[url=][/url][url=][/url]A while back I stumbled on this article on Wikipedia about the Stardock CEO publishing a “Gamers Bill of rights”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamers_Bill_of_Rights

It has its own site too at: http://www.gamersbillofrights.org/

What do you make of this? It would be nice to have some way to benchmark a developers or producers behavior towards its costumers (even if it is only in an informal and unofficial way) and the “Gamers Bill of Rights” seems as good as any standard to hold the industry to.

What is your take on this? Is there anything you would add to it or remove from it?

Ha! I remember that.

Sure did seem ironic when Stardock broke one through five when they released Elemental. Also number 4 and 8 seem to totally ignore the fact that their games required Impulse.

I'm not trying to be bitter or anything, but that list was just rife with hypocrisy.

even if you get them through store.stardock.com?

I'm thinking that this was probably on the Wall at the EA Origin offices to give everyone at the office a good laugh.

Nah, this goes too far. Would obviously be nice for gamers, but maintaining a healthy gamer-publisher experience requires compromise. This is almost like a publisher's Treaty of Versailles.

I agree, I remember a while ago I heard what Stardock had to say and then it prettymuch went 180 on it and tried to copy Valve and have DRM and have an online store service connected. It's a bit sad since the Industry is constantly trying to take away the consumer's rights until there's nothing left but the choice to say no. Thankfully they can't take that away without fraud charges.

Hell, even Chris Avellone of Obsidian just had interview where he wants the right to sell used Console games be killed by Digital Distribution. I like Steam and GoG but a 100% DD system would leave every Gamer at the mercy of the industry with no recourse for a bad purchase, and with the conflict of interest of professional and the utter lack of objectivity in user reviews, we consumers are pretty much screwed. I'm really hating this industry more and more.

I don't see why ... I see why the publishers wouldn't like it, but there is nothing materially that we didn't have before in dealing with media - we've just had it all slowly taken away from us as they years have progressed. The computer game publishers are no longer the only villain in this regard anymore. Book publishers and movie/record studios are just as bad now, but they're starting from a position of less strength since books, movies, and music have been around for longer and there is a different expected level ownership with those media in the general public. But trust me, they'd love to be where the game publishers are now.

I agree but it really doesn't make it better. Heck I know the damage the Book industry is doing with the E-Books, the place I used to work went out of Business.

We have no rights. We are fish, to be driven to the nets for harvest. Suffocate, float, then be consumed three frozen months later. It is our destiny, our unholy cause. We exist to service corporations, fuel the economy, supply mansions and yachts, trips to the tropics. We are the Fish Serfs! Hooah!
(We are best grilled with a twist of lemon, and served with a nice stiff chardonnay, preferably French).
Welcome to the 21st Corporentry
8-D

Games that fit this bill are still out there. Many of them were produced before nineties "merger madness." You'll probably win a lot more republican votes (US-specific, sorry) if you say that gamers have a right to a competitive marketplace.

But I think that there is something else contributing to this, that people have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into believing that consumership is some sort of inherent good. Correcting this might not add as much competitiveness to the market as, say, cutting a few of the biggest companies in half, but it is good to remember. We are still free to say that we refuse to allow our computers/gaming consoles to be raped by corporations. We should excercise that freedom, if for no other reason than to drive home the point that we will notice when it is gone, (unlike when we lost the ability to find a new game where you did not need the CD in the drive)

Absolutely. I don`t like Steam or the copycats (Origin), but they only came about because people just weakly accepted their excuses why they should have it. had people complained and said, "We don`t need to be forced on this- make it optional!" then steam and Origin would be nothing like they are today. now they are like a giant fist controlling most gamers and telling them that `It`s better for you!` Like Big brother and ignoring all protests from anyone else now. I see company after company falling to Steam, like Paradox that said they never would and played on that for a while.

If we stand up against it and keep publicly supporting the likes of GOG things can and will change. We need to post about GOG on other forums and keep buying their DRM free stuff. i`ve informed plenty of people about GOG already and even on Amazon discussion pages.

And yes, even Gamers have rights, it`s just right now gaming publishers get away with abusing our rights due to flying under the Law`s radar.

But it will change, eventually. BUt young people must protest to make it happen.

The idea was good, but then they softened it a bunch to get some big names on board (the original draft was much better). Then they started breaking the rules themselves but pretending their rule breaking was different somehow and so they weren't actually breaking them (or something, frankly it was insulting to anyone's intelligence).

Gamers pretty much have the least "rights" out of consumers of any kind of copyrighted material that I can think of. Most people on this forum or pretty okay with EULAs, "it's a license and not a purchase", and (fewer) with some DRM. Many are against second hand sales. So the industry has managed to take away many gaming consumers' rights while a bunch of gaming consumers actually thank them for it and cheer them on.

Frogboy is a freaking joke. Because of all his false promises (Gamers' Bill of Rights, Impulse Anywhere), pretending to plant his feet firmly into the anti-DRM ground, I was one of the few who stuck with Impulse, up until Elemental, and finally the sell out to Gamestop.

Faith is a good thing to build up, up till the point where it gets slapped in the face and spat on.

Maybe it depends on phrasing, and not to get into a political debate on the subject, but most if not almost all Republicans (and sadly a substantial number of Democrats -especially in IP concerns) are pretty blatantly pro-corporate and the competitiveness of the market seems to only ever be invoked for company's rights and never for consumer's rights. And attempts to usher in consumer rights or stop monopolies is usually called "job-eliminating", a phrase that seems to get many more Republican votes ...

Or perhaps I misunderstood your statement - i.e. this is phrasing of the issue in terms (competitive markets) that would attract Republican votes if it could be gotten across rather than the normal phrasing of the issue (fairness, etc...)?

You do have rights... But more as a consumer then a "gamer".
If a game is broken you have the right according to law to have your money returned by the store. They can say no all they want but that is how it work (atleast in my country).

They might tell you to contact the publisher or give you another game. But just say that you want money and that you did not buy it from the publisher you bought it from them.

Beside that... Well you cant return a game just because you dont like it. It have to be broken in some way. However most people do not do this or simply drop it after the first time they get a no.