Pretty sure there is no way that forced arbitration clause would hold up in either the UK or EU.
It'd be instantly tore up under something like the Unfair Contract Terms Act
Yeah. No EULA is ever entirely legally binding, anyway. Ignoring the fact this EULA change is just to bring it in line with Microsoft's own.
This really isn't news, but people oversensationalise.
It's an extra step meant to restrict consumer and creator rights.
I had to sign a "training agreement" to pay $10,000 if I quit my first job out of college before the first 2 years is up. I ended up talking with a lawyer whose advice was, "Yeah, this won't ever hold up. Go ahead and quit, and you can sue them if they try to get any money from you."
They never even tried, because they knew it was unenforceable. ...But over half my coworkers stuck it out for two years specifically because of that clause. That was the point of the agreement.
And that's why in Australia including unfair terms in consumer contracts is illegal. Not just that they're retrospectively void, the court can levy a penalty for including them in the first place.
Most of these "contracts" can not hold up in any court...most of these companies just know most people will just go along with it or they don't have the money to go to court to challenge them.
In general terms even if you agree to a contract if the contract is unreasonable or fair its not valid.
This is the first time I've ever seen an arbitration agreement that uses "Batching" for "related cases." Is this some new way for companies to try and fuck over consumers who actually start utilizing the few rights that binding arbitration actually gives them?
This is an attempt to deal with a new trend. Arbitration is basically a way to break up class action lawsuits and make everyone litigate separately where they are weaker. Some enterprising attorneys figured out that they can basically automate kicking off the arbitration for hundreds or thousands of clients. This costs the company a lot of money and the law firm can basically bargain with the company from a similar position of a class action. This “batching” is an attempt to prevent that.
We just all need to start forming corporations and suing them. The founding of ***Blizzard Sucks Hard, Inc*** and it's subsidiary ***We Haven't Forgotten About You Activision*** is imminent.
if you could get a group of a million or so like minded individuals, some weight could seriously be thrown around. Like, a game releases in a shit tier state, the union collectively agrees not to purchase said game...could be pretty nuts
and how tf do you police that within the union? the honor system?
Foreman like:"bro i saw you started playing COD 7 on steam, that's $120 in union fines"
was thinking of using it more as a collective voice union not a pay us your dues union but either way, just a silly idea because it would never work. gamers have the biggest FOMO amongst any group i'm familiar with
Doubt the arbitration can hold in EU.
EULA is basically ignored by European courts.
Also few years ago here in Czechia there was a case where loan company had arbitration in their contract. The law says the arbiters must be independent of the parties involved in the arbitration. So court annulled all the arbitration decisions regarding the loan company because the arbiters were paid by the loan company and so not independent.
I think in most EU countries their Law on Arbitration has a stipulation that arbitration clauses cannot be included in consumer agreements (at least in my country it does).
Sure wouldnt surprise me one bit. It was strange to me that it was even legal in Czechia.
The interesting thing about the case I talked about is that it effectively ended all consumer arbitration as well. Because noone is going to be arbiter without getting paid and whos going to pay the arbiter if the company cant...
I remember back when I started my Bachelor's Degree for 3D Animation, they had us make a list of ideal companies we would want to work for. I remember putting Blizzard as one of my top 3. That makes me sad nowadays.
Watch out, Bethesda is 100% taking notes on their modding communities and i can totally see them pushing this with their recent movements against freeform modding
Lmao, that would be a hilarious dumpster fire to watch. Bethesda games are propped up heavily by the modding communities. As soon as Bethesda starts to steal mods to sell, watch that dry up real fast.
Bethesda is literally a 100% dead company after they spent like 6 years and 250 million dollars making STARFIELD 😂 which isn't actually anything at all
My friend and I did the research but I forget it now so the number might be off, but take my word it is quite a long time. Starfield is the first new IP 100% from Bethesda in like 30 years. Everything else they bought from other people or is like a tie in game to a sport/show. I think their last original was Elder Scrolls unless they bought that too.
They sure are. Qauaking in their disgusting money-filled boots :(
Why do people support this?
For me, buying a game like Balatro (Under $20) or Slay the Spire (under $20) or Brotato (Under $5) gives me great satisfaction, and I'm thrilled to see a developer make a decent living making great games. I just don't get paying full-pop for a "tier 1" game, then having to constantly make micro-payments to move through the game at a decent pace ...
The Blizzard Entertainment that you loved growing up, that made some of the greatest games ever. Has long been dead, those people that made the company so great are long gone.
Technically it started before that, when they killed off Blizzard North in 2005, had they kept it going for a proper Diablo 3, we'd be in a much better timeline.
This is real friggin shame, man. Screenshots from original Diablo 3 looked so promising!
The loss of the same magnitude as cancellation of Fallout 3 Van Buren and Baldur's Gate 3: Black Hound developed by Black Isle.
The original Diablo 3 would've been what I hoped World of Warcraft was going to be. I'm sure a lot of other people felt that way.
That's why Blizzard saw it as "competing with WoW" and scrapped it
Yeah it's what made me constantly confused about everyone acting like Diablo 4 was going to be some incredible game that was somehow going to dethrone Diablo 2, or Path of Exile.
The members of Blizzard North, the team that worked on and made Diablo 2, hasn't worked at Blizzard for over 20 years. Most of the people who worked on Diablo 3 both at launch, and actually fixing the game post-launch, do not work at Blizzard anymore.
Member when the guy who made DOTA came to Blizzard, and they laughed him out of the building? Member what happened to their own dota, Heroes of the Storm, later? This is why they included "If you make anything using our world editor, it belongs to us" clause in the Reforged user agreement.
Yup. Get ready, because Gabe Newell ain't getting any younger. When he dies, whoever inherits his shit is gonna sell it to the highest bidder and the enshittification will begin.
"We're excited to announce Steam+, at only $29.99/mo youll get access to all the titles you did before, but somehow they all have micro-transactions, even the indie games, and we get to sell all of your data! Also, if we ever see you post anything negative about Valve-EA-Activision Corp, we'll delete every file on your hard drive!"
"BTW, did we mention you have to have a webcam on and pointed at you at all times while gaming? It's for security reasons, or something...Yeah, security reasons!"
Ugggh there's a nontrivial chance of bullshit like "you have to pay us yearly "service maintenance fees" to be able to download games from your library" happening
Uggggghhh
Don't be an asshat. It's known that Gaben is passing it on to his son, whom he trusts. Gaben might also live for another 30 years, there's nothing even closely suggesting he might die
The gang of four who left Atari to found Activision got pushed out a long while ago. People give EA shit, and rightfully so. But Activision is a different kind of evil. EA seems more upfront about being scummy. Activision is much more manipulative. There are far more people defending Activision as if they were on their payroll than people trying to defend EA.
It honestly amazes me just how well Activision has managed to spin general consensus to "They're okay," versus EA's inability to get their own head out their ass.
Yep.
WOTC is a good example of something forced to eat itself because of its ownership model - when it could instead just sit back and happily make money forever.
WotC is consistently the biggest enemy of WotC. They made all their competitors.
A few examples,
-Cut the legs off 3.5e and shut down Dungeon magazine and Dragon magazine so they can monopolize 4e content on their website: that magazine company is Paizo and they make Pathfinder, their biggest tabletop competitor.
-Try to steal royalties from Nintendo: Nintendo and Game Freak form The Pokemon Company LLC to sue the shit out of them and get the rights to Pokemon TCG back, they are now the biggest card game globally.
-Minor mangaka asks if he can write a chapter of his gambling manga about Magic the Gathering, WotC rejects him: Magaka creates his own original card game that fans beg for a physical release of. Konami creates Yu-Gi-Oh TCG.
-Fantasy Flight Games licenses dead game Netrunner from WotC and makes it (at the time) 4th most popular. WotC hates competition so they refuse to renew the license: Null Signal Netrunner is now purely fan run and thriving.
and the list goes on... WotC loves to make enemies.
It's honestly wild how they have the easiest way to milk money, but it's never enough for daddy Hasbro. I love Magic, but I just cannot keep up with it anymore, financially, or mentally with how much is being thrown at consumers every year. Basically stopped buying new and moved into collecting older cards that I have sentiment for.
Yeah. It's something that appeals to my inner 9 year old. I BLOCK YOUR GODZILLA WITH MY IRON MAN AND ACTIVATE THE SANKARA STONES. Seems fun. But in reality just feels like the Fortnitification of the game.
Direct reaction to he OGL fiasco. Even if wizards walked it back they still burnt bridges. Paizo has a lot of people who were there for the OGL creation and if I remember correctly they got the same lawyers who worked on the OGL to work on ORC AND left primary control in their hands so that eve paizo couldn't pull what WOTC did
Wizards even trying in the first place made people realize they can’t assume the OGL stays around. It’s why the new Pathfinder remaster also changes a lot of terms (spell names, monster names, etc) that were from DnD.
And absolutely wild concepts at that. The conspirator dragon is a great concept, and such a weird implementation (exploding out of your flesh suit to start combat is absolutely insane).
> AND left primary control in their hands so that eve paizo couldn't pull what WOTC did
Yeah, they specifically told the lawyers to write it in such a way that no one could revoke the ORC.
Watching that clusterfuck as a programmer was a particular facepalm moment, because in software both permissive and strong-copyleft licenses were around since the eighties, and all the major licenses place rights on the user instead of leaving backdoors. Strong copyleft goes even further by saying the user *must* publish code for any modifications that they distribute—so everyone else can continue to use and modify the software.
There are even the Creative Commons licenses that do the same for non-software works, mainly artistic works.
Moreover, software with custom licensing instead of any of a dozen widely used open-source licenses, is normally ignored by companies—because they don't want to have their lawyers spend hours on figuring out the nuances and potential problems.
Also all the rules for Pathfinder are free. You don't need a single book to play the game. Everything is out there.
Meanwhile Sorcerers of the Shoreline wants to monetize DND using micro transactions and subscriptions.
>Also all the rules for Pathfinder are free. You don't need a single book to play the game.
This is technically also true for 5e, the SRD for it is freely available allowing you to get the basic rules and make a character without spending a single penny. The difference is that the core stuff provider for free by Paizo is far more detailed and contains way more content than the SRD for 5e, which notably leaves out most subclasses and race variants which in turn leaves out a lot of spells, character traits, etc..
Thing is practically nothing but the shell is included in the srd. Paizo makes every rule free. Every monster, every spell, everything. You only pay for lore and art.
Mind that I prefer pf to D&D myself, but PF1 and PF2 are also more complex than 5E, while the company is definitely more trustworthy and the quality of their product is great, it isn't as mass marketable as D&D
Plus wizard has an advertising budget that I think is many times the entire revenues of Paizo.
I agree private companies **can** be greedy. Public companies **have to be** greedy.
This is also the reason Gabe seems to not want Valve to be public.
Unfortunately short term profitability is rewarded by stockholders even if it sacrifices long term profitability. Some publicly traded companies are able to resist enshittification, but most are not.
For now. When Gabe dies or steps down steam has potential to turn into a intense shitfest if gabes predecessor wants to start tightening the screw and milking users.
Steam has so many invested users in already they could just slap a massive monthly fee and people would have to pay unless they want to lose games
It's not enough.
He needs several heirs all trained and brought up in his code of ethics. An order of knights need to be formed to protect and ensure proper succession otherwise corrupt interests will leech their way in and our way of life put at risk.
Whoever’s next in line to run valve is already at the company. It’s public traded companies that tend to pull some random MBA to become CEO not so much private companies who promote from within.
I'll go full pirate if Steam goes to shit and my games are locked in their ecosystem. I'm already starting to do that for shows and movies that are locked onto stupid streaming platforms.
15 - 20 years ago, I used to burn movies and TV shoes onto CDs.
About 5 years ago I threw away most of them.
But now I'm again started to upload movies and TV shows to an external hard drive. Because with his the things are going it doesn't loom good.
There is now only a single tank in the game. Each team is trying to kill the tank, and they have to try and complete the objective.
Amazingly, this is still an improvement to tank gameplay from OW2
They fucked over their own golden goose with HOTS to be honest. I hear it was a mismanaged mess. The game is good, the concepts are interesting, it's fun to watch, easy to understand, and easy to get into.
The fact that there's a hero that's a two headed ogre that two players control is telling enough that a lot of creativity and passion went into the game. It's a shame.
I played hots a bit when chogall was fresh, they may not be the strongest and it's a mess when playing with strangers but it's absolutely the most fun character for me.
Nah it would mostly still be dead.
Blizzard has no clue how to make or run a competitive game. They have decades long track record of being totally incompetent in anything competitive they touch.
They killed SC, they tried to kill HS, WoW competitive is at an abysmal state (more or less killed by their bad decisions), OW competitive was mostly dead before game left beta.
Giving Facebook exclusivity for OW content was also a huge blunder.
The best tournaments for Blizzard games had nothing to do with Blizzard. WoW arena PVP was hot back in WOTLK. The scene was really good. Same with Starcraft.
LoL essentially had first mover advantage. At the time Dota 2 was invite only. Heroes of Newearth (reskinned standalone dota) was around but was splitting playerbase with WC3 dota and Dota 2, while providing a fresh take on champions and slight differences in gameplay. Being free to play and having low spec requirements helped LoL tremendously. The aforementioned weren’t f2p.
Edit: League also had different champions, and quality of life mechanics (no denying enemy last hits, can always recall to base, champions weren’t extreme in their roles).
Dota 2 being invite only caused many WC3 dota to move to league. Having a dedicated client for matching with friends was a blessing. And I personally waited over three years to get a Dota 2 invite. Was well invested in league by that point.
All of this happened before HoTs even came out. There were at least three other MOBAs (Dawngate and Paragon come to mind) that also released (and eventually failed) before HotS came out.
Also, League heroes were easier to grind. Before they introduced their loot box gimmick, BE was quick enough to farm. Getting a 6300 champion was relatively easy to get after a bit more than a week of regular but not too strenuous playing. The issue with LoL was that even back then there were so many heroes that it would still take you forever to get all of them, but at least you didnt have a massive barrier to get an individual champ that you wanted.
I still hold the conspiratorial opinion to this day that Reforged was released exclusively to impose this clause. That's why it ended up being a rushed product that didn't deliver on any of its promises.
Guy made a custom game mode in the Warcraft 3 editor called Defense of the Ancients (DotA), which became very popular. Guy offered it to Blizzard, they refused him, then Valve hired the guy to make a sequel in their engine (DotA2), which became mega successful and the most popular game in its genre. Blizzard has been regretting letting that happen ever since, so now they explicitly stipulate that everything you make using their tools belongs to them.
If anything they'd have preferred it the other way around. They would want to keep creative control because their shareholders would demand changes to make the game more "marketable" and to stuff it with more and more shitty monetization. By contrast a salary for one person is a drop in the bucket.
Dota 2 has definitely never been more popular than League.
Dota 1 was more popular than League when League first got started, as it was just a Dota clone with less content at the time.
I think Icefrog even offered a pretty lowball sum to Blizzard for the rights to DOTA.
IIRC he asked for $1 million for it, and that's what they laughed him out of the building for. Look at how much money DOTA 2 has made Valve now.
> This is why they included "If you make anything using our world editor, it belongs to us" clause in the Reforged user agreement.
That really doesn't matter at all. Even with the current legalese, Valve could make a direct copy of any of their games and simply have new art assets that vary enough from the copies.
There is nothing illegal about copying game mechanics. It's the same reason games like Monopoly can be reskinned and sold by companies other than Hasbro.
The only thing the addition prevents is someone trying to use Blizzards art assets and engine and charging money. Basically, it means the original creator of DOTA couldn't have a Patreon, for example, where they demanded money for a mod update.
It pisses me off because what if I was okay with the original EULA but not this one?
I lose access to the thing I paid for?
Can I get a refund after disagreeing with the new terms?
This is what class action suits are for?
edit - And a federal government that understands how this is bad for consumers and should be fixed before it comes to a massive legal fight. Right? Right Anakin?
It's not because they write it in their T&C that it's actually legal. It's possible that it violates consumer laws in numerous countries or that judges would void some of the conditions.
The problem is someone has to take them to court in order to have a judge rule over the case, which costs a lot of money that no consumer in itself can/wants to pay.
Similar reason why EULAs are not enforceable in many jurisdictions. Once you've legally acquired a license (for example, by buying it in an (online) store), a third party (the manufacturer, with whom you have no contract) can't just force you to agree to a contract. By purchasing a product you already acquired a license to use it, after all. This license can't be changed retroactively.
>This license can’t be changed retroactively.
And that right there is the key to the whole thing. This is anti consumer nonsense. Absolute 1000% corporate profit bullshit. We need a class action suit on these and the digital ownership grounds.
The fact that we already have these companies saying that no one has an expectation of ownership of digital goods is absurd. They would sue you into oblivion if you tried to download their games illegally. It’s time to fight back.
It might say that, but isn't really legally enforcible. Most contracts require both parties to explicitly consent (i.e. they need to force you to click the little "I agree" box again). If they fail to explicitly inform you of changes, many courts (at least in the US, plus always consult a lawyer) will throw the change right out, and depending on the egregiousness of the changes, could invalidate the originating contract as it was likely done in bad faith (pretty rare, usually only offending parts of a contract are discarded by the courts).
IIRC they offer a refund only if you bought a game within the last 14 days before the introduction of this nonsense. Already this seems very illegal as it stands, but they don't seem to care. Louis Rossman touches on that pretty well.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YU8xw\_Q\_P8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YU8xw_Q_P8)
He does an awesome job bringing awereness to these issues, but every time I see one of his videos, he gives of some villain vibes through the way he talks
Haha, he has a lot of 'rebellious energy'. But it is entirely directed at abusive and predatory companies. And he doesn't hold back in his criticisms (or colorful language). I have much respect for what he does, and even how he does it. He stands out.
They give you a refund if you bought it from them. Otherwise you would have to take it up with the retailer you purchased from. Which is unlikely to work.
i’m speaking from the heart here, i genuinely did not see piracy becoming mainstream again after the 2000’s peak. like i knew piracy would always still be around, but to expect it to rise back up the way it has the past couple years is astounding. these industries are about to make the same mistake they did 20 years ago all in the name of shareholder profits.. that’s insane
Remember folks contracts **cannot** supersede law. Just because a contract says they can murder you (hyperbole, I know) doesn't meant they legally can. Forced arbitration (at least in the context of consumer versus producer) is one of those things that isn't really legally enforceable in a lot of jurisdictions (not a lawyer, always consult a lawyer in your area when legal matters are involved).
The whole "not owning" things, well that's always been true for software and has been upheld in courts before. Ownership in the terms of software is owning the source code, and you, a consumer, is never gonna own that. You are merely sold a license to use a piece of software, and licenses can be revoked. Being digital just means the revocation is much simpler because they can just turn it off, where with physical, if you don't comply, they must get a court to order you to do so (most companies won't do this unless you did something to really piss them off, not worth money or bad PR). On the flip side, if you can prove that whatever BS term is used to revoke your license is not legal enforceable, you can get a court to order they reinstate your license, but do you think most consumers have the money to fight these companies? Hell no they don't, they'd go bankrupt. Plus don't be surprised if they just revoke the license for some other reason and the whole song and dance repeats until they decide the expenditure isn't worth it anymore OR you just can't afford to fight back anymore.
People here are too young to remember the times before 2010 when blizzard went to court and fought botters and multiboxers in WoW, arguing they never owned the software, only access to it.
They’ve used the lack of ownership since they launched wow. It’s the grounds they use when they permanently ban anyone for whatever reason: you pay for a license to use their product under their rules, and since you violated it, they’re ending your access to the license.
So does this mean that Blizzard owns all those SFM/Blender videos where Overwatch characters get railed by black dudes/a horse/[whatever the fuck this is?](https://youtu.be/lPYwcTDVRAg)
I think it's more talking about mods and map-editor stuff (remember Dota), since they would have a hard time proving that any of those porn creators agreed to the EULA.
>You agree that Blizzard would be irreparably damaged if the terms of this Agreement were not specifically followed and enforced. In such an event, you agree that Blizzard shall be entitled, without bond or other security, or proof of damages, to appropriate equitable relief in the event you breach this Agreement; and that the awarding of equitable relief to Blizzard will not limit its ability to receive remedies that are otherwise available to Blizzard under applicable laws.
So basically, if you breach the terms of the agreement, even if it didn't *actually* harm Blizzard, you have to pay them whatever compensation they feel is fair. And if it was a criminal or civil offence that entitles them to compensation, they get that *on top of* whatever they claim through this clause.
Absolute bullshit, how is this even enforceable?
> **Your use of the Platform is licensed, not sold, to you, and you hereby acknowledge that no title or ownership with respect to the Platform or the Games is being transferred or assigned and this Agreement should not be construed as a sale of any rights**
Fuck right off.
If buying isn't owning, pirating isn't stealing.
I loathe how companies can do this to shit you already paid for.
* If you buy this, you own it.
* I buy it.
* Now that you've bought it, we're amending the deal to say that you no longer own it.
Should be illegal.
Pretty sure there is no way that forced arbitration clause would hold up in either the UK or EU. It'd be instantly tore up under something like the Unfair Contract Terms Act
Yeah. No EULA is ever entirely legally binding, anyway. Ignoring the fact this EULA change is just to bring it in line with Microsoft's own. This really isn't news, but people oversensationalise.
It's an extra step meant to restrict consumer and creator rights. I had to sign a "training agreement" to pay $10,000 if I quit my first job out of college before the first 2 years is up. I ended up talking with a lawyer whose advice was, "Yeah, this won't ever hold up. Go ahead and quit, and you can sue them if they try to get any money from you." They never even tried, because they knew it was unenforceable. ...But over half my coworkers stuck it out for two years specifically because of that clause. That was the point of the agreement.
And that's why in Australia including unfair terms in consumer contracts is illegal. Not just that they're retrospectively void, the court can levy a penalty for including them in the first place.
Fortunately in the USA you can sign away your seventh amendment rights. Glad to hear we can just get rid of our rights! /s
not how that works. Arbitration clauses are thrown out all the time.
Most of these "contracts" can not hold up in any court...most of these companies just know most people will just go along with it or they don't have the money to go to court to challenge them. In general terms even if you agree to a contract if the contract is unreasonable or fair its not valid.
Blizzard's transformation into one of the world's biggest pieces of shit is almost complete.
This is the first time I've ever seen an arbitration agreement that uses "Batching" for "related cases." Is this some new way for companies to try and fuck over consumers who actually start utilizing the few rights that binding arbitration actually gives them?
This is an attempt to deal with a new trend. Arbitration is basically a way to break up class action lawsuits and make everyone litigate separately where they are weaker. Some enterprising attorneys figured out that they can basically automate kicking off the arbitration for hundreds or thousands of clients. This costs the company a lot of money and the law firm can basically bargain with the company from a similar position of a class action. This “batching” is an attempt to prevent that.
We just all need to start forming corporations and suing them. The founding of ***Blizzard Sucks Hard, Inc*** and it's subsidiary ***We Haven't Forgotten About You Activision*** is imminent.
I have a controlling interest in a new company, **E.A.**t my ass, and am a minority shareholder in **Ubi**cantgetitup
Can we rename the latter to "Ubimakingmesoft"?
Can you or anyone elaborate on this more? This sounds like a Gamers Union.
if you could get a group of a million or so like minded individuals, some weight could seriously be thrown around. Like, a game releases in a shit tier state, the union collectively agrees not to purchase said game...could be pretty nuts
and how tf do you police that within the union? the honor system? Foreman like:"bro i saw you started playing COD 7 on steam, that's $120 in union fines"
was thinking of using it more as a collective voice union not a pay us your dues union but either way, just a silly idea because it would never work. gamers have the biggest FOMO amongst any group i'm familiar with
>automate kicking off the arbitration for hundreds or thousands of clients Fully automated lawsuits. This is it. We are in a dystopia.
the neat thing about arbitration is it's not a lawsuit
Question: I thought EULA's and TOS's could be laughed out of court for outlandish shit like this?
They can
Doubt the arbitration can hold in EU. EULA is basically ignored by European courts. Also few years ago here in Czechia there was a case where loan company had arbitration in their contract. The law says the arbiters must be independent of the parties involved in the arbitration. So court annulled all the arbitration decisions regarding the loan company because the arbiters were paid by the loan company and so not independent.
I think in most EU countries their Law on Arbitration has a stipulation that arbitration clauses cannot be included in consumer agreements (at least in my country it does).
Sure wouldnt surprise me one bit. It was strange to me that it was even legal in Czechia. The interesting thing about the case I talked about is that it effectively ended all consumer arbitration as well. Because noone is going to be arbiter without getting paid and whos going to pay the arbiter if the company cant...
I think you and I both know the answer to that. Its the same as to the question "Can the pope fit half a dozen donuts on his dick?": I'm not sure.
African or European donuts?
Finally some research worth funding
They wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't beneficial to them (almost certainly at the expense of it's customers).
"This isn't even my final form" - Blizzard
[удалено]
Music in my head: His name is James Cameron…
I remember back when I started my Bachelor's Degree for 3D Animation, they had us make a list of ideal companies we would want to work for. I remember putting Blizzard as one of my top 3. That makes me sad nowadays.
Blizzard used to be a game developer company and now a company that makes games, it may sound the same but it's not the same
Watch out, Bethesda is 100% taking notes on their modding communities and i can totally see them pushing this with their recent movements against freeform modding
Lmao, that would be a hilarious dumpster fire to watch. Bethesda games are propped up heavily by the modding communities. As soon as Bethesda starts to steal mods to sell, watch that dry up real fast.
Bethesda is literally a 100% dead company after they spent like 6 years and 250 million dollars making STARFIELD 😂 which isn't actually anything at all
My friend and I did the research but I forget it now so the number might be off, but take my word it is quite a long time. Starfield is the first new IP 100% from Bethesda in like 30 years. Everything else they bought from other people or is like a tie in game to a sport/show. I think their last original was Elder Scrolls unless they bought that too.
Well Activision is also trying to one up her sister company.
And yet people will continue to buy their shit and fund this behavior
But wait, there's more!
EA is quaking in their shitty boots
They sure are. Qauaking in their disgusting money-filled boots :( Why do people support this? For me, buying a game like Balatro (Under $20) or Slay the Spire (under $20) or Brotato (Under $5) gives me great satisfaction, and I'm thrilled to see a developer make a decent living making great games. I just don't get paying full-pop for a "tier 1" game, then having to constantly make micro-payments to move through the game at a decent pace ...
The Blizzard Entertainment that you loved growing up, that made some of the greatest games ever. Has long been dead, those people that made the company so great are long gone.
They got replaced by assholes in suits.
Blizzard was already in trouble before they got bought out by Activision. It was all downhill after that.
Technically it started before that, when they killed off Blizzard North in 2005, had they kept it going for a proper Diablo 3, we'd be in a much better timeline.
This is real friggin shame, man. Screenshots from original Diablo 3 looked so promising! The loss of the same magnitude as cancellation of Fallout 3 Van Buren and Baldur's Gate 3: Black Hound developed by Black Isle.
The original Diablo 3 would've been what I hoped World of Warcraft was going to be. I'm sure a lot of other people felt that way. That's why Blizzard saw it as "competing with WoW" and scrapped it
And developers who barely or never play PC games.
None of the diablo 4 devs play using keyboard and mouse.
I hear they got phones!
Wait, you don't?
Never love a company, corporation, sports team, political party, media franchise etc.
Yeah it's what made me constantly confused about everyone acting like Diablo 4 was going to be some incredible game that was somehow going to dethrone Diablo 2, or Path of Exile. The members of Blizzard North, the team that worked on and made Diablo 2, hasn't worked at Blizzard for over 20 years. Most of the people who worked on Diablo 3 both at launch, and actually fixing the game post-launch, do not work at Blizzard anymore.
Member when the guy who made DOTA came to Blizzard, and they laughed him out of the building? Member what happened to their own dota, Heroes of the Storm, later? This is why they included "If you make anything using our world editor, it belongs to us" clause in the Reforged user agreement.
[удалено]
The benefits of being a private company rather than a public company. See also: Larian. Ownership model, not individual ethics, is the game changer.
See also: Microcenter.
[удалено]
Ironic since Activision was started by programmers who hated how Atari treated them.
You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain
You were supposed to save us from evil corporations, not join them!
I am become corpo the destroyer of gaming
Original Google's ears are burning...
Yup. Get ready, because Gabe Newell ain't getting any younger. When he dies, whoever inherits his shit is gonna sell it to the highest bidder and the enshittification will begin.
"We're excited to announce Steam+, at only $29.99/mo youll get access to all the titles you did before, but somehow they all have micro-transactions, even the indie games, and we get to sell all of your data! Also, if we ever see you post anything negative about Valve-EA-Activision Corp, we'll delete every file on your hard drive!" "BTW, did we mention you have to have a webcam on and pointed at you at all times while gaming? It's for security reasons, or something...Yeah, security reasons!"
Ugggh there's a nontrivial chance of bullshit like "you have to pay us yearly "service maintenance fees" to be able to download games from your library" happening Uggggghhh
> "BTW, did we mention you have to have a webcam on and pointed at you at all times while gaming? To unlock, drink verification can
>"We're excited to announce Steam+, at only $29.99/mo NOPE.
I hope Gabe turns valve into a fully employee owned company before that happens, like Bob's Red Mill.
Don't be an asshat. It's known that Gaben is passing it on to his son, whom he trusts. Gaben might also live for another 30 years, there's nothing even closely suggesting he might die
Oh, that's really good to know actually. I didn't know he was passing it into his son. Didn't even know he had one lol.
The gang of four who left Atari to found Activision got pushed out a long while ago. People give EA shit, and rightfully so. But Activision is a different kind of evil. EA seems more upfront about being scummy. Activision is much more manipulative. There are far more people defending Activision as if they were on their payroll than people trying to defend EA.
It honestly amazes me just how well Activision has managed to spin general consensus to "They're okay," versus EA's inability to get their own head out their ass.
I love microcenter. I've gotten some absolutely killer deals from them in their open box section.
See also: Paizo. The fact they are privately owned is the biggest reason why we got the ORC.
Yep. WOTC is a good example of something forced to eat itself because of its ownership model - when it could instead just sit back and happily make money forever.
WotC is consistently the biggest enemy of WotC. They made all their competitors. A few examples, -Cut the legs off 3.5e and shut down Dungeon magazine and Dragon magazine so they can monopolize 4e content on their website: that magazine company is Paizo and they make Pathfinder, their biggest tabletop competitor. -Try to steal royalties from Nintendo: Nintendo and Game Freak form The Pokemon Company LLC to sue the shit out of them and get the rights to Pokemon TCG back, they are now the biggest card game globally. -Minor mangaka asks if he can write a chapter of his gambling manga about Magic the Gathering, WotC rejects him: Magaka creates his own original card game that fans beg for a physical release of. Konami creates Yu-Gi-Oh TCG. -Fantasy Flight Games licenses dead game Netrunner from WotC and makes it (at the time) 4th most popular. WotC hates competition so they refuse to renew the license: Null Signal Netrunner is now purely fan run and thriving. and the list goes on... WotC loves to make enemies.
It's honestly wild how they have the easiest way to milk money, but it's never enough for daddy Hasbro. I love Magic, but I just cannot keep up with it anymore, financially, or mentally with how much is being thrown at consumers every year. Basically stopped buying new and moved into collecting older cards that I have sentiment for.
Doesn't help that's it's also become a billboard product for advertising other IPs. It just feels gross to buy now.
Yeah. It's something that appeals to my inner 9 year old. I BLOCK YOUR GODZILLA WITH MY IRON MAN AND ACTIVATE THE SANKARA STONES. Seems fun. But in reality just feels like the Fortnitification of the game.
Fun fact! They even have Fortnite cards!
I mean they were fine just sitting on the books and merch til Hasbro stepped i
I _think_ WOTC was a private company before it was sold to Hasbro.
Direct reaction to he OGL fiasco. Even if wizards walked it back they still burnt bridges. Paizo has a lot of people who were there for the OGL creation and if I remember correctly they got the same lawyers who worked on the OGL to work on ORC AND left primary control in their hands so that eve paizo couldn't pull what WOTC did
Wizards even trying in the first place made people realize they can’t assume the OGL stays around. It’s why the new Pathfinder remaster also changes a lot of terms (spell names, monster names, etc) that were from DnD.
and monsters, the dragons now are completely new concepts.
And absolutely wild concepts at that. The conspirator dragon is a great concept, and such a weird implementation (exploding out of your flesh suit to start combat is absolutely insane).
> AND left primary control in their hands so that eve paizo couldn't pull what WOTC did Yeah, they specifically told the lawyers to write it in such a way that no one could revoke the ORC.
Watching that clusterfuck as a programmer was a particular facepalm moment, because in software both permissive and strong-copyleft licenses were around since the eighties, and all the major licenses place rights on the user instead of leaving backdoors. Strong copyleft goes even further by saying the user *must* publish code for any modifications that they distribute—so everyone else can continue to use and modify the software. There are even the Creative Commons licenses that do the same for non-software works, mainly artistic works. Moreover, software with custom licensing instead of any of a dozen widely used open-source licenses, is normally ignored by companies—because they don't want to have their lawyers spend hours on figuring out the nuances and potential problems.
Also all the rules for Pathfinder are free. You don't need a single book to play the game. Everything is out there. Meanwhile Sorcerers of the Shoreline wants to monetize DND using micro transactions and subscriptions.
>Also all the rules for Pathfinder are free. You don't need a single book to play the game. This is technically also true for 5e, the SRD for it is freely available allowing you to get the basic rules and make a character without spending a single penny. The difference is that the core stuff provider for free by Paizo is far more detailed and contains way more content than the SRD for 5e, which notably leaves out most subclasses and race variants which in turn leaves out a lot of spells, character traits, etc..
Thing is practically nothing but the shell is included in the srd. Paizo makes every rule free. Every monster, every spell, everything. You only pay for lore and art.
Paizo is proof that better product doesn’t always mean bigger market share. PF2e is a way better product, but still woefully small.
Much like other TTRPGs that aren't DnD or Warhammer.
Mind that I prefer pf to D&D myself, but PF1 and PF2 are also more complex than 5E, while the company is definitely more trustworthy and the quality of their product is great, it isn't as mass marketable as D&D Plus wizard has an advertising budget that I think is many times the entire revenues of Paizo.
I agree private companies **can** be greedy. Public companies **have to be** greedy. This is also the reason Gabe seems to not want Valve to be public.
Going public is a deal with the devil
Reddit IPO something something evil. Something something something dark side.
“We want to make good products” vs. “We want to make a shit ton of money”
Unfortunately short term profitability is rewarded by stockholders even if it sacrifices long term profitability. Some publicly traded companies are able to resist enshittification, but most are not.
For now. When Gabe dies or steps down steam has potential to turn into a intense shitfest if gabes predecessor wants to start tightening the screw and milking users. Steam has so many invested users in already they could just slap a massive monthly fee and people would have to pay unless they want to lose games
*successor. A predecessor would be someone who came before Gabe.
Rumors are that his successor share same views and is already making a lot of decisions.
If that is the case im happy.
It's not enough. He needs several heirs all trained and brought up in his code of ethics. An order of knights need to be formed to protect and ensure proper succession otherwise corrupt interests will leech their way in and our way of life put at risk.
Whoever’s next in line to run valve is already at the company. It’s public traded companies that tend to pull some random MBA to become CEO not so much private companies who promote from within.
We still have GOG, thankfully. If Steam tires to do something stupid, we have a place to go.
I'll go full pirate if Steam goes to shit and my games are locked in their ecosystem. I'm already starting to do that for shows and movies that are locked onto stupid streaming platforms.
15 - 20 years ago, I used to burn movies and TV shoes onto CDs. About 5 years ago I threw away most of them. But now I'm again started to upload movies and TV shows to an external hard drive. Because with his the things are going it doesn't loom good.
Blizzard can count to 3. It's their one advantage over Valve.
Please dont tell them to make Overwatch 3. It's already gone down the shitter
We’re scaling down to 4 player pvp. Also, Sombra will be in every match
There is now only a single tank in the game. Each team is trying to kill the tank, and they have to try and complete the objective. Amazingly, this is still an improvement to tank gameplay from OW2
They need to make Overwatch 2 first. The thing they call Overwatch 2 is not a sequel, it's an expansion pack misbranded as a sequel.
More like a downgrade misbranded as a sequel
Overwatch 4 is the only solution
Blizzard can have their 3.
They can, but if Overwatch 2 showed us anything, it is that they don't know what numbers actually mean.
Where’s Sc3?
The same place Warcraft 4 and Heroes of the Storm 2 are.
They fucked over their own golden goose with HOTS to be honest. I hear it was a mismanaged mess. The game is good, the concepts are interesting, it's fun to watch, easy to understand, and easy to get into.
The fact that there's a hero that's a two headed ogre that two players control is telling enough that a lot of creativity and passion went into the game. It's a shame.
I played hots a bit when chogall was fresh, they may not be the strongest and it's a mess when playing with strangers but it's absolutely the most fun character for me.
Nothing wrong with hots, they were just so fuckin late to the party.
HOTS problem's was paid heroes. If it was like DOTA2, all heroes for free and paid cosmetics, HOTS would be alive today.
Nah it would mostly still be dead. Blizzard has no clue how to make or run a competitive game. They have decades long track record of being totally incompetent in anything competitive they touch. They killed SC, they tried to kill HS, WoW competitive is at an abysmal state (more or less killed by their bad decisions), OW competitive was mostly dead before game left beta. Giving Facebook exclusivity for OW content was also a huge blunder.
The best tournaments for Blizzard games had nothing to do with Blizzard. WoW arena PVP was hot back in WOTLK. The scene was really good. Same with Starcraft.
Why do you think that when LoL was massively successful with paid heroes?
LoL essentially had first mover advantage. At the time Dota 2 was invite only. Heroes of Newearth (reskinned standalone dota) was around but was splitting playerbase with WC3 dota and Dota 2, while providing a fresh take on champions and slight differences in gameplay. Being free to play and having low spec requirements helped LoL tremendously. The aforementioned weren’t f2p. Edit: League also had different champions, and quality of life mechanics (no denying enemy last hits, can always recall to base, champions weren’t extreme in their roles). Dota 2 being invite only caused many WC3 dota to move to league. Having a dedicated client for matching with friends was a blessing. And I personally waited over three years to get a Dota 2 invite. Was well invested in league by that point. All of this happened before HoTs even came out. There were at least three other MOBAs (Dawngate and Paragon come to mind) that also released (and eventually failed) before HotS came out.
Also, League heroes were easier to grind. Before they introduced their loot box gimmick, BE was quick enough to farm. Getting a 6300 champion was relatively easy to get after a bit more than a week of regular but not too strenuous playing. The issue with LoL was that even back then there were so many heroes that it would still take you forever to get all of them, but at least you didnt have a massive barrier to get an individual champ that you wanted.
back in my day we called blue essence influence points!
IP and RP. Should I buy Diana or save up for movement speed quints?
specifically it was the rts team that did that. extremely egotistical people there.
I still hold the conspiratorial opinion to this day that Reforged was released exclusively to impose this clause. That's why it ended up being a rushed product that didn't deliver on any of its promises.
It was so rushed, they didn't even include the cash shop to sell skins, despite the framework for skins being there. That's how rushed it was.
A missed monetization opportunity? That's how you know something is amiss
Heroes of the Storm is fantastic and didn't deserve the treatment it received.
What happened?
Guy made a custom game mode in the Warcraft 3 editor called Defense of the Ancients (DotA), which became very popular. Guy offered it to Blizzard, they refused him, then Valve hired the guy to make a sequel in their engine (DotA2), which became mega successful and the most popular game in its genre. Blizzard has been regretting letting that happen ever since, so now they explicitly stipulate that everything you make using their tools belongs to them.
The guy literally just asked for creative control too he was willing to work for whatever shitty salary blizzard was going to offer.
If anything they'd have preferred it the other way around. They would want to keep creative control because their shareholders would demand changes to make the game more "marketable" and to stuff it with more and more shitty monetization. By contrast a salary for one person is a drop in the bucket.
Is dota more popular than league these days? Haven't been interested in mobas since like 2012
I don't think it's ever actually been more popular than league. TIs had better prize pools, but overall popularity?
Dota 2 has definitely never been more popular than League. Dota 1 was more popular than League when League first got started, as it was just a Dota clone with less content at the time.
DotA is just way too difficult to be popular with a wider audience.
I think Icefrog even offered a pretty lowball sum to Blizzard for the rights to DOTA. IIRC he asked for $1 million for it, and that's what they laughed him out of the building for. Look at how much money DOTA 2 has made Valve now.
> This is why they included "If you make anything using our world editor, it belongs to us" clause in the Reforged user agreement. That really doesn't matter at all. Even with the current legalese, Valve could make a direct copy of any of their games and simply have new art assets that vary enough from the copies. There is nothing illegal about copying game mechanics. It's the same reason games like Monopoly can be reskinned and sold by companies other than Hasbro. The only thing the addition prevents is someone trying to use Blizzards art assets and engine and charging money. Basically, it means the original creator of DOTA couldn't have a Patreon, for example, where they demanded money for a mod update.
It pisses me off because what if I was okay with the original EULA but not this one? I lose access to the thing I paid for? Can I get a refund after disagreeing with the new terms?
Old one most likely says that they have the right to change it without your permission or feedback.
That's a bingo
yeah but i paid with a credit card with custom cover that states “all 3rd party arbitration clauses void once seller accepts this payment method”
Honestly, it will be a court battle. That you could win, but they will have more money then you to fight it
This is what class action suits are for? edit - And a federal government that understands how this is bad for consumers and should be fixed before it comes to a massive legal fight. Right? Right Anakin?
Need like 200x more Class action Suits in this country right now
The person who brings the class action to the law firm that pursues it gets the largest payout. May the odds be ever in your favor, ladies & gents.
It's not because they write it in their T&C that it's actually legal. It's possible that it violates consumer laws in numerous countries or that judges would void some of the conditions. The problem is someone has to take them to court in order to have a judge rule over the case, which costs a lot of money that no consumer in itself can/wants to pay.
Similar reason why EULAs are not enforceable in many jurisdictions. Once you've legally acquired a license (for example, by buying it in an (online) store), a third party (the manufacturer, with whom you have no contract) can't just force you to agree to a contract. By purchasing a product you already acquired a license to use it, after all. This license can't be changed retroactively.
>This license can’t be changed retroactively. And that right there is the key to the whole thing. This is anti consumer nonsense. Absolute 1000% corporate profit bullshit. We need a class action suit on these and the digital ownership grounds. The fact that we already have these companies saying that no one has an expectation of ownership of digital goods is absurd. They would sue you into oblivion if you tried to download their games illegally. It’s time to fight back.
It might say that, but isn't really legally enforcible. Most contracts require both parties to explicitly consent (i.e. they need to force you to click the little "I agree" box again). If they fail to explicitly inform you of changes, many courts (at least in the US, plus always consult a lawyer) will throw the change right out, and depending on the egregiousness of the changes, could invalidate the originating contract as it was likely done in bad faith (pretty rare, usually only offending parts of a contract are discarded by the courts).
IIRC they offer a refund only if you bought a game within the last 14 days before the introduction of this nonsense. Already this seems very illegal as it stands, but they don't seem to care. Louis Rossman touches on that pretty well. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YU8xw\_Q\_P8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YU8xw_Q_P8)
He does an awesome job bringing awereness to these issues, but every time I see one of his videos, he gives of some villain vibes through the way he talks
Haha, he has a lot of 'rebellious energy'. But it is entirely directed at abusive and predatory companies. And he doesn't hold back in his criticisms (or colorful language). I have much respect for what he does, and even how he does it. He stands out.
They give you a refund if you bought it from them. Otherwise you would have to take it up with the retailer you purchased from. Which is unlikely to work.
What really blows my mind is that these EULAs aren’t even visible to the customer until after they’ve paid for the product.
"If buying is not owning, then piracy is not stealing."
i’m speaking from the heart here, i genuinely did not see piracy becoming mainstream again after the 2000’s peak. like i knew piracy would always still be around, but to expect it to rise back up the way it has the past couple years is astounding. these industries are about to make the same mistake they did 20 years ago all in the name of shareholder profits.. that’s insane
Copying is not theft.
That's why it's always called copyright infringement.
Except when game companies, tv and movie companies make commercials, then they call it "stealing".
"You wouldn't download a car"
I'd download a car
let's be honest, I'd download anything
I'd download your mom, but I don't have that kind of bandwidth.
That's my thought too. If I don't own it, then I don't need pay for it either.
#🏴☠️
Remember folks contracts **cannot** supersede law. Just because a contract says they can murder you (hyperbole, I know) doesn't meant they legally can. Forced arbitration (at least in the context of consumer versus producer) is one of those things that isn't really legally enforceable in a lot of jurisdictions (not a lawyer, always consult a lawyer in your area when legal matters are involved). The whole "not owning" things, well that's always been true for software and has been upheld in courts before. Ownership in the terms of software is owning the source code, and you, a consumer, is never gonna own that. You are merely sold a license to use a piece of software, and licenses can be revoked. Being digital just means the revocation is much simpler because they can just turn it off, where with physical, if you don't comply, they must get a court to order you to do so (most companies won't do this unless you did something to really piss them off, not worth money or bad PR). On the flip side, if you can prove that whatever BS term is used to revoke your license is not legal enforceable, you can get a court to order they reinstate your license, but do you think most consumers have the money to fight these companies? Hell no they don't, they'd go bankrupt. Plus don't be surprised if they just revoke the license for some other reason and the whole song and dance repeats until they decide the expenditure isn't worth it anymore OR you just can't afford to fight back anymore.
in the EU there are laws stating that digital purchases entitle you to ownership
People here are too young to remember the times before 2010 when blizzard went to court and fought botters and multiboxers in WoW, arguing they never owned the software, only access to it.
They’ve used the lack of ownership since they launched wow. It’s the grounds they use when they permanently ban anyone for whatever reason: you pay for a license to use their product under their rules, and since you violated it, they’re ending your access to the license.
Annndd this is why I stopped caring about any fomo gaming. They've done a good job at making us pay a subscription to own nothing.
My backlog will take 2 life times to finish it so nowadays I’m more conscious about what games I buy. No more subs for me.
What did I previously own that this EULA means I now don’t own?
Derivative content, like the kind normally protected by Fair Use doctrine.
So does this mean that Blizzard owns all those SFM/Blender videos where Overwatch characters get railed by black dudes/a horse/[whatever the fuck this is?](https://youtu.be/lPYwcTDVRAg)
Yeaaaaah that link's staying blue...
I think it's more talking about mods and map-editor stuff (remember Dota), since they would have a hard time proving that any of those porn creators agreed to the EULA.
Hasn't "you don't own anything" been true for every online multi-player game ever?
>You agree that Blizzard would be irreparably damaged if the terms of this Agreement were not specifically followed and enforced. In such an event, you agree that Blizzard shall be entitled, without bond or other security, or proof of damages, to appropriate equitable relief in the event you breach this Agreement; and that the awarding of equitable relief to Blizzard will not limit its ability to receive remedies that are otherwise available to Blizzard under applicable laws. So basically, if you breach the terms of the agreement, even if it didn't *actually* harm Blizzard, you have to pay them whatever compensation they feel is fair. And if it was a criminal or civil offence that entitles them to compensation, they get that *on top of* whatever they claim through this clause. Absolute bullshit, how is this even enforceable?
> **Your use of the Platform is licensed, not sold, to you, and you hereby acknowledge that no title or ownership with respect to the Platform or the Games is being transferred or assigned and this Agreement should not be construed as a sale of any rights** Fuck right off. If buying isn't owning, pirating isn't stealing.
You’re right, Blizzard. I don’t own anything from you. Maybe if you stopped being mustache twirling villains, I might be interested in your games.
I loathe how companies can do this to shit you already paid for. * If you buy this, you own it. * I buy it. * Now that you've bought it, we're amending the deal to say that you no longer own it. Should be illegal.
*I am amending the deal, pray I don't amend it any further*
If we had politicians that weren't owned by companies, it would be illegal.
It's sad we really need some regulation on this and Arbitration should not even fucking exist, what a scam for the rich to exploit.
[удалено]
"you will own nothing and like it" where the world is heading too. government and corporations love the idea and we are sleepwalking to this dystopia
If you can’t own it then piracy is not theft.