Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SteamWatch Offers Forum for Displeased Customers

Posted by Zonk on from the letting-off-a-little dept.

paniq writes "SteamWatch has opened a forum to discuss the pros and cons of Valves online distribution software Steam 'due to constant deletion of complaint threads in the official Steam forum', as the site states. Installation of Steam to play Valves newest cutting edge shooter Half-Life 2 is mandatory, but forum members criticize Valve for meager Support, violation of consumer rights and formulate alternative ideas for Steams implementation. A 'Steam Watch' news section covers articles and rants about Steam found on the net."

12 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Consumer rights... by elmegil · · Score: 3, Insightful
    violation of consumer rights

    Last time I checked, nobody was holding a SPAS-12 to your head and forcing you to buy the product. Get your money back, don't play the game, and quit yer fucking whining.

    --
    7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    1. Re:Consumer rights... by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If you read the link, you'll see that the complaint was that the goods had already been bought, and Valve was imposing new terms and conditions for continued usage of a critical part of the game to people who'd bought the game and agreed to fairer terms and conditions in the past.

      Seems sleazy to me. If I were in the same boat, I'd try to get my money back. I may be likely to be unsuccessful, but I can make it time consuming and thus expensive for Valve in the process.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Consumer rights... by Marc_Hawke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since when was a lawsuit the FIRST option? And what makes you think some 15 year old kid could file one?

      No, really, the first thing you do is express your complaints to the company. When the company starts silencing those complaints (terrible move there) you move to an outside channel. (Which is what this story is about.)

      Once you've gotten a critical mass of like-minded people, you use a class-action lawsuit if the company hasn't addressed your concerns yet.

      --
      --Welcome to the Realm of the Hawke--
    3. Re:Consumer rights... by Khuffie · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Except it forced people with the original Half-Life to install Steam in order to play the game and counter-strike.

      How the heck are those people gonna get their money back? When they bought Half-Life Steam didn't exist.

    4. Re:Consumer rights... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Last time I checked, nobody was holding a SPAS-12 to your head and forcing you to buy the product. Get your money back, don't play the game, and quit yer fucking whining."

      Translation: "I'm enjoying the game and don't want to hear people legitimately badmouthing it."

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:Consumer rights... by elmegil · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What I don't get is what "customer rights" they're talking about.

      Let's go back to "TFA". You buy HL1 and play it. No Steam required to play the single user game, which is what is being sold in the box. No Steam required to play the online game, which you get along with it. Eventually, after many years, Valve says "we are upgrading to a new platform, Steam, with a new EULA, and by the way we're phasing out the old online servers that let you find other games to connect to." Nowhere in the original EULA did it say the WON servers would be available forever. Not accepting the Steam EULA means not being able to use the new servers to find online games, but nothing stops you from agreeing on servers to play on with your friends, and connecting to and playing on those servers. Nothing stops you from playing the single-user version of the game to your heart's content.

      WHAT RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED?

      Obviously to anyone who doesn't think the world is supposed to be given to them free on a silver platter, NONE.

      So let's extrapolate a bit. You hear about HL2, you want to play. It's clear if you pay any attention to the press, that Steam is required. Complaints aplenty fly around the net about how "intrusive" and "big brother like" it is. Anyone with half a brain can read reviews, look at chat boards etc. and hear the flap being raised about this.

      Do you assert that there's some RIGHT to be able to play the game on YOUR terms, regardless of the creator's intentions? Bullshit. If you don't like the licensing terms of HL2 and Steam, don't play. It's that simple. Valve will lose money (or not) based on whether or not their terms are acceptable to most people. End of story. There are no consumer rights being violated, unless you think you have a right to dictate all terms, which flys directly in the face of all legal precedent in this arena. Vote with your pocketbook and quit whining already!

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    6. Re:Consumer rights... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Try not to put words in my mouth, moron. There's no "right to screw stupid people" and anything you're reading into what I say along those lines is your problem not mine."

      I don't think so. You're basically saying it's okay for Valve to put anything they want into the EULA, and then change it on a whim. If that's not what your line of thought is, then you need to do a little more to spell out your point. I'm not accepting responsibility for being a 'moron' when you're not even addressing the actual complaints people have about Valve's business practices.

      "The fact remains, that it is up to YOU to know WHAT YOU ARE BUYING."

      Really?

      "Valve may amend this Agreement at any time in its sole discretion. As a Subscriber, you agree that Valve may amend the terms of this Agreement."


      The user knows what they're buying? Bullshit. Tell that to customers of the original game who suddenly found themselves with a new agreement. "This deal's getting worse all the time."

      "If you voluntarily give up your rights by agreeing to a coercive EULA, then you have no one to blame but yourself."

      So no consequences for a company with a shitty EULA? No reason to complain? No reason to tell Valve they shouldn't do business like that? Right.

      "Bitching afterwords is like an 18 year old voting for Bush and then whining about being sent to Iraq in a draft."

      Actually, he'd have every right to complain. Bush did not make a campaign promise back in 2000 that he was going to take the country to war. As much as I hated the actions of the protestors during that time, I don't think that "shutting up and dealing with the unintended consquences of their actions" would have been right on the simple grounds that Bush needed to know what people felt. This is true in Valve's case, too. People want a game. People don't like EULA. People voice complaints about the EULA. Expressing demand is 'whining'? Grow up.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:Consumer rights... by topgun601 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      your right, i spoke with my money, my rights were not vilolated. how? i did not buy HL2.

      --
      This post brought to you by: the marketing division of The Sirus Cybernetics Corporation
    8. Re:Consumer rights... by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Show me one commercial EULA that doesn't have that clause."

      Here you go, smart ass. Have fun reading through ALL of that. The closest they come to saying they can change the agreement is when you upgrade the software, you're agreeing to the new EULA.

      "Show me who said you HAVE TO BUY THE PRODUCT if you don't like EULA's."

      Show me why somebody doesn't have the right to complain that a EULA on a high-demand product. Sucks. Come to think of it, show me where somebody said they were forced to buy the game to begin with.

      "Yep. They're buying "whatever Valve says they want"."

      So, they still don't know what they're getting. They don't have a right to complain about that? Uh huh.

      Sorry bud, I don't buy it. One shouldn't need a legal degree to buy something as simple as a game. To argue otherwise is moronic.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  2. Not impressed so far... by eviltypeguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not terribly impressed with all the "poor victims" so far that have posted on the forums.

    Most of them are people that tried to use an illegtimate CD key or cracks, then bought the game when they couldn't get that to work, or felt guilty enough and bought it, and then got shut out of the game.

    Gee, screw someone over, then try to play nice and they don't react nicely to you? Never saw that coming...

    About the only legitimate post (obviously IMO) I've read there so far covers some of the interesting legal entanglements that come from Valve's EULA for Steam. Personally, I hope EULAs are abolished, or if not, that they would come back in a much simpler form.

    I think it's absolutely ridiculous to expect anyone but a lawyer to have to read through and understand the pages and pages of legal drek that come with each new game. How can anyone in their right minds expect a person who isn't an expert in contract law to fully understand and comprehend all their rights with a EULA. Nevermind the questionable legality of EULAs to begin with. Of course one might argue that an expert in contract law already knows that EULAs can't be legally binding since they don't fulfill many of the basic qualifications of a legal contract, but since IANAL I digress...

  3. Re:Not all it seems... by Night+Goat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Agreed. The open letter is a laugh. "We're not pirates, we're future customers!" Oh, you plan on buying the product later? Oh, OK, in that case go ahead and play it now. That just doesn't make sense. I've pirated software in the past, and I had no delusions of being in the right. I knew it was wrong, I was stealing plain and simple.

  4. Re:Not all it seems... by KeeperS · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "In other words, Steam gets in the way of pirating HL2 and they're pissed."

    This mantra is often repeated on Slashdot and it doesn't align with reality. Steam is doing absolutely nothing to piracy. Pirates are getting cracked versions of the game. Why should they care about Steam? Their cracked single player game doesn't need it! As for multiplayer, CD keys were already working fine, so it's not as if Steam is making any inroads there. Maybe a couple pirates will have to spend 5 seconds downloading the crack, but other than that I doubt they care at all.

    Legitimate users, on the other hand, have been inconvenienced by Steam. If I don't want to have a Steam account, why should I be forced to get one to install a single player game? Should I be required to get a Microsoft Passport in order to install Office? It's not difficult to imagine a future where every developer requires you to get an account with them in order to play their single player game. Is this really a step forward?

    I can't speak for these Steam Watch people, but make no mistake, there are some people who haven't bought HL2 all or in part because of Steam. I'm one of them. And no, I haven't pirated it either.