MrPopo wrote:Because the reason you can't access them is you're being difficult. If you and Steam were on good terms when Valve shut down you'd have a reasonable expectation that they'd do the unlock update. Right now they're saying "Hey guy, we still want you to play, but you have to promise to not be a dick" and you're saying "Hey now, I have a right to be a dick, and while I doubt I'll exercise that right, I don't want to give away that right".
this pretty much sums up my feeling on the matter too. I don't know, maybe you guys think I'm spineless or whatever, but I just don't really see why this is a huge deal anymore. Steam was like "you can totall sue us if you want. You can use our arbitrators or you can pick your own lawyer, we just don't want you to bandwagon onto some other suit. But yeah, go ahead and sue us if you want." So at this point I'd say click agree and get back to your 600+ games, or just start a class action suit regarding this matter.
They are the ones being dicks. All I've ever done is give them lots of money and free word-of-mouth advertising. They shut off my account to strongarm me into legally agreeing to something I'm not comfortable in agreeing to.
I've never even had to think about making a class action lawsuit before, but now I have to research and think about this topic because Steam has made it so I have to decide if I would rather lose my games or give up access to this legal channel. That's a classic dick move on their part.
Last edited by J T on Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
You didn't sign up for these terms originally and while I don't know but I'm sure their EULA says they can amend their terms any time they feel the "need" to do so, that itself is a crock of shit to begin with anyways ("we can change the terms of our business at any given time and you can either suck it or hit the road"). I say go class action with a rocket launcher. Or write Gabe a personal email. Or send chocolates. Whatever you think will gain you the most traction in keeping your games while not giving up a right.
I'm sure their EULA says they can amend their terms any time they feel the "need" to do so, that itself is a crock of shit to begin with anyways ("we can change the terms of our business at any given time and you can either suck it or hit the road").
If that bothered you you shouldn't have agreed to the EULA in the first place. If I recall right, my rental agreement had similar verbage back when I was in my apartment. There's a lot of contracts out there that heavily favor the person writing it, but what keeps them from abusing the rewrite power is that word will get around that they screw people over and they won't get any more business.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Lokkenjawnz wrote:Plus, they've already gone on record that should anything happen to the company that they have methods in place to release everyone's games so they can still be played.
I used to think they would unlock your games if they went out of business too. People on online forums told me that would happen and it was one of the things that made me feel better about using Steam's service. But I never heard it from Valve directly, and you probably haven't either. Don't bank on it. They are letting you know in your Subscriber Agreement that you do not own your games and that they can terminate your license or shut off your account whenever. Steam is still in business and I can't access hundreds of games I've already paid for. Why would I expect to be able to access them if they went out of business?
@ Lokken - A company folds and they will graciously unlock the games? Riiiight.
D.D.D. wrote:You didn't sign up for these terms originally and while I don't know but I'm sure their EULA says they can amend their terms any time they feel the "need" to do so, that itself is a crock of shit to begin with anyways ("we can change the terms of our business at any given time and you can either suck it or hit the road"). I say go class action with a rocket launcher. Or write Gabe a personal email. Or send chocolates. Whatever you think will gain you the most traction in keeping your games while not giving up a right.
This, stinks about the amendment clause.
Maybe demand a refund cancellation or a lawsuit refund and get out?
I'm sure their EULA says they can amend their terms any time they feel the "need" to do so, that itself is a crock of shit to begin with anyways ("we can change the terms of our business at any given time and you can either suck it or hit the road").
If that bothered you you shouldn't have agreed to the EULA in the first place. If I recall right, my rental agreement had similar verbage back when I was in my apartment. There's a lot of contracts out there that heavily favor the person writing it, but what keeps them from abusing the rewrite power is that word will get around that they screw people over and they won't get any more business.
I'm not on Steam... But not 'cause of a EULA issue.
Of course an entity writing a contract will write in in their favor. It still doesn't mean that people should be screwed over because they have no choice, that is, until lots of people hear about it.
Then again, hasn't it been proven in courts that EULAs don't hold up as they aren't laws and "most" people don't read them anyways?
I agreed because Class Actions are not a basic right, only ever really benefit the lawyer, and Valve's amends for placing this restriction seemed fair in my mind.
MrPopo wrote:The life lesson here is jobs will come and go, but Earthbound will always be there for you.
I'm sure their EULA says they can amend their terms any time they feel the "need" to do so, that itself is a crock of shit to begin with anyways ("we can change the terms of our business at any given time and you can either suck it or hit the road").
If that bothered you you shouldn't have agreed to the EULA in the first place. If I recall right, my rental agreement had similar verbage back when I was in my apartment. There's a lot of contracts out there that heavily favor the person writing it, but what keeps them from abusing the rewrite power is that word will get around that they screw people over and they won't get any more business.
I'm not on Steam... But not 'cause of a EULA issue.
Of course an entity writing a contract will write in in their favor. It still doesn't mean that people should be screwed over because they have no choice, that is, until lots of people hear about it.
Then again, hasn't it been proven in courts that EULAs don't hold up as they aren't laws and "most" people don't read them anyways?
The thing I'm having trouble with is that there was already verbage that said "We can change the EULA any time we want, and you have to agree to it to continue using our service." That was apparently acceptable to people; the likelyhood of them putting in anything actually bad was very low. Now this class action suit clause goes in and everyone is worried that they won't be able to get involved in a class action suit which likely wouldn't have happened in the first place. It really feels like a mountain out of a molehill considering that you were fine with them being able to amend the agreement in the first place.
I agreed because Class Actions are not a basic right, only ever really benefit the lawyer, and Valve's amends for placing this restriction seemed fair in my mind.
From my admittedly small amount of research there is nothing that a class action lawsuit can get you that you could not get with a solo lawsuit. The class action streamlines the legal system (1 case instead of 1000 or more), and makes it easier to get a lawyer to take the case (a % of a small settlement for a solo suit vs. a % of a large settlement for a class action, but the individual payouts are still small).
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
