RTCW 2

(Graballa) #21

Sorry, you’re missing the point. BF1942 and COD both have Single-Player elements, that’s what you pay for. The fact you can play them online, and the fact that was probably the only reason you bought them in the first place is besides the point.

The only part of the game you have any “right” to play is the Single-Player. The MP part relies on other people putting their hands in their pockets to provide you with the servers to play on. These servers, being someone else’s property, you have no legal right to use.

In the real world of course it makes no practical difference, I’m merely pointing out that for legal reasons I don’t think publishers can charge money for games that only contain an MP element, at least not without also providing the servers themselves, in which case it would probably be done via monthly subscription charges as per many MMORPG’s.

As puubert points out ET was meant to have an SP element. When the SP was dropped ID/Activision had no choice but to either bin it or give it away free. Thankfully for us they gave it away free, something for which we are all eternally grateful.

I’m still amazed there are so many people who think they have some legal right to play on servers they haven’t paid for themselves, and as yet no-one has given an example of a game which is MP only and for which the game company concerned does not provide some servers or for which the servers are not subject to an additional charge.[/quote]

I personally can’t see any legal problems with actually charging for ET, the game is a piece of software which although does require an extra component ie servers to play it, is still software.

I’d say the problem is simply one of the economics of supply and demand. Without a single player element, Activision will have arguably realised there would be little demand for a solely MP product, and it’s for this reason that they chose to release ET MP for free.

Plus to market a solely MP game which, as you say, would require 3rd party servers in the main, would have required a large amount of money which they wouldn’t have wanted to spend I’m assuming. Even the large amount of marketing perhaps wouldn’t have stimulated that much demand. But then again, with the amount of usage I’ve got out of the game, I would have been willing to pay.

(Fusen) #22

I see what you mean but I don’t think it would be illegal, it would just be crappy support from the developers/publishers and everyone would boycott the game…but then there are free servers that you cna play on so I don’t it would be an issue unless the game suckes and no one wants to play it

LINCOLN L-HEAD V12 ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS

(Fusen) #23

oh and I was kicked from your server yesterday lol :(, cos I told my team (allies on fueldump) to try and focus on objective as it was only me and spoof who were doing anything with escorting the tank then whistle tells me to stfu so I say I’ll listen to you when you actually do anything to help the team, then he puts on referee status and gives the old high and mighty oh well will you listen to me know so I made a sarcastic comment about being scared and he kciked me :’( =D

Ford taurus x

(Fusen) #24

Hydra I never said anyone has the right to play on a server which doesn’t belong to them, I’m just saying if the server is a public server then anyone can play on it unless the admin decides otherwise

Simca 1300/1500

(Kendle) #25

In other words they don’t have any right to play there either.

That’s true, and of course you can host your own server, on your own PC, and either play by yourself (which kinda defeats the whole idea) or invite others to join (assuming you’ve got the resources and bandwidth). So maybe there’s the answer to the “legal” issue.

However, as you say, ID probably considered the marketing costs for a purely MP game outweighed the potential revenue. I’d certainly pay money for the quality of game that ET undoubtedly is, I just wouldn’t pay money for a game, any game, unless I had some guarantee I could actually play, against other real people, online, and that means a guarantee of servers.

(Fusen) #26

Hydra I never said anyone has the right to play

Vaporgenie vaporizer

(puubert) #27

I think the game developer of publisher should set up free servers for at least the initial wave of buyers, before others setup their own servers. If they were to say, add $20-$25 to the cost of the game, which entitled you to unlimited access to their servers. The only problem I see with marketing a sole MP game, is a lack of people playing it. You don’t have a MP game unless you have a community behind it. Personally, I was interested in EverQuest, but as soon as I learnt I had to keep forking out to play it, I changed my mind. It was big, but how many people played it 6 months later?

If the developers and publisher set up servers, charged a one-time fee at the time of game purchase, then you can circumvent the problem.

([!]Icon) #28

Ya know, with all this talk about legality. I have about $1400 worth of pirated software on my computer, so im not about to stand up and wave the flag for legal rights and all that crap. But i do think that if you buy a game, you buy the right to play it online for free. I doubt that there are many games worth paying $50 for singleplayer, and if someone decides to host a Public server, anyone has the right to play there. I mean how can somebody host a game online and not want people to play. MP should be free no matter what, unless its a game like Planetside, or Everquest where the entire premise of the game is online.

(Kendle) #29

Maybe, but you don’t buy the ability to play it online for free, because to play online for free requires someone else to put their hands in their pockets and pay money for servers for you to play on. So you may have every right to use the software just not necessarily anywhere to do so.

No, they don’t have any right, as explained previously and in many other posts. It’s a very important point and one which I really think people need to come to terms with as I’m sure it would cut out some of the bad behaviour on publics if more people released this.

That doesn’t make sense. The entire premise of ALL online games is that they’re online. Or are you saying that as long as the game contains an SP element the MP part should be free? How would that work? The publisher uses some of the revenue from the SP game to provide servers for those wishing to play MP? Why should gamers who’ve no intention of playing online subsidise those who do?

Besides which of course it doesn’t happen. ID/Activision make no financial contribution to my Clan’s public server, and yet you would have it they have a right to charge you money for the game it hosts and that you have a right to play on it for free!!

(Agrado) #30

Gah! I hate assholio admins like that! :angry:

(Kendle) #31

Gah! I hate assholio admins like that! :angry:[/quote]
You don’t know even 1/10th the whole story, so please refrain from making such comments until you do, not that this is the place for it anyway.

([!]Icon) #32

No, they don’t have any right, as explained previously and in many other posts. It’s a very important point and one which I really think people need to come to terms with as I’m sure it would cut out some of the bad behaviour on publics if more people released this.

So you think that if someone comes out and says im hosting a public server. then the public shouldnt have the right to play there? well, how much do you pay to use a public bathroom, or a parking lot. And even if we did have to pay, i think the only thing it would affect si the population on the servers. Not many people are going to be gung-ho about paying for somthign they have always had for free.

The entire premise of ALL online games is that they’re online. Or are you saying that as long as the game contains an SP element the MP part should be free? How would that work? The publisher uses some of the revenue from the SP game to provide servers for those wishing to play MP? Why should gamers who’ve no intention of playing online subsidise those who do?

How many game companies host game servers? I dont see any Activision servers for ET. i dont see any Atari servers for UT. Its not like companies that make games dont make any money at all. Why should we pay them for somthing when they say we can have it for free. do you go around and just give money to people when they dont ask for it?

(Kendle) #33

That’s it exactly, you’re getting there. They may have the ability to, but the “right” is temporailiy granted by the owner of the server, who is perfectly at liberty to remove it anytime he wants (by passwording it for instance, or just kicking you for absolutely no reason at all).

I presume the cost of such facilities is taken out of your taxes, they’re not free at all.

Of course not, still doesn’t give them any “rights” though does it?

Somebody pays for the servers, and as long as they do the games companies are not going to, of course. But why should the people who pay for these servers continue doing so?

Let me put it to you another way. Let’s say you’ve just bought COD (for example). You install it, fire it up, launch the in-game browser and lo and behold there are NO servers. None, not even one (assuming it’s all setup correctly). Who do you sue? On what grounds do you take the game back to the shop and demand a refund? Where in the License agreement that comes with the game does it set out your right to play the game on ANY servers whatsoever? Go look and come back when you find it. Take a look at ET’s License agreement while you’re at it.

([!]Icon) #34

Let me put it to you another way. Let’s say you’ve just bought COD (for example). You install it, fire it up, launch the in-game browser and lo and behold there are NO servers. None, not even one (assuming it’s all setup correctly). Who do you sue?

I wouldnt sue anyone, i dont think anyone would sue a company becuase there are no servers up, and that why games come with the option to HOST.

Where in the License agreement that comes with the game does it set out your right to play the game on ANY servers whatsoever?

I’m pretty sure that right is given to you when you buy the game. but no not any servers thats another feature put into games called PASSWORD. But what i dont get at all isa why you want to pay extra money to play online? Why in the hell would you want to pay for somthing that being given to you for free. If you really feel that you shouldnt be allowed to play games online without paying, i suggest you stop playing ET and whatever else you play until you start sending SD $15 in the mail every month. Then you can come on here and tell us what we should and shouldnt have to pay for.

This is going no where. I dont wanna argue. So lets just agree to disagree. Agreed?

(puubert) #35

[quote="[!]Icon"]

This is going no where. I dont wanna argue. So lets just agree to disagree. Agreed?

Technically, he’ll have to disagree with that.

(Kendle) #36

What’s to disagree on? You’re not making any sense. Where did I say I wanted to pay to play online? Where did I say I, or anyone else, should? I’m merely pointing out the FACT that none of us have the LEGAL RIGHT to play on any of the servers out there (other than those we’ve made a financial contribution to ourselves).

As far as I can see you “nearly” accept this point.

I asked you who you would sue if you couldn’t play online and you say no-one. If you had a LEGAL RIGHT to play online you would have grounds to sue someone if you couldn’t, but you seem to accept that you don’t.

But then you say the right to play online is given to you when you buy the game? Where does it say that in the license agreement? The ONLY rights you have are those stated in the license agreement, and the LEGAL RIGHT to play the game SOMEWHERE (other than on your own server or a server you pay extra money for) is NOT part of the agreement.

Now, I’m sorry to have to keep labouring this point, and it’s not as simple as “agree to disagree”, because there is no grey area here. You either have a LEGAL RIGHT to play online or you don’t. Simple as. And when I say LEGAL RIGHT I’m talking actual, quantifyable, provable in a court of law LEGAL RIGHT, not some fuzzy concept like “well you really ought to be able to play online if you’ve spent good money on the game”.

And it’s the complete absence of this LEGAL RIGHT that prevents games companies charging money for games with NO SP element (not even bots) and NO one-off or on-going server costs. And that in turn is the reason there are NO games that meet that criteria. All games either have an SP element (even if it’s only bots) OR they charge money to play (like most MMORPG’s) OR they’re free (like ET and AA).

([!]Icon) #37

Where did I say I wanted to pay to play online?

are you not suggesting that we should have to pay to play mp games online?

But i just dont agree that we dont have a legal right to play online. But if your so fueled about legalities, then dont play online.

Like i said this is going no where.

(Kendle) #38

Nope, never have, I’m only debating the legalities.

I’m not fueled up about it, but if you really think it’s your legal right to connect your PC to someone else’s, you’re living in cloud cookoo land my friend. Remember, I’m debating legal rights, not abilities. The fact you can and do play online, and the fact you do so at the invitation of, and with the consent of, the person providing the server, doesn’t give you the LEGAL RIGHT to do so.

Unless you come up with some sensible reasoned arguments to counter mine you’re right, it isn’t.

([!]Icon) #39

I just dont agree that i dont have the legal right to go to a server when there clearly public, and want people there. They want people to come, what kinda of server opens a public server and then says we dont want you to come unless your asked. Servers wont do that, its too much work. and i doubt people will go there often if they have to be invited. If i didnt have the right to be there the server would be locked. If the company wanted to make us pay for online play, im sure they wouldnt hesitate. but obviously this isnt a dier subject or else companies would be doing somthing about it.

(Kendle) #40

Fair enough Icon, you’re confusing the ABILITY to do something with having the RIGHT to do something. We’re only going to continue going round in circles until we can get past that (no disrespect Icon but is English not your first language?)

The only reason it came up was because I said ID/Activision couldn’t charge money for ET as it had no SP and incured no additional charge to play, and that was rather off-topic in the first place as this thread was supposed to be about RTCW2!

Consider the matter closed? :wink: