Network now...BLOG
The Gamer's Bill of Rights
Just like humanity in general, PC gamers are entitled to basic liberties: freedom to return computer games that don't work (for a full refund); minimum requirements that are actually accurate; to not be treated as a criminal by game companies, and so forth.
To uphold these rights, Stardock and Gas Powered Games decided to put together the Gamer's Bill of Rights, which we present before you today. These are the key elements that publishers need to adhere to in their games; they're all pretty common sense, but they're things that the game industry is increasingly straying from. We admit that many developers are at the mercy of their publishers, but our goal, if we get enough industry support on this, is to create a consortium that upholds the following basic standards for PC games:
We the Gamers of the world, in order to ensure a more enjoyable experience, establish equality between players and publishers, and promote the general welfare of our industry hereby call for the following:
- Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
- Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
- Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
- Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.
- Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer.
- Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent.
- Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.
- Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
- Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.
- Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.
This isn't something terribly new to gaming in general--consoles already have a similar standards system. Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo, certify console games and tell developers what they can and cannot do. But on the PC we don't have anything like that. Of course, we do have Games for Windows, but it's not quite the same as what we're doing here. (Actually, I'd love it if Games for Windows or the PC Gaming Alliance adopted these Rights.)
Let's talk about a few of these Rights:
No. 3: "Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state." Users want support for a game after it's released. Believe it or not, they don't want buggy software that gets maybe one patch after launch. Gamers want a reasonable amount of support post-launch.
No. 6: "Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer." Face it: system requirements are not always honest. One of the things that has always frustrated gamers is when they see a great clip of a game on GameTrailers, they get a game, expecting it to run decently, and they later find out that their system had no chance of ever reasonably running the game at those minimum specs. Sure, a $5,000 PC will run a game better than a $1,000 setup, but users will many times have to turn off so many graphical features that it looks nothing like what they saw in the trailer.
No. 8: "Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers." Obnoxious copy protection methods punish honest, paying gamers.
So to reiterate, here are the steps Stardock and Gas Powered Games plan on taking: Announce the new principles and adhere to them (done); Try to get other publishers to sign on; Form a consortium; And add on to the bill in a way that makes sense.
But for now, here it is. We'll be judging reaction on it, and we'll be talking to developers soon. Of course, some companies won't think that this is worth their time. (Publishers will probably ask, "Who the hell is Stardock? - that would be my reaction.) But it's the gamers who will end up driving something like this. From there, we hope this grows organically. If publishers want to participate in this, they certainly can--it costs them nothing, all they have to do is agree to adhere to the Rights.
.jpg)
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Try to get other publishers to sign on; Form a consortium; And add on to the bill in a way that makes sense. http://www.crazypurchase.com
I don't understand #8
I like the Idea Of the Gamers Bill of rights.
If we are all adding to the darn "commandments," cuz thats what they should be, let me add one....
Gamers shall have the right to Haggle the Pricing of Highly Priced Games, with the choice of paying less due to advertisements included, or More without...
Ok, maybe I am just looking for a more affordable Ride. but I will bet you that if you sold Games for$30 if you got to put advertising on the Videogame Billboards and (tvs and radios in the game), then I think it would be fair.The Ad company would Pay the Game company Per game sold, so long as it does not hinder the Game on screen....
I am talking a bit much
Gamers shall have the right to fully participate in the global gaming community available to online games and not be regionally restricted to local markets based on 3rd party contracts and profit control by the publishers and developers.
1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund. Should this also include a state where the user knows that they have an unsupported OS?
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state. Agree
3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release. Disagree somewhat. If the game is already pristine, which is rare, they don't need any updates.
4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game. Valve's Steam is crappy about this.
5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer. Definitely.
6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent. I believe it should be conveyed before installation if nothing else. DRM of this fashion is harmful.
7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time. Agree.
8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers. Agree.
9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play. Again, Valve's Steam is crappy about this. I was really put off by the way I couldn't play Half-Life 2 without some dumb Internet connection present for the first loadup.
10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play. Many a yes. I don't like messing with vitual CD drives through Windows or any type of loopback mount through *nix.
Some proposed amendments:
A. Gamers shall be able to have some level of compatibility, accidental or otherwise, with their OS, through emulation software or compiled binaries for the native system. Developers shall make no game requiring one and only one OS, but do not have to support more than one OS.
B. Gamers shall be able to loan their games to a neighbor or friend without legal penalty or frivolous technical restrictions enabling a try-before-one-buys scheme to some degree.
Stardock is to be congratulated for their “Gamers Bill of Rights” – though incomplete, it’s a good start and excellent to see a game developer recognizing the inadequacies of DRM. The most important item missing in the list is the right to easily move the game to a new PC, a 2nd PC or to lend it to a friend. It is also key to recognize that developers being asked to fulfill these gamers’ rights, need to protect their own rights at the same time – i.e. to prevent theft and lost revenue. To fulfill all of the Bill of Rights is readily possible but requires the strongest of protection mechanisms; otherwise the crackers’ task just became much easier. . At ByteShield we offer gamer and developer friendly protection that fulfills all these ‘Rights’ and many more, while exceedingly difficult to crack - see our latest whitepaper, “Is Anti-Piracy/DRM the Cure or the Disease for PC Games?‘ at http://byteshield.net/byteshield_whitepaper_0005.pdf.
Going through this “Bill of Rights” point by point:
1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don’t work with their computers for a full refund. >> we agree and ByteShield enables this because any installation can be disabled and refunded with no fear of theft
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state. >> we agree but this is a developer decision
3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game’s release. >> we agree but this is a developer decision
4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.>> we agree but with respect to the game this is a developer decision. However, in certain circumstances (e.g. bug fix versions, virus protection) this should happen automatically to minimize support issues (for users and developers) but with full information of what is happening supplied to the gamer
5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer. >> we agree but this is a developer decision
6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won’t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent >> ByteShield already makes this promise – see our whitepaper http://byteshield.net/byteshield_whitepaper_0005.pdf.
7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time. >> we agree and ByteShield enables this because any installation can be deactivated in combination with permitting a re-download
8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers. >> ByteShield already makes this point - see our whitepaper http://byteshield.net/byteshield_whitepaper_0005.pdf.
9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.>> ByteShield offers this but it’s implemented at discretion of game developer
10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play. >> ByteShield already makes this promise - see our whitepaper http://byteshield.net/byteshield_whitepaper_0005.pdf.
Thanks,
Christian Olsson
ByteShield, Inc.
11. Must be able to mouseclick through logos & intro movies. This will make me love the developers even more ;)
12. Bill of rights shall have some legal standing
Gamers shall have the right to end a game quickly and not have to go through 5 screens and load a profile just to quit a game.
I heartily agree with all the points - so much so that I subscribed just to be able to comment.
I think it is high time that we gamers start asserting our own rules since the gaming industry is in line to equal the movie industry in terms of income value.
I have had quite a few bad experiences with games I have bought (I'm not talking about buying lemons - that's my fault for not paying attention to reviews). I have had to buy a new copy of BF1942 because the disk shattered after a year in the CD player. I have been locked out of BF2142 because of EAs shamefully shoddy key management. I have suffered numerous reinstalls of EA Download - which I will never install again - just to play BF2142 over a sixteen-month period. Not to mention the number of times a patch broke the game and forced me to deinstall the game and EA Download before reloading EA Download, re-downloading the game installer, reinstalling and reconfiguring. What a nuisance !
Actually, most of my troubles I owe to EA Games. I hate their online service and their attitude towards gamers. The last time I tried to reinstall BF2142 from the (downloaded yet again) install file, I got an error message that really takes the cake. It said : Invalid CD Key. Hello ? I'm installing from your own download file !
One other game that really galled me was PainKeeper. I buy the boxed set for 50€, get home, and find out that it won't install. "Please insert original CD" it said. WHAT !?! How more original can it be right out of shrinkwrap ? I don't live in China, this is the real thing !
I actually HAD to download the pirate version to be able to play the game I BOUGHT. How crap is that ?
So yes, I have had it with CD/DVD-in-drive requirements. I am fed up with EULAs that only ensure that I'm screwed if anything goes wrong. And I am most definitely incensed at games that are released only to have a patch required to play them.
If this Bill Of Rights does anything to alleviate these issues, then I'm all for it.
Can we get a poster version ? I'd like to see this in all game store windows.
Where's my right to install the game on as many computers as I want/own? I should be able to install it on any number of my computers, not just as many as the publisher wants me to.
I would like to see companies making all of the major games support other operating systems than Windows. So far the only company that truly supports gaming in Linux is Id software because they are the only ones still using opengl and they have proven that opengl is just as good if not better than D3d but still most companies refuse to use opengl and eliminate a part of their possible audience because of it. Granted Linux does not have much market share right now but it has been growing steadily and with Dell selling computers with Linux preinstalled I believe that it will be increasing much faster.
On right number one. It is already a right. While some people think that the shrinkwrap license means that if you open it, you bought it, this is not exactly true. Because the ToS is not read before you pen the package, you have the right to a full refund if you do not agree. Just take it back to the store. They MUST refund your money, as long as you return everything and you do not have it installed on your computer.
Not sure if you were driving at something else here, but I thought I would mention this.
This Gamer Bill of Rights idea is great! Or it would be, if Gas Powered Games had made a habit out of following these rules before establishing them. Supreme Commander is still unoptimized and unfinished, and I have little faith in this noble move changing GPG's attitude. Stardock has always had gamers' best interests in mind, so I'm glad they're being vocal about it.
I find the idea quite appealing as a 16 year old who has been a gamer since 5. Where I find fault in this is, and this is going to be the major hinderance to this idea, the legal issues that arise. For instance....
No. 3: "Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state." Users want support for a game after it's released. Believe it or not, they don't want buggy software that gets maybe one patch after launch. Gamers want a reasonable amount of support post-launch.
What this entails is a company to provide support for a game that no longer has any monetary gain for said company. That means that this business is being forced into a venture that is no longer profitable or beneficial. If you apply this to something like an extremely old cell phone company which is required to provide support and services to a practically non-existent cliental without cost to the customer, it just doesn't make sense. I couldn't agree more with the fact that some set of guidelines for a company to [roughly] adhere to would benefit them as well as their customers. I just don't like the idea of putting the creators of the games that we all enjoy playing into a headlock because of the 20 people who play an outdated game don't have support.
This next part is an area where I think you may have over stepped...
Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
Give me a break! Once again you force a company to spend funds on what is a possbile failure of a game when it could be going towards the next game of the year winner. I truly could not agree more with the fact that game developing companies treat their customers as threats, but in order for some agreement to be reached, treating them with the same hostility as they have treated us for years isn't going to fix a thing. Best of luck and I hope we can see at least some of these ideas come to fruition.
I like the way you think, Brad -- but before you go getting all religious and "making lists of commandments," like Moses, don't you think the Gaming community should first come up with some contemporary jokes?
The only good jokes I know of related to Gaming are either about GTA or... Well... you need to go back to the eighties with classics like:
What's round and yellow and drinks blood?
http://cackl.com/joke/view/584/Whats+round+and+yellow+and+drinks+blood
I think we need your cool rules and new jokes. That is all. Peace out!
Huzzah!!
I think it's well past due for something like this. I've shyed away from PC gaming for a long time now because of being burned so many times.
One of the last PC games I bought was some kind of vampire game and it was completely broken out of the box. It wouldn't run at all without downloading the patch that wasn't available for weeks after the release; and I couldn't return it because it was opened.
A few years later, I decided to try again and bought the Sam & Max compilation game from retail. Every time I want to play it, I find myself looking for the disc to play the game that is entirely on my hard drive.
More recently I wanted to play Peggle and thought I'd give Steam a try since everyone is always talking about how great it is. I hate it. I have Peggle, an amazing single-player game, that I cannot play while out on the road or on a plane. What good is Steam to me if I can't play my games disconnected? I play on a laptop and am disconnected most of the time.
Because of these issues, I've found myself either ignoring games I would have otherwise purchased, or when I do make a purchase, I'm off looking for hacks on how to get around some of these problems imposed upon me.
Over all, I'd rather not deal with this mess and choose to play console games and my DS. If more PC companies adopted the business practices as outlined in this article's Gamer's Bill of Rights; then I would definitely find myself buying and enjoying computer games again. Until then, I'll just take my DS everywhere I go.
--belcaw
I'd contact Valve about your Steam problems. I have been a Steam user and never had any problems whatsoever and I currently live in a developing nation with an internet connection to prove it and have had zero problems playing any of my Steam games, nor have I had any trouble given that I'm on my third pc since buying Half-life 2 and have installed it on all the computers with nary a lockout, warning or nonfunctional game.
Basically, I think Steam is one platform that actually delivers. It could probably be better, of course, but after its growing pains, it turned out to be pretty great.
Brian
www.brianwoods.com
Too bad this is purely marketing fluff and that these "rules" do not seem to apply to either company...
And let us not talk about how unrealistic some of these are while people freely pirate...
What are you talking about? Stardock already follows these rules.
I will admit Stardock is one of the "better" companies out there, but it is hardly perfect. I am more going after them for releasing this fluff piece in the face of gaming piracy and having no agreements from major industry shakers.
But Gas Powered Games? 'Nuff said on that one.
And Stardock does not always offer full refunds - it have given credits or partial refunds in the past, there have been isses with its download software, its products are not patch-free, its games are not the highest quality, there is no mention of ownership issues, and there are other issues with its non-gaming products.
Aye, it is still a decent company (relatively,) but I do not think it (much less GPG) is the company it claims to be nor is it realistic or working with the rest of the industry. As such, this is more wishful thinking than anything else...
We can all go "Huzzah!," but then everything else will go back to normal.
I'll admit that I too am skeptical about how much impact this declaration of good intent will lead too, but I'm not ready to throw in my lot with this cynic yet, either.
Let's see how this plays out.
If they stick to it, and draw other people to their cause, good on 'em.
If they start pushing cop-outs when they fail to live up to their own standards, it's another beautiful dream, that never amounted to anything.
I am glad to see a great company promote these positive pro gamer policies. I hope that more publishers will be willing to not treat their customers as criminals and follow these other ideals as well.
Number one is one of the reasons I have a hard time getting into buying new release games. I wait several months to buy the newest games to make sure they are not crap.
I also think that number two should be a valid reason for a full refund. Would you be willing to flush the cash on a new TV that did not work. Would you accept that you could not get a refund for it? Why would anyone buy a TV just to have it repaired on the first day?
The rest are pretty straight forward and I agree whole heartedly.
I don't see what the fuzz is all about with Dx10 -
It's been proven multiple times DX10 is nowhere near as good as it was promised, and drives the performances down on your machine (regardless of it's specs) - without seeing any TRUE improvements graphically -
Granted there are some improvements on lighting and shadows - but as far as texture and physics goes - it's a no go - Most games now have various free mods / patches giving you the game with equivalent (if not better) looks and feel under xp dx9, than you would have on vista dx10 (ex: crysis) - all that without a drop on your performances as big as vista +dx10 :) -
Also, you can not blame microsoft for releasing dx10 for vista only - would you expect a car manufacturer to release a new engine - and because it's better, you'd expect to be able to install that engine into your car ? Eventhough it's the same manufacturer - the car model is not the same - True enough, in some cases it might be possible - but why in god's name would the manufacturer do it? assuming that like winxp, the actual product will be unsupported / out of production in a little while - why would they invest time and money to make research developpment and all this stuffs - for something that will not bring them any cash? You have to remember, microsoft is not a charity - it's a business - and they want to make money - that's pretty much it -
Not too sure I understand the right number 8 - treated as criminals? huh? :S
Not too sure I understand the right number 8 - treated as criminals? huh? :S
I sure hope you are kidding. If not, I pity you.
Pity?
Try envy.
I used to think that people complaining about DRM were extreamists, but then I quit pirating and actually bought some games.
I got my games to work with less hassle when I was stealing them from a virusy server in china.
Today's game companys treat the paying customer worse than the thief.
@Brian
regardless of how the situation is in Ukraine, the customer should have the CHOICE how he wants his game. Dubbing does affect more than two countries in the world. The "law" is not asking the publisher to stop making localizations. But as a customer I like having the choice of enjoying the original game. Often games in Germany will be released in German only. That really is a problem since the low quality of the dubbing is utterly demolishing the game. It's not a problem of small developers either. Even Sony's title Uncharted: Drakes Fortune suffers from localization errors no eighth grader with a translation engine would have made (just look at the cover, notice anything?)
Rule 14: Computer games require hardware to run on, that is the first barrier of entry. Why would anybody want to construct further barriers of entry by making the software tied to a platform such as windows? Worse, why would anybody tie their software to a special API version inside that Windows platform being sold at a premium price? Ideally the developers should address all customers with hardware powerful enough without concerning himself with crappy 3D middleware. That's why some predictions see the rise of the OS agnostic browser game for the future. Sure, some hardware needs a modern type of OS in order to work right (Win3.11 would not be able to address all the space on the BlueRay), but enforcing an additional software purchase is quite something different than the original hardware purchase. Would you be willing to pay Microsoft money before you can use the fifth gear on your new Mercedes? Would you then develop some gadget for Mercedes owners which can only be used in fifth gear? Suddenly you are no longer selling to all customer but to a specific subset of customers.
In a world where space isn't a hinderance (I guess that means PC and PS3), there is no reason for game companies to not include the original and the dub as they do with most home video releases now-a-days. You have persuaded me this is how it should be instead of an either/or proposition.
I still don't see the issue with new software offering new iterations of things. I still see it as a parallel to "doom 5 can't have any new weapons unless they are patched into the original game." Software moves forward. I will admit to having absolutely no knowledge as to whether DX10 will work on XP, but I have to reason to assume MS is lying when they say it won't.
Brian
www.brianwoods.com
4thvariety,
I have issues with a couple of your rights.
While I am certainly a fan of many a subtitled movie, it turns out that basically the United States and Great Britain are the only countries that favor subs over dubs. I currently live in Ukraine and there was a law that recently went into effect that requires all TV shows to be in Ukrainian. Prior, shows brought directly from Russia were subbed. Dub houses in Los Angeles are swamped because of this. All this is to say, there's no reason for there to be a right that only applies to one or two countries on the planet.
Also, are you inferring that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to write software that improves upon things? I'm not going to get into whether DX10 can work on XP or not, but by being the entity that controls standards (whether rightly earned or not), isn't their choice to update them? I know DX9 lasted a good long while, but is it really the best games can ever be? If we followed your point to its conclusion, you might be saying that someone needs to release Blu Ray drive drivers for Windows 3.1 (or how about Surface for DOS?) because every system should be able to access all features, right?
A law should be so universal that no one can argue with its merits and while I agree with (some of) your point, I can definitely see others having a problem with (some of) these.
Brian
www.brianwoods.com
Not really, I live in Greece and everything here is subbed. I prefer it, too, because dubs are usually inferior and there are many advantages to being able to hear the original dialogue (nuances in speech, puns, etc).
11. Mature gamers shall have the right that mature games treat subject matters in an adult fashion void of adolescent fantasies catering to teenagers only.
12. Gamers shall have the right to enjoy their product in its original language and shall not be forced to listen to second rate localizations disgracing their native tongue.
13. Gamers shall have the right to buy the game directly from the development team's online store without any regional obstruction from the publisher and without local price differences.
14. Gamers shall not be forced to buy any third-party software in order for the game to run its full featureset. This rule excludes services providing subscription-based delivery of the game, such as Gametap, but it includes services such as Live! as well as DX10 and its forced Vista upgrade.
15. Gamers shall have the right to disclose or not disclose all of their personal information when dealing with the game company, be it upon purchase or support of the game.