HL2 makes story in The Inquirer

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:47:58 -0500, Alex <a@b.c> wrote:

>Nice, you just gave in! Information on packaging has to be made clear
>for everyone legally able to make decisions for themselves (adults and
>non invalids). Since you just said that the box might confuse stupid
>people, you admitted the box's label(s) are unacceptable.

Yeah, in the same way that manufacturers of sleeping tablets put a
warning "may cause drowsiness" on the packaging to avoid lawsuits from
the truly f***witted people in this world, half of which seem to be
present in this thread.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"difool" <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in message
news:isfj0191jffjqh7ngvtioh8ngiqn1hlsns@4ax.com...
> On 8 Feb 2005, flightlessvacuum@lycos.com wrote:
>
>> difool will be loving this...
>
> please let me correct you if i may...
> "all german pc gamers will be loving this"
> and yes i'm extremely happy for them, now i want the same for me
>
> --

Ha. Good response difool!

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:l7qj01lkaa714nh25kh7f1fitgrml85c7n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 05:15:39 -0500, "The Chronic" <endo@blunt.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't need to make that distinction, the wording is unambiguous.
>>
>>The wording is unambiguous in its literal sense, but that's insufficient.
>>It can be misleading to the average consumer, who takes the interpretation
>>in the context of what is expected from a PC game. Half Life 2 is
>>different, and it doesn't make that clear.
>
> "unambiguous in its literal sense" - in other words it is correct.
>
> The fact that some other game boxes are ambiguous or misleading is an
> issue you should take up with the relevant publishers. HL2 is
> correctly labeled.
> --

Just what is your problem, Andrew? A completely neutral trading standards
department has found the packaging wanting. Why do you have to defend Valve
all the time?

Let me reiterate the salient point here - the trading standards office
concerned has one axe to grind - consumer protection and upholding the law
(or would that be two axes?). They see Valve as falling down on both counts
and have directed them accordingly.

Maybe you feel that the trading standards office are "anti steam FarCry
fanbois" as is often the response to a post which has the effrontery to
criticise Steam and/or Valve?

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:s72k01prf8b86oe2d4sn3kdtab3icqhfac@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 07:47:58 -0500, Alex <a@b.c> wrote:
>
>>Nice, you just gave in! Information on packaging has to be made clear
>>for everyone legally able to make decisions for themselves (adults and
>>non invalids). Since you just said that the box might confuse stupid
>>people, you admitted the box's label(s) are unacceptable.
>
> Yeah, in the same way that manufacturers of sleeping tablets put a
> warning "may cause drowsiness" on the packaging to avoid lawsuits from
> the truly f***witted people in this world, half of which seem to be
> present in this thread.
> --

So, Andrew, not only are the German population stupid, but also many posters
in this thread. Oh, add to this the German trading standards officers
concerned and their legal advisors.

Sheesh, Andrew, either you are somebody akin to Stephen Hawking incognito or
a total and utter prick - probably about 15 years old with it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

The Chronic wrote:
> drocket wrote:
>
>>So the fact that it says it requires an internet connection in the
>>system requirements isn't sufficient to warn consumers that it
>>requires an internet connection?
>
>
> Requires an internet connection for what? It can be interpreted as
> "internet connection required for multiplayer," since this has always been
> the case with store bought PC games. It does not make the distinction that
> an internet connection is required to start playing single player, nor can
> this be considered common knowledge to the average consumer. If the average
> consumer cannot understand the contract, it is against the law.
>
>

"Internet connection required".

Which part is ambiguous?

I agree that the shops need to remind people since it is a new concept,
nonetheless it is perfectly clear. Again : "Internet connection required".

Its like crossing a border : valid passport required. Easy.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:56:55 +0100, Walter Mitty
<mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:


>"Internet connection required".
>
>Which part is ambiguous?
>
>I agree that the shops need to remind people since it is a new concept,
>nonetheless it is perfectly clear. Again : "Internet connection required".
>
>Its like crossing a border : valid passport required. Easy.

Internet connection required usually implies for MP and Vivendi did
not mention this game requires IC for authentication. Just like those
game companies that install hidden copy protection drivers without the
users knowledge (Starforce) they have unwittingly opened themselves up
to a possible lawsuit. This is something I want to see go to court and
take these companies down a peg or two.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:53:38 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> wrote:

>Just what is your problem, Andrew? A completely neutral trading standards
>department has found the packaging wanting. Why do you have to defend Valve
>all the time?

I am sorry to hear common sense isn't allowed on Usenet any more. Just
KF me and have fun talking to DiF***wit who will happily talk bollocks
to you until the cows come home.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

The Chronic wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>
>>It doesn't need to make that distinction, the wording is unambiguous.
>
>
> The wording is unambiguous in its literal sense, but that's insufficient.
> It can be misleading to the average consumer, who takes the interpretation
> in the context of what is expected from a PC game. Half Life 2 is
> different, and it doesn't make that clear.
>

I feel its a tad early for you to be redefining the english language
and how people interpret it. You feel the average consumer doesn't
understand the word "required" thus leaving Valve open to legal action?

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Walter Mitty" <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cud4tf$h8i$03$2@news.t-online.com...
> The Chronic wrote:
>> Andrew wrote:
>>
>>>It doesn't need to make that distinction, the wording is unambiguous.
>>
>>
>> The wording is unambiguous in its literal sense, but that's insufficient.
>> It can be misleading to the average consumer, who takes the
>> interpretation
>> in the context of what is expected from a PC game. Half Life 2 is
>> different, and it doesn't make that clear.
>>
>
> I feel its a tad early for you to be redefining the english language and
> how people interpret it. You feel the average consumer doesn't understand
> the word "required" thus leaving Valve open to legal action?

I think you will find it is the trading standards office concerned making
this distinction.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:56:51 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> wrote:

>So, Andrew, not only are the German population stupid, but also many posters
>in this thread. Oh, add to this the German trading standards officers
>concerned and their legal advisors.

I have said nothing about the German population. The German trading
standards will have received complaints from bozo's like DiF***wit and
will be acting to help the "speshul" people in their community from
having to use their brain.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Schrodinger wrote:
> "Walter Mitty" <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:cud4tf$h8i$03$2@news.t-online.com...
>
>>The Chronic wrote:
>>
>>>Andrew wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It doesn't need to make that distinction, the wording is unambiguous.
>>>
>>>
>>>The wording is unambiguous in its literal sense, but that's insufficient.
>>>It can be misleading to the average consumer, who takes the
>>>interpretation
>>>in the context of what is expected from a PC game. Half Life 2 is
>>>different, and it doesn't make that clear.
>>>
>>
>> I feel its a tad early for you to be redefining the english language and
>>how people interpret it. You feel the average consumer doesn't understand
>>the word "required" thus leaving Valve open to legal action?
>
>
> I think you will find it is the trading standards office concerned making
> this distinction.
>

I dont doubt it. The world has gone potty.

I wonder if nuts of the future will come with a label that says "remove
shell before eating".

--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/3tdeu
" Format wars could 'confuse users'"
http://www.tinyurl.com

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:529k01d7clomha48b3c2ke7r32ivija5qj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:53:38 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> wrote:
>
>>Just what is your problem, Andrew? A completely neutral trading standards
>>department has found the packaging wanting. Why do you have to defend
>>Valve
>>all the time?
>
> I am sorry to hear common sense isn't allowed on Usenet any more. Just
> KF me and have fun talking to DiF***wit who will happily talk bollocks
> to you until the cows come home.
> --

Andrew, according to your posts, common sense is not allowed in the German
Trading Standards department either. One must accept at some point that,
when everybody disagrees with you it may be for a reason...

 

[schrodinger]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:gl9k019o2aqu6gtv69lfdtkhi28nic7h5s@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:56:51 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> wrote:
>
>>So, Andrew, not only are the German population stupid, but also many
>>posters
>>in this thread. Oh, add to this the German trading standards officers
>>concerned and their legal advisors.
>
> I have said nothing about the German population. The German trading
> standards will have received complaints from bozo's like DiF***wit and
> will be acting to help the "speshul" people in their community from
> having to use their brain.
> --
>

Your inference by stating that warnings are placed on sleeping tablet
packaging "to avoid lawsuits from
the truly f***witted people in this world" is that there are a lot about and
they need protecting from themselves.

Rights or wrongs of this aside, there is a clear implication that you feel a
sizable number of Germans must fall into this category, otherwise their
Trading Standards people and legal advisors to same would not feel it
necessary to take this action.

From my point of view, you do not seem to be accepting a logical and
reasonable argument already put forward in this NG (okay, ignore the
ramblings of DiFool) and since confirmed by a serious German state
institution.

I won't kill file you because that is silly. If I thought you weren't worth
talking to, I would simply not reply to you.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 16:13:15 GMT, "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> wrote:

>Rights or wrongs of this aside, there is a clear implication that you feel a
>sizable number of Germans must fall into this category, otherwise their
>Trading Standards people and legal advisors to same would not feel it
>necessary to take this action.

Cases like these only need a handful of idiots to make a protest and
trading standards departments start an investigation. It is the same
as having a slightly saucy ad campaign that 5 prudes complain about
and the whole ad has to be pulled. It is nothing to do with a sizeable
number of people, whether or not they are German.

Regardless of all this, the bulk of the article is about the EULA
which I am not talking about, I am just taking issue with people who
are claiming it isn't clear you need a net connection. From memory the
specs on the box also say DVD drive alongside net connection in the
"Other" section. Are there people that are confused about the
imaginary ambiguity with that as well? Probably not as that doesn't
make for such a good troll.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[vinCe]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

<mike_noren2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote

> Not sure.
> They can't forbid resale of the product,

I've worked for software companies for fifteen years and none of the
products I've worked on could be 'resold'.

The user's bought a licence to run the software - they never owned it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 19:29:14 GMT, "Vince"
<vmelia@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


>The user's bought a licence to run the software - they never owned it.
>
Those licenses mean next to nothing in many countires, especialy
Europe. The courts set the rules, not the software houses. If I had
the mind and money to do so I could have a field day in court with
game publishers and many of their shoddy products.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Walter Mitty" <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cud8ks$7a3$01$1@news.t-online.com...
> Schrodinger wrote:
<snip>
>
> I dont doubt it. The world has gone potty.
>
> I wonder if nuts of the future will come with a label that says "remove
> shell before eating".
>
> --
> Walter Mitty


Too late. Buy any appliance from the store, open the user manual and be
prepared to read 4 pages on things not to do with your appliance.

1. Don't use the egg beater on your ear.
2. Don't take a bath with your toaster.
3. Don't stick your fingers in the tree sheddar while it's on.
4. ...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:lkqj01p9oa87s011n8slsma3tuegpb0448@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 05:19:06 -0500, "The Chronic" <endo@blunt.com>
> wrote:
>
> >The difference is that "internet connection" is open to
misinterpretation,
>
> Only to people who are too stupid to use a PC in the first place.
> --


If it takes intelligence to use a pc, then that leaves me out.

To change subject, I use to enjoy logging on. Reading email, surfing the
web.... but now, just to get online I need to:

1. Setup a firewall
2. Anti-virus program running
3. Don't use IE cause of the holes
4. Run Spyware program
5. Disable file sharing
6. Don't open email attachments from people that you don't know.
6a. Don't open email attachemtns from people that you do know.
7. Don't use your email in a newsgroup
8. Don't click on pop-up
9. Disable Active Scripting
10. .....

Madness! I'm mad as heck and I'm not going to take it anymore!!!! 😉

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:56:55 +0100, Walter Mitty
<mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>The Chronic wrote:
>> drocket wrote:
>>
>>>So the fact that it says it requires an internet connection in the
>>>system requirements isn't sufficient to warn consumers that it
>>>requires an internet connection?
>>
>>
>> Requires an internet connection for what? It can be interpreted as
>> "internet connection required for multiplayer," since this has always been
>> the case with store bought PC games. It does not make the distinction that
>> an internet connection is required to start playing single player, nor can
>> this be considered common knowledge to the average consumer. If the average
>> consumer cannot understand the contract, it is against the law.
>>
>>
>
>"Internet connection required".
>
>Which part is ambiguous?
>
>I agree that the shops need to remind people since it is a new concept,
>nonetheless it is perfectly clear. Again : "Internet connection required".
>
>Its like crossing a border : valid passport required. Easy.


This is just the tip of the iceberg. One of my former coworkers
recently lost his sight in an auto accident. Imagine his surprise to
find out that he couldn't play any of his games any more. He intends
to make billions suing the entire gaming industry. Nowhere on any game
package does it state that eyesight is required to play.

It's a clear cut case of misleading the consumer. 🙁

Seems there's a lawyer out there that will take ANY case.

Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........

 

[vinCe]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Chris Pound" wrote

> "Vince" wrote:

>>The user's bought a licence to run the software - they never owned it.

> Those licenses mean next to nothing in many countires, especialy
> Europe.

Which countries?

Not the UK.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 22:03:01 GMT, "Vince"
<vmelia@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:


>Not the UK.
>

The UK especially. Read your own consumer protection laws lately? You
can return any product that doesn't work as advertised, including
software. Not according to the Mickey Mouse software EULA's though.
It's BS.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "The Chronic" <endo@blunt.com> Spake Unto All:

>> It lists internet connection as a _minimum requirement_.
>
>Under the category of "other." Unclear.

So by inference it is equally unclear that you need a DVD-ROM drive to
play the game?
Because that too is listed in the "other" category, as a DVD-ROM is
neither OS, processor, memory, graphics card, or free harddrive space.

>> Bitching about it not being playable on a non-internet-connected
>> machine is like bitching about it not being playable on a Matrox
>> Millennium gfx card, or their Pentium 90 - neither of which meet
>> minimum requirements either.
>
>The difference is that "internet connection" is open to misinterpretation,
>particularly for a game with a single player campaign.

Frankly I don't see how "minimum requirement" can be reasonably
misinterpreted to mean "not minimum requirement".

I do, however, see how customers might fail to notice the requirements
textboxes completely, even though white-and-orange in color, because
they're quite small. Which is unfortunate.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> Spake Unto All:

>Andrew, according to your posts, common sense is not allowed in the German
>Trading Standards department either. One must accept at some point that,
>when everybody disagrees with you it may be for a reason...

I'm not sure you, difool/riku, Kroagnon and the German Trading
Standards Dept (if that is their real name) quite count as
"everybody".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "Schrodinger" <no@1way.com> Spake Unto All:

>So, Andrew, not only are the German population stupid, but also many posters
>in this thread.

Is that so?
Would everyone who bought HL2 without knowing it required internet
connection please raise their hands?

> Oh, add to this the German trading standards officers
>concerned and their legal advisors.

It is entirely possible that they are. It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Chris Pound <Chris@invalid.noemail> Spake Unto All:

>>The user's bought a licence to run the software - they never owned it.
>>
>Those licenses mean next to nothing in many countires, especialy
>Europe.

Not true. The EULA is worthless, but copyright legislation still
apply.