Gamers Bill of Rights Drafted
- Thread starter TopSecret
- Start date
some of them are a tad OTT imo, in the right direction but these two:
# Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
# Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
cant see that ever happening
first: Consumers issue, nothign to do with developer/retailer
2nd: what do you class as a finished state. very grey line there
# Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
# Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
cant see that ever happening
first: Consumers issue, nothign to do with developer/retailer
2nd: what do you class as a finished state. very grey line there
I agree with these yes, but i dont agree that gamers have a "right" so to say. Im sorry but its YOUR choice whether to buy the game or not and Devs DONT have to make these games. Its their choice to make patches, its their choice whether they wanna make the game or not, its the stores policy (here in the US) whether they take an opend game back or not, ect ect. You see my point. As a gamer we really have no say so in anything besides whether or not we want to spend our hard earned money on a game we feel we would like. Thats the only thing we (gamers) have a right to.
Rastalovich
New member
Yeah lots of fair comments.
I think that atleast 50% of those should be expected anyway and shoddyness prevails when they dont come to fruition.
A few of them are good things going forward.
In essence tho, this is a gimmick, it`s not something the broad range of game companies are going to sign up to, or even entertain past a few of them - just a bit of 1-upsmanship of a couple of companies over the others.
It`s interesting, includes some good things, some silly things, and needs more things.
I think that atleast 50% of those should be expected anyway and shoddyness prevails when they dont come to fruition.
A few of them are good things going forward.
In essence tho, this is a gimmick, it`s not something the broad range of game companies are going to sign up to, or even entertain past a few of them - just a bit of 1-upsmanship of a couple of companies over the others.
It`s interesting, includes some good things, some silly things, and needs more things.
BlazeEagle
New member
I think this "Bill of Rights" is fair & reasonable but it's fairly useless without enforcement of this "Gamers Bill of Rights" by the industry.
Nothing can be perfect of course, but when I spend money on a product, I expect quality & reliability. When a company takes my money & doesn't deliver quality & reliability, I feel betrayed & have no desire give a company my money & loyalty.
Give me quality, reliability & trust & I'll give 'em back to you. It's a two way street.
I also expect to be treated like a consumer, not a potential criminal.
I've noticed that no matter what it is, people downplay the importance of things like this until it becomes too late to do anything about it without an immense struggle, if possible at all.
Nothing can be perfect of course, but when I spend money on a product, I expect quality & reliability. When a company takes my money & doesn't deliver quality & reliability, I feel betrayed & have no desire give a company my money & loyalty.
Give me quality, reliability & trust & I'll give 'em back to you. It's a two way street.
I also expect to be treated like a consumer, not a potential criminal.
I've noticed that no matter what it is, people downplay the importance of things like this until it becomes too late to do anything about it without an immense struggle, if possible at all.
gotmaxpower
New member
Personally I think this will never kick off, sounds way too far fetched and looks like it will bring piracy to the next level.
Some of the rules are a little bit OTT though, like the refund rule. If a person buys a game regardless of the system requirements - and then finds out his computer cant run it - he shouldn't be entitled to a refund because it was a fault on his part.
Some of the rules are a little bit OTT though, like the refund rule. If a person buys a game regardless of the system requirements - and then finds out his computer cant run it - he shouldn't be entitled to a refund because it was a fault on his part.
name='ionicle' said:
Yea but theyre not rules, theyre just a humble request on behalf of gamers. We have the right to demand whatever the hell we want but that doesnt mean we have the legal right to take action if we're told to shove it, which is what will happen with a lot of these.
Rastalovich
New member
name='gotmaxpower' said:
They want to cater also to the likes of people who have pcs built for them, or purchase them, and don`t wholey know what`s inside them. It`s a fair comment.
It doesn`t reach that far tho, in the majority of cases u don`t need to tell them why ur sending them back for refund, especially if bought over the internet. U have like 14 days grace or something under some european law or similar.
I can imagine EA rolling all over the floor with laughter tbh.
Mr. Smith
New member
I agree with 90% this.
Developers should make working games and support them afterwards. Yes we choose to buy games but its a developers JOB to make fully functioning games...
Not in agreement with 'Right for full refund if it doesnt work on hardware' - read the min/rec specs nublets.
Developers should make working games and support them afterwards. Yes we choose to buy games but its a developers JOB to make fully functioning games...
Not in agreement with 'Right for full refund if it doesnt work on hardware' - read the min/rec specs nublets.
Yes its their job to make a good game, but we have no right to demand what they do since we dont technicaly pay them. We pay the money to pay their company and thats that. If anything we should be demanding of companies to do their jobs right which is boss the devs around to get somethign right done but it will never work.
Rastalovich
New member
Well they`re all guilty in a way. A dev has a publisher, a year goes by and the publisher wants the game out by the fall. The dev often has a contract to do so, that can lose %ages if dates aren`t met. So the dev either keeps their soul and produces the game 100% working or meets the deadline @ 96% and patches later.
It`s all to do with monies, often if they have 6 more months u`ll get more towards the 100%, but there can be penalties for them. This can be party to funds being paid to the dev upfront - the deals are signed and time flies by.
It does seem to take an inordinate amount of time to do games these days mind u. They used to come out with "well we use studios and complex things these days" - bolox tbh. Most of that is splashed out in a fixed period, overly so (they make more studio stuff than they need within a period) and then work off that raw footage.
I can probably bet that the most time is spent on bug fixing.
It`s all to do with monies, often if they have 6 more months u`ll get more towards the 100%, but there can be penalties for them. This can be party to funds being paid to the dev upfront - the deals are signed and time flies by.
It does seem to take an inordinate amount of time to do games these days mind u. They used to come out with "well we use studios and complex things these days" - bolox tbh. Most of that is splashed out in a fixed period, overly so (they make more studio stuff than they need within a period) and then work off that raw footage.
I can probably bet that the most time is spent on bug fixing.
