Originally posted by bverji Originally posted by Bethling However, when you subscribed to the game, you did agree to their license and terms of service. The Terms of Service says: "Turbine has the right to terminate or suspend, and you have the right to cancel, your account(s) or a particular subscription at any time. " They can shut down the game and cancel everyone's account if they choose to. They didn't forfeit any rights. Just because they put something in an agreement it's only binding if they have the legal right to make such a option in the first place. For example, you can't make a cotract for money/sex or promise/suicide. these are of course extreme examples but it illustrates that contracts are only binding within the frame work of the law. Reguardless of which the part you quote is pertaining to the right to stop a particular subscription not to ceasing service all together.
Of course a clause has to be legal to be binding; allowing either party to a contract the ability cancel the contract is legal (as far as I know , and has been used many times in the past by many businesses.
I'm a businesswoman, not a lawyer, but I don't see a difference in shutting down the service and in canceling their contract with all of their subscribers (user's aren't billed and can no longer connect to the servers).
Of course a clause has to be legal to be binding; allowing either party to a contract the ability cancel the contract is legal (as far as I know , and has been used many times in the past by many businesses. I'm a businesswoman, not a lawyer, but I don't see a difference in shutting down the service and in canceling their contract with all of their subscribers (user's aren't billed and can no longer connect to the servers).
As I said before because it's not just a service. They can't sell a game and then not provide a way to play it. Your right they have all the right in the world to not provide service and cancel the ongoing contract with their customers, however they don't have the right to sell a game and then not provide a way to use it. The contract is irrelevent.
Originally posted by Atoh Let me rephrase what I said, after some thought. When you buy a game you are essentially buying the right to create an account to play said game. That Cd key is generally used to create an account... which Turbine reserves the right to cancel at anytime. You are not buying the code. You are simply buying the right, as others have stated, to play the game for the month that you paid for. Not for 3 months after, not for a week after. If you stop paying the company, you stop recieveing the right to play the game. Turbine has no responsiblilities to it's customers if they are no longer getting paid.
So, what you mean is that the first month is NOT indeed free as most MMO companies like to say? But in fact the most expensive month of them all, about 40$ or so.
Because by that reasoning you get one month of play for whatever the box costs, and after that you have some garbage to dispose of, ( wich ALSO costs money, and is an environmental problem as well ).
If I can get my hands on an EMU or whatever i am sure gonna play, and have no moral or ethical concerns what so ever.
It is not as if turbine is going out of biss, they are just cancelling a service.
And if I am only renting the software then they can have it back, with the expansion, as long as they hand me the cash back, seems fair to me.
I doubt though they will make any server software avail, or a SP patch or anything.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I say yes,As long as no one makes profit of it because people have been paying for that game for a long time and now Turbine comes and closes it down just like that.I really think they should release all the server files and let the players make their own servers as long as they don't make profit.
Originally posted by bverji As I said before because it's not just a service. They can't sell a game and then not provide a way to play it. Your right they have all the right in the world to not provide service and cancel the ongoing contract with their customers, however they don't have the right to sell a game and then not provide a way to use it. The contract is irrelevent.
I guess I just don't think it's reasonable to expect to be able to play a subscription-based game after the service has been discontinued. And I think that's a difference between the two of us that isn't going to be resolved
I guess I just don't think it's reasonable to expect to be able to play a subscription-based game after the service has been discontinued. And I think that's a difference between the two of us that isn't going to be resolved
I can accept that .
I just don't think they have the right to sell a game and expansions for $50 and then only claim to be a subscription game.
Originally posted by SONOFAGUNN If you spend $50 on a game and you pay to play for a reasonable time they should give you the right to set up your own server.
lolz.
Okay, first off let's assume that no profit was being made on AC2's new player controlled servers.
So you got free AC2 servers now after the game shuts down. Everyone knows AC2 is linked to and made by Turbine, Inc.
...So now some schmucks start the new AC2 servers with all the umm "stolen" code and work of Turbine and place them on their own servers. Their servers are nowhere near as good as Turbines. The lag is extremely horrid. Bugs that Turbine would have/could have smashed easily start to run rampant. The schmucks that start their own servers play with the code and now have avatars running around nekked and jumping halfway across the continents with a new funtion that they add. The original games code of conduct for the player base is thrashed and not enforced at all. Harassment including both sexual and racial run rampant without conequence.
This is only a possibility of what might happen, sure. But in the hands of whoever puts their little paws on it that wants to use the code and AC2 name could do this or much worse actually.
And this kindof negative free hosting is certainly a good possibility!
I can see why Turbine doesn't just hand out their code for all to use, even if there were no liability or financial concerns. Something like I just described would only make Turbine look really bad to any future adventurers of the AC2 world on free servers.
- Zaxx
I agree with that if we are just talking about a un-successful game, but if the game was successfull and they decided to do away with it after 8 years I would think my view would be more applicable.
After all if the game sucked why would you want the code (only to hack it into something).
It would be up to the company and in no way would I condone the ripping of code, all I am saying is that it would be nice.
You have NO RIGHTS what-so-ever to the software that you were simply RENTING to play.
You did not OWN it, you bought premission to PLAY it. The only part of it you ever owned was the box and CD media the software came on. That's IT! You did not OWN the bits and bytes that were ON the CD. That was Proprietary
The only way anyone should have these so-called RIGHTS is if they purchase all the source code from the manufacture/developing software house and that rarely happens.
Don't you think that the software in itself is still valuable to the company? It has code that can be reused in other ventures. Why would you want to give up your trade secrets for free?
What you are asking for is like going into a 5star resturant, ordering the desert and then demanding the Chef give you the recipe for it.
Originally posted by The-Raven What you are asking for is like going into a 5star resturant, ordering the desert and then demanding the Chef give you the recipe for it.
no it's more like going to a resturant charging you for deseart and then giving you no silverware to eat it with
Originally posted by i<3robots Blizzard did not claim a loss of revenue in the suit- as they really couldnt claim a loss of revenue. Both Bnet and bnetd.net were free services. The court did not take revenue into account.
If I am charging $50 for a game and you are giving the game away my loss revenue is $50 reguardless of what you are charging. The laws recognises this and that how the concept of revenue works in the legal model. I explained it before. I don't know how to have a disscussion with you if you can't accept/understand basic and reasonable concepts. I know that comes off harshly and I don't intend to be insulting, but I don't know what else to say to such a grave misinterpretation about loss of revenue. What your saying is obviously incorrect being free services has no bearing.
Civil court can't recognise anything other then monetary loss, everything is about monetary exchange and the rights of monetary exchange in civil court. That's why people can't own ideas there isn't anythin substanial to posses and there is no singular possession the only thing that can be own is the right of worth from an idea.
bnetd.net wasnt giving away blizzard games - it was just offering a private network to play the games online. Afaik, you still needed to purchase the actual Blizzard games in order to play on either network. There was never a loss of revenue claim made. It was a simple copyright violations case. DMRA really changed a lot of the laws - loss of revenue isnt relevant at all anymore.
Civil Courts can and do recognize losses other than monetary. Malpractice and civil rights violations are both such examples. The method of relief is most often monetary though. I would aslo maintain there is a diffference between an idea and a intellectual properrty. A talking mouse is an idea, Mickey Mouse is a property. I can make a game with a talking mouse, but if i use Mickey without permission - i would lose any litigation pressed against me. Same situation here....
Originally posted by i<3robots Blizzard did not claim a loss of revenue in the suit- as they really couldnt claim a loss of revenue. Both Bnet and bnetd.net were free services. The court did not take revenue into account.
If I am charging $50 for a game and you are giving the game away my loss revenue is $50 reguardless of what you are charging.
bnetd.net wasnt giving away blizzard games - it was just offering a private network to play the games online. Afaik, you still needed to purchase the actual Blizzard games in order to play on either network. There was never a loss of revenue claim made. It was a simple copyright violations case. DMRA really changed a lot of the laws - loss of revenue isnt relevant at all anymore.
Civil Courts can and do recognize losses other than monetary. Malpractice and civil rights violations are both such examples. The method of relief is most often monetary though. I would aslo maintain there is a diffference between an idea and a intellectual properrty. A talking mouse is an idea, Mickey Mouse is a property. I can make a game with a talking mouse, but if i use Mickey without permission - i would lose any litigation pressed against me. Same situation here....
I was using the $50 analogy as an explanation of revenue not as an illustration of the lawsuit between Blizzard and bnetd...reread it.
Most malpractice is about loss revenue and reperations and they reward the plantif based on a MONETARY amount. As for civil rights cases it depends some cases are criminal and some civil. The civil ones rerward a MONETARY settlement.
Seriously you need to just stop talking about things that are clear you have little understanding of. I am sure you are an intellegent and capable person, but you obviously know the little about law.
Since every game in their EULA hammers the Game belongs to the parent company its kinda a moot point. I look at it this way there are tons of MMO's oyut there anymore if the game I am playing folds theres always another around the corner
Originally posted by bverji As I said before because it's not just a service. They can't sell a game and then not provide a way to play it. Your right they have all the right in the world to not provide service and cancel the ongoing contract with their customers, however they don't have the right to sell a game and then not provide a way to use it. The contract is irrelevent.
It is a subscription-based service and they're not selling a game. What you bought is access to the game. More or less you just paid the initial fees of a subscription-based service. i<3robots gave a good example a few pages back.
Currently playing: * City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant. * City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
I don't believe that anyone should have a right to run a private server as the company still owns the code, which they may or may not use at a later date. I do believe however that if an mmorg closes shortly after persuading thousands of people to buy an expansion (AC2) then those people should be entitled to a full refund of the said purchase.
If this is a legal way to do business then guys, we could all be rich overnight. Lets start an mmorg, package it in a pretty box, hype it in a media overload and sell a few thousand copies. A couple of weeks later we can shut it down and start over, cool $$$$$
Originally posted by The-Raven What you are asking for is like going into a 5star resturant, ordering the desert and then demanding the Chef give you the recipe for it.
no it's more like going to a resturant charging you for deseart and then giving you no silverware to eat it with
No it's more like paying for your dessert, the restraunt deciding they don't want to serve and taking the half-eaten dessert off your table without asking if your done or if you want to take it home.
None of the above restaurant comparisons is correct, since you didn't buy the game, you subscribed to it by paying the initial fee of purchasing the box. Like subscribing to a DSL line and paying an initial fee and purchasing a DSL modem...
Currently playing: * City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant. * City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
The software belongs to the company that made it. The only thing you did when purchasing it and any subsequent expansions was buy the right to make use of the client. Server side is and always has been the domain of the company.
Now with that said Lineage 2, UO and other mmo's do not release their server software yet people still open private servers. Check on slashdot and see if there is any interest in creating private servers. They are typically a labor of love though so whether or not one may arrive is entirely up to the commiunity.
Originally posted by i<3robots Originally posted by bverji Originally posted by i<3robots Blizzard did not claim a loss of revenue in the suit- as they really couldnt claim a loss of revenue. Both Bnet and bnetd.net were free services. The court did not take revenue into account. If I am charging $50 for a game and you are giving the game away my loss revenue is $50 reguardless of what you are charging. The laws recognises this and that how the concept of revenue works in the legal model. I explained it before. I don't know how to have a disscussion with you if you can't accept/understand basic and reasonable concepts. I know that comes off harshly and I don't intend to be insulting, but I don't know what else to say to such a grave misinterpretation about loss of revenue. What your saying is obviously incorrect being free services has no bearing. Civil court can't recognise anything other then monetary loss, everything is about monetary exchange and the rights of monetary exchange in civil court. That's why people can't own ideas there isn't anythin substanial to posses and there is no singular possession the only thing that can be own is the right of worth from an idea. bnetd.net wasnt giving away blizzard games - it was just offering a private network to play the games online. Afaik, you still needed to purchase the actual Blizzard games in order to play on either network. There was never a loss of revenue claim made. It was a simple copyright violations case. DMRA really changed a lot of the laws - loss of revenue isnt relevant at all anymore. Civil Courts can and do recognize losses other than monetary. Malpractice and civil rights violations are both such examples. The method of relief is most often monetary though. I would aslo maintain there is a diffference between an idea and a intellectual properrty. A talking mouse is an idea, Mickey Mouse is a property. I can make a game with a talking mouse, but if i use Mickey without permission - i would lose any litigation pressed against me. Same situation here....
Bnetd did not provide downloads of the client software but they facilitated the use of pirated software and pirated keys so that people that did not pay for the software were able to enjoy it as though they had further making the reason to pay for the software less and less. As far as I know that is considered legally an accessory and leaves them open to litigation. The same as how Ultima offline and other server emulators do not enforce registration keys keeping people that got the software illegally from enjoying it.
Originally posted by deggilator It is a subscription-based service and they're not selling a game.
A good example is let's say you purchase a satellite antene. The company can't charge you 500 for the antenna and then two years down the road decide to no longer service their satellite. Although your paying $40 a month for the service they are still responsible to you beyond the service because they sold you an atenna. It's not just a "subscription-based service" because by selling you ownership of the antenne they obligated themselves to provide service (assuming the antenne only works with their satellite, wich most are set up that way).
What your trying to claim is that because when I bought the santenna (that I now possess) I didn't buy the rights to build my own satilite, and/or didn't buy the rights to build my own antenna that I don't have the right to my intial investment of $500 for purchasing a now usless item. That's just absurd.
For years software developers got royally screwed form people pirating their work and since the 90's there has been huge push to correct that, but it has gotten to the point that people have becomed brainwashed into believing that the purchaser of software has no possession rights at all. Obviously that's not the case. IP laws are to protect Software developers from people stealiing money from them by using their ideas, but that doesn't mean when a person buys a peice of software that they don't own possession of it. Sure just like in the example with the antenne the purchaser can't use it to recreate their own, but they still own the item they purchased.
In the case of MMOG's reguardless of what part of the software is on the disk when a person buys the software it is a game; it is marketed as a game, designed to be played as a game, says game on the box and displayed with other games the person buys the game realising their is a monly fee assossciated with the game, but expecting that their purchase of the software denotes ownership of the game.
By choosing to sell the expansions and the "game" the MMOG producer gives user ownership of that part in which they sold their customer and reguardless of the quibbling of what that initial software consists of the producer has the obligation to provide it's use or refund the amount spent to purchase that ownership.
all i have to say to all this BS is you can go in to a store and BUY AC2 now. there still selling it. in some stores.
so you get the game and install it and try to set up your account to play mm yes they still take your money.
for a service they do not provide.
if they feel they can not aford to run our server then let us run one. look they still have poeple buy the game.
there are laws in my state that protect us from this type of crimes. not sure about where you live.
lets say i sell you a car you think its all there you just have to spend money to keep gas in it. and you find out the only type of gas it uses there not making anymore and there not letting anyone else make that gas eather. you stuck with a car that does not run can not run and will never run.
I say yes as long as no one makes money from it! because people might love that game and just because the company is out of budget they shut it down...
Originally posted by bverji A good example is let's say you purchase a satellite antene. The company can't charge you 500 for the antenna and then two years down the road decide to no longer service their satellite. Although your paying $40 a month for the service they are still responsible to you beyond the service because they sold you an atenna. It's not just a "subscription-based service" because by selling you ownership of the antenne they obligated themselves to provide service (assuming the antenne only works with their satellite, wich most are set up that way).
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. They may stop providing the service at their discretion, for example if they do not have enough customers and income to support the service, as is stated in the subscription contract of such services. And, unlike MMORPGs, you even sign the contract that states that term and no law obliges them otherwise. As far as I know, the only legal obligation is to provide you with a refund for any pre-paid time period that the service will not be provided. The $500 you paid for the equipment does not oblige them, it was the purchase of an antenna and that antenna is still at your posession, isn't it?
Currently playing: * City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant. * City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
Considering the emotion level of involvement into the game, a MMO should not even have the right to close without making some options availables for folks who want to take the flame onward.
The details would need to be worked, they dont need to allow everyone to be able to run free servers, and they dont need to be completely free, however 80% of any fees charge should be given back to the MMO creating company (a royalty). If nobody want to keep the flame going on, maybe they would need to reconsider and have an offer for someone to accept keep going on with the MMO, up to the point of completely free if needed...we are talking about customers been happy with what they buy...and in entertainment, this is life.
Current laws say they can close at their own leasure. I assume the most respectable companies would never be doing something like closing nonetheless, regardless of any laws. The laws could be extremely harsh on those companies, since they offer, from the start, to run everything on their side...and americans laws are often harsh when it come down to closing something you offer, especially when you charge money and the customers paid for said service(the fact we buy the initial box)...many phone companies and electricities companies can tell you about past laws that enforce them on delivering a service they want to close. To say the laws will not change is been more a visionnary then basing your beliefs on facts.
But yes, due to the emotional involvement in MMOs, they should offer some form of "keep going on" servers for individuals that may want to do it. We are not talking about a single RPG that you can run nonetheless but will just not get any new patch, we are talking about a game that you cant play anymore and that you have buyed, often with many expensions, which represent hundreds of $ and most importantly, the emotional involvement of the players.
Yes, yes and yes. A company that close a MMORPG(like Turbines) for ANY reason without offering something I judge proper, is definitely a company I wont waste my money on future MMOs releases, and I bet Microsoft wont be looking kindly on those Turbines folks if it mean less DDO sells. But nobody know if there will be AC2 stuff open for 3rd party to run it still (in this example the raiding setting of DDO is the main reason, but this secondary reason would need to find an adequate answer as well for me to consider their game...yet...in D&D case...I mean, TSR is the roxor...maybe...I dunno...lot of emotions...if there was no raiding and they behave wrongly with AC2...not sure...I would not give any chance to non-TSR products...anyway, it is still a wrong behavior from the company and nothing to improve customers appreciation).
As a side example, Square Enix lost me as a customer because of their MMO and the fact they erase an account after 3 months, we are not even talking of closing the MMO, just because they erase data, they lost a customer for good, I will never again buy any SquareEnix Product...now just think for a moment a game I enjoy is not available to play anymore...I bet that this company is on a road to hell.
A company that start a MMO make untold promises other non-MMO games dont do...and even if they dont need to respect those promises, not respecting them may have dire consequences in the futures. The customers are everything to a company, and unhappy customer mean that the company might as well just close right away. And we all know how emotional the customers in MMO can be...so again...
YES. (regardless of any law)
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Comments
Of course a clause has to be legal to be binding; allowing either party to a contract the ability cancel the contract is legal (as far as I know
, and has been used many times in the past by many businesses.
I'm a businesswoman, not a lawyer, but I don't see a difference in shutting down the service and in canceling their contract with all of their subscribers (user's aren't billed and can no longer connect to the servers).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I say yes,As long as no one makes profit of it because people have been paying for that game for a long time and now Turbine comes and closes it down just like that.I really think they should release all the server files and let the players make their own servers as long as they don't make profit.
I guess I just don't think it's reasonable to expect to be able to play a subscription-based game after the service has been discontinued. And I think that's a difference between the two of us that isn't going to be resolved
I can accept that
I just don't think they have the right to sell a game and expansions for $50 and then only claim to be a subscription game.
lolz.
Okay, first off let's assume that no profit was being made on AC2's new player controlled servers.
So you got free AC2 servers now after the game shuts down. Everyone knows AC2 is linked to and made by Turbine, Inc.
...So now some schmucks start the new AC2 servers with all the umm "stolen" code and work of Turbine and place them on their own servers. Their servers are nowhere near as good as Turbines. The lag is extremely horrid. Bugs that Turbine would have/could have smashed easily start to run rampant. The schmucks that start their own servers play with the code and now have avatars running around nekked and jumping halfway across the continents with a new funtion that they add. The original games code of conduct for the player base is thrashed and not enforced at all. Harassment including both sexual and racial run rampant without conequence.
This is only a possibility of what might happen, sure. But in the hands of whoever puts their little paws on it that wants to use the code and AC2 name could do this or much worse actually.
And this kindof negative free hosting is certainly a good possibility!
I can see why Turbine doesn't just hand out their code for all to use, even if there were no liability or financial concerns. Something like I just described would only make Turbine look really bad to any future adventurers of the AC2 world on free servers.
- Zaxx
I agree with that if we are just talking about a un-successful game, but if the game was successfull and they decided to do away with it after 8 years I would think my view would be more applicable.
After all if the game sucked why would you want the code (only to hack it into something).
It would be up to the company and in no way would I condone the ripping of code, all I am saying is that it would be nice.
Witty saying to amuse you goes here.
You got to be kidding me right?
LOL
You have NO RIGHTS what-so-ever to the software that you were simply RENTING to play.
You did not OWN it, you bought premission to PLAY it. The only part of it you ever owned was the box and CD media the software came on. That's IT! You did not OWN the bits and bytes that were ON the CD. That was Proprietary
The only way anyone should have these so-called RIGHTS is if they purchase all the source code from the manufacture/developing software house and that rarely happens.
Don't you think that the software in itself is still valuable to the company? It has code that can be reused in other ventures. Why would you want to give up your trade secrets for free?
What you are asking for is like going into a 5star resturant, ordering the desert and then demanding the Chef give you the recipe for it.
Civil court can't recognise anything other then monetary loss, everything is about monetary exchange and the rights of monetary exchange in civil court. That's why people can't own ideas there isn't anythin substanial to posses and there is no singular possession the only thing that can be own is the right of worth from an idea.
bnetd.net wasnt giving away blizzard games - it was just offering a private network to play the games online. Afaik, you still needed to purchase the actual Blizzard games in order to play on either network. There was never a loss of revenue claim made. It was a simple copyright violations case. DMRA really changed a lot of the laws - loss of revenue isnt relevant at all anymore.
Civil Courts can and do recognize losses other than monetary. Malpractice and civil rights violations are both such examples. The method of relief is most often monetary though. I would aslo maintain there is a diffference between an idea and a intellectual properrty. A talking mouse is an idea, Mickey Mouse is a property. I can make a game with a talking mouse, but if i use Mickey without permission - i would lose any litigation pressed against me. Same situation here....
bnetd.net wasnt giving away blizzard games - it was just offering a private network to play the games online. Afaik, you still needed to purchase the actual Blizzard games in order to play on either network. There was never a loss of revenue claim made. It was a simple copyright violations case. DMRA really changed a lot of the laws - loss of revenue isnt relevant at all anymore.
Civil Courts can and do recognize losses other than monetary. Malpractice and civil rights violations are both such examples. The method of relief is most often monetary though. I would aslo maintain there is a diffference between an idea and a intellectual properrty. A talking mouse is an idea, Mickey Mouse is a property. I can make a game with a talking mouse, but if i use Mickey without permission - i would lose any litigation pressed against me. Same situation here....
I was using the $50 analogy as an explanation of revenue not as an illustration of the lawsuit between Blizzard and bnetd...reread it.
Most malpractice is about loss revenue and reperations and they reward the plantif based on a MONETARY amount. As for civil rights cases it depends some cases are criminal and some civil. The civil ones rerward a MONETARY settlement.
Seriously you need to just stop talking about things that are clear you have little understanding of. I am sure you are an intellegent and capable person, but you obviously know the little about law.
Since every game in their EULA hammers the Game belongs to the parent company its kinda a moot point. I look at it this way there are tons of MMO's oyut there anymore if the game I am playing folds theres always another around the corner
It is a subscription-based service and they're not selling a game. What you bought is access to the game. More or less you just paid the initial fees of a subscription-based service. i<3robots gave a good example a few pages back.
Currently playing:
* City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant.
* City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
I don't believe that anyone should have a right to run a private server as the company still owns the code, which they may or may not use at a later date. I do believe however that if an mmorg closes shortly after persuading thousands of people to buy an expansion (AC2) then those people should be entitled to a full refund of the said purchase.
If this is a legal way to do business then guys, we could all be rich overnight. Lets start an mmorg, package it in a pretty box, hype it in a media overload and sell a few thousand copies. A couple of weeks later we can shut it down and start over, cool $$$$$
I don't care wtf yall say
I miss earth and beyond, chances are EA will never let it see the light of day again.
I want me enb back....now.
no it's more like going to a resturant charging you for deseart and then giving you no silverware to eat it with
No it's more like paying for your dessert, the restraunt deciding they don't want to serve and taking the half-eaten dessert off your table without asking if your done or if you want to take it home.
Witty saying to amuse you goes here.
None of the above restaurant comparisons is correct, since you didn't buy the game, you subscribed to it by paying the initial fee of purchasing the box. Like subscribing to a DSL line and paying an initial fee and purchasing a DSL modem...
Currently playing:
* City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant.
* City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
The glue factory has long since sent you a bill for services here.
The software belongs to the company that made it. The only thing you did when purchasing it and any subsequent expansions was buy the right to make use of the client. Server side is and always has been the domain of the company.
Now with that said Lineage 2, UO and other mmo's do not release their server software yet people still open private servers. Check on slashdot and see if there is any interest in creating private servers. They are typically a labor of love though so whether or not one may arrive is entirely up to the commiunity.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
Bnetd did not provide downloads of the client software but they facilitated the use of pirated software and pirated keys so that people that did not pay for the software were able to enjoy it as though they had further making the reason to pay for the software less and less. As far as I know that is considered legally an accessory and leaves them open to litigation. The same as how Ultima offline and other server emulators do not enforce registration keys keeping people that got the software illegally from enjoying it.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
A good example is let's say you purchase a satellite antene. The company can't charge you 500 for the antenna and then two years down the road decide to no longer service their satellite. Although your paying $40 a month for the service they are still responsible to you beyond the service because they sold you an atenna. It's not just a "subscription-based service" because by selling you ownership of the antenne they obligated themselves to provide service (assuming the antenne only works with their satellite, wich most are set up that way).
What your trying to claim is that because when I bought the santenna (that I now possess) I didn't buy the rights to build my own satilite, and/or didn't buy the rights to build my own antenna that I don't have the right to my intial investment of $500 for purchasing a now usless item. That's just absurd.
For years software developers got royally screwed form people pirating their work and since the 90's there has been huge push to correct that, but it has gotten to the point that people have becomed brainwashed into believing that the purchaser of software has no possession rights at all. Obviously that's not the case. IP laws are to protect Software developers from people stealiing money from them by using their ideas, but that doesn't mean when a person buys a peice of software that they don't own possession of it. Sure just like in the example with the antenne the purchaser can't use it to recreate their own, but they still own the item they purchased.
In the case of MMOG's reguardless of what part of the software is on the disk when a person buys the software it is a game; it is marketed as a game, designed to be played as a game, says game on the box and displayed with other games the person buys the game realising their is a monly fee assossciated with the game, but expecting that their purchase of the software denotes ownership of the game.
By choosing to sell the expansions and the "game" the MMOG producer gives user ownership of that part in which they sold their customer and reguardless of the quibbling of what that initial software consists of the producer has the obligation to provide it's use or refund the amount spent to purchase that ownership.
all i have to say to all this BS is you can go in to a store and BUY AC2 now. there still selling it. in some stores.
so you get the game and install it and try to set up your account to play mm yes they still take your money.
for a service they do not provide.
if they feel they can not aford to run our server then let us run one. look they still have poeple buy the game.
there are laws in my state that protect us from this type of crimes. not sure about where you live.
lets say i sell you a car you think its all there you just have to spend money to keep gas in it. and you find out the only type of gas it uses there not making anymore and there not letting anyone else make that gas eather. you stuck with a car that does not run can not run and will never run.
they have bent you over and ramed it in.
you have 3 things you can do.
act like its not happening.
injoy it.
or fight for your life.
give me freedom or give me death....
www.DigitalMindz.com
I say yes as long as no one makes money from it! because people might love that game and just because the company is out of budget they shut it down...
like i said yup
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. They may stop providing the service at their discretion, for example if they do not have enough customers and income to support the service, as is stated in the subscription contract of such services. And, unlike MMORPGs, you even sign the contract that states that term and no law obliges them otherwise. As far as I know, the only legal obligation is to provide you with a refund for any pre-paid time period that the service will not be provided. The $500 you paid for the equipment does not oblige them, it was the purchase of an antenna and that antenna is still at your posession, isn't it?
Currently playing:
* City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant.
* City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
Yes.
Considering the emotion level of involvement into the game, a MMO should not even have the right to close without making some options availables for folks who want to take the flame onward.
The details would need to be worked, they dont need to allow everyone to be able to run free servers, and they dont need to be completely free, however 80% of any fees charge should be given back to the MMO creating company (a royalty). If nobody want to keep the flame going on, maybe they would need to reconsider and have an offer for someone to accept keep going on with the MMO, up to the point of completely free if needed...we are talking about customers been happy with what they buy...and in entertainment, this is life.
Current laws say they can close at their own leasure. I assume the most respectable companies would never be doing something like closing nonetheless, regardless of any laws. The laws could be extremely harsh on those companies, since they offer, from the start, to run everything on their side...and americans laws are often harsh when it come down to closing something you offer, especially when you charge money and the customers paid for said service(the fact we buy the initial box)...many phone companies and electricities companies can tell you about past laws that enforce them on delivering a service they want to close. To say the laws will not change is been more a visionnary then basing your beliefs on facts.
But yes, due to the emotional involvement in MMOs, they should offer some form of "keep going on" servers for individuals that may want to do it. We are not talking about a single RPG that you can run nonetheless but will just not get any new patch, we are talking about a game that you cant play anymore and that you have buyed, often with many expensions, which represent hundreds of $ and most importantly, the emotional involvement of the players.
Yes, yes and yes. A company that close a MMORPG(like Turbines) for ANY reason without offering something I judge proper, is definitely a company I wont waste my money on future MMOs releases, and I bet Microsoft wont be looking kindly on those Turbines folks if it mean less DDO sells. But nobody know if there will be AC2 stuff open for 3rd party to run it still (in this example the raiding setting of DDO is the main reason, but this secondary reason would need to find an adequate answer as well for me to consider their game...yet...in D&D case...I mean, TSR is the roxor...maybe...I dunno...lot of emotions...if there was no raiding and they behave wrongly with AC2...not sure...I would not give any chance to non-TSR products...anyway, it is still a wrong behavior from the company and nothing to improve customers appreciation).
As a side example, Square Enix lost me as a customer because of their MMO and the fact they erase an account after 3 months, we are not even talking of closing the MMO, just because they erase data, they lost a customer for good, I will never again buy any SquareEnix Product...now just think for a moment a game I enjoy is not available to play anymore...I bet that this company is on a road to hell.
A company that start a MMO make untold promises other non-MMO games dont do...and even if they dont need to respect those promises, not respecting them may have dire consequences in the futures. The customers are everything to a company, and unhappy customer mean that the company might as well just close right away. And we all know how emotional the customers in MMO can be...so again...
YES. (regardless of any law)
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren