58 I've Got The News Blues
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 18:22:
Not if going online is a separate license that they include free with the game.
The license is irrelevant in terms of the expense of resources which was your point. Sure the game developers or publishers can make up any kind of license for any part of the game they want out of thin air, but that doesn't change the fact that the actual expense of resources to support the current player of that one game disc doesn't change if the disc is resold or given to someone else.

The attempt to charge extra for multiplayer functionality on console games is simply a money grab by the game developers and publishers. It's not due to increased expense because one game disc can't be simultaneously played.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Consolidation
5. Re: Morning Consolidation Mar 19, 2010, 17:10 I've Got The News Blues
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 13:57:
it makes a bit of sense - used buyers would be accessing those resources without paying for them, so they'd actually be taking money from the creators as opposed to simply not paying it.
No, that doesn't make any sense because used buyers are only accessing resources instead of the original buyer who can no longer access them since he no longer has the game. So, the used buyer isn't taking money away from anyone for the use of those resources because if he wasn't using them, the original buyer would or could be. Those multiplayer resources are there to support each copy of the game itself. It doesn't matter who happens to be playing it.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
64. Learn to read. Mar 19, 2010, 13:35 I've Got The News Blues
 
BobBob wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 04:17:
Steam has an off-line mode genius.
Learn to read, genius. See post #38 for my reply to someone else with your same deficiency.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
52. Re: Steam fails. It is inevitable. Mar 19, 2010, 01:42 I've Got The News Blues
 
Prez wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 01:29:
A huge reason why so many people are willing to put up with the dangers of having so many games attached to one company's one service is because for the vast majority of them, there are **ahem** working back-ups on the net that one could revert to in the event of some sort of catastrophic failure of either Steam or Valve.
I agree with you. The wide availability of cracks for Steam is the main or at least a major reason why people put up with all of Steam's restrictions and risk. It's sale prices are another.

The problem this has caused though is that other publishers like EA and Ubisoft see this widespread support of Steam and misinterpret it as acceptance of Steam's DRM and restrictive policies. So, when these publishers implement DRM which is similar to what Steam offers, they expect similar support for it. The widespread use of Steam has moved the goalpost of the DRM discussion from general resistance to Internet-based DRM to accepting it as the new baseline from which to get progressively more restrictive. So, by supporting Steam because they could easily crack it, PC gamers have actually screwed themselves into similar DRM industry-wide which won't necessarily be as easy to crack.

In the end, I end up using Steam for the myriad of conveniences it affords without having to consider the biggest negative as a negative.
This assumes that Valve never defeats the crackers with a new revision of the Steam client. I personally hope Valve doesn't, but you never know.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
48. Steam fails. It is inevitable. Mar 19, 2010, 01:15 I've Got The News Blues
 
Wolfen wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 00:56:
Since half life 2, i have bought roughly 120 games through Steam. In that time span. I have not yet once experienced an issue with not being able to access my game due to Steam being offline, or vanished.
Building your game library with Steam is like building your house in a floodplain. Regardless of the good deal you think you got on the land, with nature being what it is, eventually your house will flood. It may take many years for it to happen. The floods may be infrequent. Your neighbor may get flooded worse or more often than you do. But, given the inherent risks of the location of your home, flooding is inevitable. And the more you have invested in your home, the bigger your loss will be when it floods. The same is true with Steam. Steam's DRM is designed to prevent you from playing all of your games which use the service unless you successfully authenticate with its network. And, given the restrictions and failures inherent to the Steam network and software, at least occasional failure is unavoidable. It's happened in the past to many Steam users (and permanently for some), and if it hasn't happened to you yet, it likely will given enough time.

To prove this to yourself simply type "steam failed to" into Google and then see all the suggestions which popup like "steam failed to connect" and "steam failed to contact key server". Then click on some of the links to read about actual people having these problems. The fact that these terms are Google suggestions shows just how commonplace these Steam failures are. You will also find in that Google search that Valve has a FAQ page dedicated to these failures given how frequently they occur.

Just because you personally haven't had Steam keep you from being able to play your games doesn't mean that it won't or that the risk is minor. It isn't. You simply have been lucky.

This comment was edited on Mar 19, 2010, 21:43.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
46. Re: You're still a hypocrite. Mar 19, 2010, 00:47 I've Got The News Blues
 
Prez wrote on Mar 19, 2010, 00:33:
Steam is not the same as Ubsioft's and now EA's new fandangled DRM.
I don't dispute that. In some ways it is a little better (offline mode), and in some ways it is much worse (universal kill switch).

If my internet connection goes down, I do not get booted out of the game with Steam.
No, but you won't be able to launch another game when you exit the current one if Steam refuses to enter offline mode which can happen due to various restrictions.

I can select "Start up in Offline mode" in the Settings and never have to connect to a Steam server to play any of my singleplayer games.
Saying "never" is very misleading as the limits and bugginess of offline mode make its permanence very unlikely.

If Valve goes out of business today, I'm not locked out of any of my Singleplayer games on Steam.
You will be locked out if you ever want to install them on another PC, or on the same PC after a fresh installation of the OS, or if your last login to Steam failed to save the information, or if you want to use another Steam account, etc.

Yes, if you successfully entered offline mode the last time you used Steam and you never change your OS or your Steam files don't change, then you should still be able to play your Steam games offline assuming that the Steam client doesn't screwup as it has historically with offline mode due to bugs. In any case that is still pretty restrictive DRM.

I am not denying Steam is DRM; but it is far less obtrusive than the BS Ubisoft and EA are using.
It is more intrusive because at least C&C4's and Ubisoft's DRM only affect games individually. With Steam's DRM, a single failure affects all of your games not just one. I'm not a fan of C&C4's or Ubisoft's DRM and would never pay for games which incorporate them, but if I did at least that DRM wouldn't affect any of the other games I already have. Steam's DRM affects all of its games at once, and with Valve constantly changing the Steam client, you never know how new changes or restrictions in it will affect access to games you already have.

This comment was edited on Mar 19, 2010, 01:25.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
43. You're still a hypocrite. Mar 18, 2010, 23:06 I've Got The News Blues
 
Cutter wrote on Mar 18, 2010, 22:47:
First off, I've never claimed to "love" Steam or even like Steam.
I didn't claim that you love Steam. Re-read my post or the quote. I simply claimed that you used it since you posted gushingly about HL2 and other Valve games which require it.

In fact if you go through enough of my posts you'd see that I come out against it, as with most digital only services.
Well I admit that I didn't go through many of your posts. I simply read ones like http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&boardid=1&threadid=108327&id=580242 where you praised Valve's games. However, since those games require Steam, you obviously like Steam enough to still buy those games and to play them despite that fact that you wrote that you refuse to use such a system.

If you'd actually taken the time to do some basic research
Actually I did basic research on you. I found posts of yours which supported your hypocrisy. What I didn't do was extensive research on you by reading dozens of your past posts to find any which disproved it. However my points still stand because you obviously like Steam enough to buy and play games using it despite the fact that Steam possesses all of the features you claim you won't support.

Take a look at Valve's privacy policy while you're at it, nimrod.
http://www.valvesoftware.com/privacy.htm
Valve collects information about you and your game playing activities using Steam including "how long and what I play". That policy supports it not disputes it. My point stands.

This comment was edited on Mar 18, 2010, 23:14.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
41. Re: You actually love the message just not who is saying it. Mar 18, 2010, 22:00 I've Got The News Blues
 
Parias wrote on Mar 18, 2010, 19:40:
Valve...has indicated they'll provide a method for continuing to be able to play their games should their authentication services be discontinued.
No, Valve hasn't done that. That is a myth that is spread by Steam fanboys. The Steam Subscriber Agreement states otherwise, and that is the official and legally binding policy.

Ironically unlike Valve, EA actually has a written policy that it will release a patch to remove the DRM from a game if the authentication servers are decommissioned.
See this link
So, while EA could be successfully sued for not upholding this written promise, Valve couldn't be because it has made no such promise especially not in writing.

Additionally, Valve (and the subsequent parties releasing their games under Steam) aren't beating around the bush trying to pretend their games don't have DRM.
Actually Valve does this every time Gabe mouths off criticizing other companies' DRM while pretending that Steam's DRM is better. It isn't, and in some ways it is more restrictive than anything else. For example Steam's DRM is a universal kill switch to all of a user's games which use Steam. At least the other major DRM systems only affect games individually.

This comment was edited on Mar 19, 2010, 13:23.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EA on C&C4's "No" DRM
40. Re: You actually love the message just not who is saying it. Mar 18, 2010, 21:37 I've Got The News Blues
 
PHJF wrote on Mar 18, 2010, 18:50:
If steam doesn't detect an internet connection it starts up in offline mode, afaik.
It will only try to start offline mode if the previous login was saved. If it wasn't saved or the file which stores the login information is corrupted then Steam won't start until the user can get online and successfully login. And, sometimes offline just won't work regardless although Valve has recently claimed to have finally "fixed" offline mode twice in recent updates.

Offline mode should be totally selectable regardless, but it isn't despite the fact that there is now an offline mode menu command. Maybe one day Valve will be generous enough to bestow that flexibility upon its minions.

This comment was edited on Mar 18, 2010, 23:54.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
326 Comments. 17 pages. Viewing page 9.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo