GoofsterStud
Member
Bravo for putting your money where your mouth is. Good luck getting a refund.
VISA has already taken care of it.
Bravo for putting your money where your mouth is. Good luck getting a refund.
That is pretty damn shitty. So I dont own the games?
What if I download all my 100+ games from steam to a HDD, then deactivate?
You better download 100+ cracks if you want to play them
VISA has already taken care of it.
http://i.imgur.com/YM7Hq.png[IMG]
I know this is expected but don't you love the way Steam Support put it here.
In the UK/EU I believe it can be ignored as I don't think this can hold up with our consumer rights.
[B]Just like the fact you can get a refund on [U][URL="http://i.imgur.com/Zx8eR.png"]any digital download in the UK 7 days after with no explanation[/B][/URL] [/U] or even after that if it's not as intended. (I've used that a few times.
FYI: [U][URL="http://i.imgur.com/bXcxw.jpg"]TLDR Version of Steams New Agreement[/URL][/U][/QUOTE]
That's how people were getting refunds on the completely broken F1 2011. People made it sound so matter of fact. Guess they were UKers.
VISA has already taken care of it.
Well, you've made certain Valve will wipe your Steam account now.
Wow, really? How much money are you talking about, dating back how long? And which state/country is this that lets you?
Ridiculously low sale prices
(can't even be argued as bad for the developer considering how beforehand in the retail space their games would go into a bargain bin without any advertising or would be competing heavily with the reselling market)
Easy storage of your catalog
(admittedly everyone else provides this very easily now)
Finely well tuned social networking tools that are gaming oriented.
(Noone comes close to this)
DRM that doesn't feel intrusive.
(hello Blizzard)
Great discovery service for finding games that would appeal to you.
(They're even better than Apple and I only think that is the case because they are serving only one type of pc application market instead of spread across 4)
I am concerned with this why? My civil liberties are more important to me.
What civil liberties? Certainly, the right to join a class action lawsuit isn't one, it was repealed by the Supreme Court April 2011.
For people who accept such terms.
Which translates to "anyone who uses the services of any American company".
Not all companies make you wave such rights. >.>
That's what developers commented about it:I'm not really a big fan of the 'wait for the sales' mentality that steam has cultivated, I think it may benefit some of the more prominent studios but for many it would be interesting to see how few games sell on steam outside of the big sales.
Not sure what you mean. You can easily copy-paste your game folders over a LAN without any issue. They just work.It's kinda not really 'easy' storage. You can't move games between computers, like you can with other services. If I have 2 PCs and I want to move my steam library across I have to redownload, which is kinda a pain.
No idea of what's supposed to be "crashy" about the chat, as I can't say I ever experience a crash with it. But I'm sure that I can't think of concurrent services offering better community features.Uh, I'm not sure if you're talking about the same social tools. The only thing I've ever really used the community page for is checking playtimes. The chat is awful, crashy and badly implemented.
Not all companies make you wave such rights. >.>
In regards to gaming, pretty much all of them do. XBL, PSN, Origin, Amazon have similar clauses in their TOS that you've already accepted. I guess you can use gog though.
Steam was heavy handed in their implementation though, hopefully they can incorporate a better system in the future like they did with banned accounts.
Are you missing that people who don't agree to these terms are unable to play their games?
We are not talking about the new terms here though. He made his purchases under the very terms he is complaining now. I just wonder why.
I'm not really a big fan of the 'wait for the sales' mentality that steam has cultivated, I think it may benefit some of the more prominent studios but for many it would be interesting to see how few games sell on steam outside of the big sales.
ITT: People not realising this is standard practice in America, has been for a good 15 months, and there's no way of getting round it.
And I'm not a big fan of buying anything for 50 - 60 dollars when you don't actually own the physical media and you don't have resale rights. And there are almost no PC games sold today with resale rights. And without that, the real price of PC games is MUCH higher than console games. So, yeah, baby! Will. Wait. For. Steam. Sales. Because fuck the publishers otherwise. Their games are way overpriced (for the entertainment market that exists in the year 2012... not 1985) and they could all die in a fire otherwise.
No I made a purchase before the new terms. I will never make a Steam purchase again.
I couldn't make purchases if I wanted to anyway after the new terms since I didn't agree. Maybe you are talking to someone else, if so I apologize.
No, he means that you bought Steam's games under the original agreement that Valve had the right to lock you out of your games whenever they damn well please.
I knew and accepted that term when I began using Steam. I don't know why so many people here don't.
When you state it like that, I'm glad I'm getting my money back.
Thanks.
The amount of legal mumbo jumbo can make everything look bad. Consider that there are many games with locked-out content on disk, you are never buying games, you are essentially buying a right to play them. You don't own the disk and you can't do with it what you please. People still buy games because this never actually comes into play on a common basis. It's the same with Valve being able to lock out your steam account. They would never do it for no reason and if they suspect something and do lock it out, I've seen plenty of steam support replies that have gotten solved quickly. Just because a company can do X and it's in their agreement, doesn't mean they will, there is plenty of legal BS in gaming that rarely amounts to anything.
The point is that they shouldn't be able to lock me out of a purchase, whether they have a reason or not.
I'm pretty sure the doctrine of equitable unconscionability comes into play here. You agreed to a contract for services and paid money and then the other side unilaterally changed the terms of the contract with no remedy on your end.
Cute, but not legally enforceable in my juridstiction (again, afaik, and Australia); and couldn't see that on a quick search anyway.
Just to play devil's advocate, I'm not sure unconscionability would work here. Mind you, what I'm saying after this is based on personal knowledge, not any real research or knowledge of the specific law in the forum where this clause is litigated so my words are definitely not legal advice and may not be correct. But unconscionability is usually a nuclear option that is rarely used by courts. When it is, it is usually to invalidate extremely unfair contracts. I'm not sure that this clause will count as unfair. Namely because this is an arbitration clause (you are forced into arbitration rather than a lawsuit), which is common in contracts. This clause doesn't remove all of your legal options, it just funnels them into arbitration. Moreover, courts actually favor arbitration clauses t so it will likely be loathe to overturn this clause. Now, I could be completely wrong on this but I at least am willing to argue that this is not a slam dunk case.
Duress might be a decent argument but it still runs up against public policy favoring arbitration. I don't know enough about the law of duress generally to make any claims about it.
What I'm trying to say here is don't sign the agreement being 100% certain that this clause will not be enforced. I imagine Valve hired a good law firm to structure this clause and that the law firm has a good argument for the validity of the clause. Moreover, the mere existence of the clause, regardless of whether or not it is valid, acts as a deterrent. Let's say Valve does something that may make you want to engage in a class action lawsuit. You will have to address this clause at some point, which just adds to the legal costs. Plus, Valve can draw out litigation over this one clause. You may eventually win and have the clause declared unenforceable, but the legal cost of doing so may be so high that you might not have the funds to proceed, the class might not have the funds to proceed, or a law firm taking this case on commission may not want to even deal with it.
The point is that they shouldn't be able to lock me out of a purchase, whether they have a reason or not.
Retail>digital confirmed.
That's fine if we don't hold the same opinion on steam.Sorry to be picky, but basically everything you said here is a massive over-exaggeration of steam, or basically not at all good for the consumer.
I don't either but I see how it can be argued as acceptable for other people which is why I bring it up. In fact it pretty much is the biggest reason people talk about and hype up Steam in the first place.I'm not really a big fan of the 'wait for the sales' mentality that steam has cultivated, I think it may benefit some of the more prominent studios but for many it would be interesting to see how few games sell on steam outside of the big sales.
Yeah if Steam was GoG I would understand this problem but I accept why Steam uses DRM and why they would be more attractive to devs as a platform to sell there wares.It's kinda not really 'easy' storage. You can't move games between computers, like you can with other services. If I have 2 PCs and I want to move my steam library across I have to redownload, which is kinda a pain.
Uh, I'm not sure if you're talking about the same social tools. The only thing I've ever really used the community page for is checking playtimes. The chat is awful, crashy and badly implemented.
Well, I've never actually got Steam's fabled offline mode to work consistently, I don't really get the dig at Blizzard here..
I have never used the 'discovery service', I'm not even really sure what you're talking about.
I just got Sleeping Dogs and Darksiders 2 for less than what you'll pay for 1 on consoles. So I'll disagree with you there.
That's what developers commented about it:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...w_deep_discounts_really_affect_your_games.php
Sections 2(C), 2(E), 2(F), 3(A), 3(B), 3(D), 3(H), and 5 - 13 will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement.
Something odd:
So even if you disagree, you can't sue (section 12 is the waiver)?