Petition to change the rules for digitally delivered goods in the Consumer Rights Act

[Muxlee]

I voted no because the average person has no idea what quality assurance means when it comes to software.
No software development project that I've ever worked on has said, 'We'll ship when there are no defects.'
All of them have test exit criteria that state 'No critical defects'.

Also, we're not talking about potentially life saving software, where QA is much more rigorous.
Finally, I see too many 'subjective bugs'. Example, the car always spins when I drive it so there must be a bug in the physics.

your right up to a point QA does nt mean bug free ; it is no more than a status report to the stakeholders . This will be the marketing ,project management, legal , finance teams, and shareholders .
TBH the final decision will be financial; Product Quality is not high on the list. Brand reputation would be considered as a factor for product launch - however if you change your brand after two iterations it becomes another quality factor than can be disregarded in order to meet the launch date .

 

[Imari]

Some people like me have spent £1500+ on sim rig setups and are investing hundreds of hours.

You spent that on one game? There's your mistake right there.

I'm staggered by the number of people who voted no. If someone offers you the chance to improve your quality of life that costs you nothing and barely even costs you any time. Why wouldn't you take it?

Because I purchase on PC, mainly on Steam, and I feel that I have adequate recourse against any developer shenanigans. If a game is broken, I get a refund. If a game just happens not to work on my system, I get a refund. If the game isn't what I expected, either through shady marketing or me just not knowing, I get a refund.

If I simply decide I was drunk and don't really want the game, I get a refund.

I'm not a fan of rules simply for the sake of more rules. There isn't a problem that your "solution" would solve for me. Therefore, I vote no. I vote against more rules to achieve what would be for me, nothing.

Besides, I dunno what it's like on console but on PC at least pCARS 2 really isn't that buggy. Some of the setup saving stuff is kind of annoying, but it's not game breaking. And I think that's all I've actually run into.

 

[mattikake]

You spent that on one game? There's your mistake right there.

Oh so it's MY fault! Actually I got the setup for PC1 but whatever. How wrong of me to create a setup to play a game as it is intended to be played. And there's me thinking I should do things like buy running shoes before I join a running club...

Because I purchase on PC, mainly on Steam, and I feel that I have adequate recourse against any developer shenanigans. If a game is broken, I get a refund. If a game just happens not to work on my system, I get a refund. If the game isn't what I expected, either through shady marketing or me just not knowing, I get a refund.

If I simply decide I was drunk and don't really want the game, I get a refund.

Wrong. Try it. If you've had the game for less than a day, you can't - for ANY reason.

Steam, I believe, gives you 4 hours, could be 12. I bought Rome 2 for my PC a few years ago. It took 2 hours to download, another to install and get going past the tutorials etc. Only come about 6 hours later did I find that a save game issue caused the game to crash 100% of the time. And the graphics updates causes problems with other games like World Of Tanks. A few days later I found this was apparently due to my graphics card - something which although steam listed as a supported device, on digging around on the internet I found it wasn't and there wasn't going to be a fix. It was mis-advertised and mis-sold.

I was refused a refund due to the length of time I had it, which was much less than 14 days.

I'm not a fan of rules simply for the sake of more rules. There isn't a problem that your "solution" would solve for me. Therefore, I vote no. I vote against more rules to achieve what would be for me, nothing.

Sadly, that's up to you. It's not a rule for the sake of a rule. The Distance Selling Regulations allow fair sales of goods to protect the consumer against faulty workmanship and bad business practices. It has a purpose that is clearly defined to stop abuse of sales! How can you not see that? It's a critical part of how internet/remote sales are regulated to stop scams and fraud. If these regs didn't exist e-commerce couldn't function due to the number of scammers that would be rife.

Can you imagine a world where people could sell anything that pretends to something but doesn't and the customer is not allowed a refund? The very fact these regulations exist in the background has been protecting you from scams for decades, whether you care to recognise that or not.

Besides, I dunno what it's like on console but on PC at least pCARS 2 really isn't that buggy. Some of the setup saving stuff is kind of annoying, but it's not game breaking. And I think that's all I've actually run into.

As implied, the console versions are very different from the PC. These are simple ports that has been admitted were not tested in house before release. They didn't have to because... tadaaa... customers are not eligible for refunds as the exemption from DSR's stand...

Surely you must see how this knock-on effect works? The exemption supports abuse.

Free market; "The idea is that the consumer influences the producer, but the producer knows the consumer is thick as ****"

your right up to a point QA does nt mean bug free ; it is no more than a status report to the stakeholders . This will be the marketing ,project management, legal , finance teams, and shareholders .
TBH the final decision will be financial; Product Quality is not high on the list. Brand reputation would be considered as a factor for product launch - however if you change your brand after two iterations it becomes another quality factor than can disregarded in order to meet the launch date .

Exactly, which is why the consumer needs protection. The consumer is protected under the DSR's for everything as a result, except for computer games/digital downloads.

 

[BrandonW77]

Wrong. Try it. If you've had the game for less than a day, you can't - for ANY reason.

Steam, I believe, gives you 4 hours, could be 12. I bought Rome 2 for my PC a few years ago. It took 2 hours to download, another to install and get going past the tutorials etc. Only come about 6 hours later did I find that a save game issue caused the game to crash 100% of the time. And the graphics updates causes problems with other games like World Of Tanks. A few days later I found this was apparently due to my graphics card - something which although steam listed as a supported device, on digging around on the internet I found it wasn't and there wasn't going to be a fix. It was mis-advertised and mis-sold.

I was refused a refund due to the length of time I had it, which was much less than 14 days.

Steam refund policy is 14 days and 2 hours of play (not download time). I knew within 2 hours of playing PCars2 whether I wanted to refund it or not (I did not). So, yeah, pretty easy to get a refund on Steam if you don't like the game.

 

[mattikake]

Steam refund policy is 14 days and 2 hours of play (not download time). I knew within 2 hours of playing PCars2 whether I wanted to refund it or not (I did not). So, yeah, pretty easy to get a refund on Steam if you don't like the game.

Ah yes. Sorry I stand corrected. It must've been the more than 2 hours of play time I got shafted on. The tutorials took longer than that, so I would never have discovered the problem in that time anyway. So I wouldn't call that easy. The 14 days is a bit irrelevant as that would imply you've bought a product but not used it.

DSR's would still extend this to 14 days however - you can use a product as much as you like in those 14 days, as long as it is returned in perfectly re-sellable condition in it's original packaging.

 

[BrandonW77]

The 14 days is a bit irrelevant as that would imply you've bought a product but not used it.

Actually it's especially relevant to this topic. You can pre-order the game to get any free bonuses you might want, then wait a week for the user reviews to roll in and if most users claim it's rubbish or broken then you can refund it without ever even having played it or petitioning the government.

 

[Imari]

Oh so it's MY fault! Actually I got the setup for PC1 but whatever. How wrong of me to create a setup to play a game as it is intended to be played. And there's me thinking I should do things like buy running shoes before I join a running club...

I was merely pointing out the fallacy that you've invested 1500+ euro in a single game. You haven't. You bought sim racing gear that you can and have used to play many games.

Had you spent 1500 euro on a single game, you'd be an idiot. You haven't, so you're merely trying to overstate your case by lumping all the costs of some gear that you use for a wide range of games onto the one that you don't like.

You've still got all your sim racing gear and it still works just fine with your other games. That you've spent a lot of money on peripherals is really neither here nor there when it comes to pCARS 2.

Wrong. Try it. If you've had the game for less than a day, you can't - for ANY reason.

Er, wrong?

I've done it. You can't tell me I'm wrong when I've actually refunded games.

I was refused a refund due to the length of time I had it, which was much less than 14 days.

Was this before they implemented the "refunds for basically any reason you feel like" policy? I feel like it was. Rome 2 came out in 2013, and unquestionable refunds didn't come out until I think 2015?

Sadly, that's up to you. It's not a rule for the sake of a rule. The Distance Selling Regulations allow fair sales of goods to protect the consumer against faulty workmanship and bad business practices. It has a purpose that is clearly defined to stop abuse of sales! How can you not see that? It's a critical part of how internet/remote sales are regulated to stop scams and fraud. If these regs didn't exist e-commerce couldn't function due to the number of scammers that would be rife.

But e-commerce does function, and the number of scammers is not rife. So you're saying that the rules work and that we don't need additional rules? I agree. Glad we could find something we have similar views on.

Can you imagine a world where people could sell anything that pretends to something but doesn't and the customer is not allowed a refund? The very fact these regulations exist in the background has been protecting you from scams for decades, whether you care to recognise that or not.

That world would suck. Good job we don't live in that world. I know that we don't, or you wouldn't be asking me to imagine it.

As I've pointed out and you seem to be ignoring, I can get refunds. I have got refunds. You're yet to demonstrate why we need more rules, because your argument seems to rest on the fact that I can't get refunds which is false on the face of it. I refunded Mass Effect 2 just a few months ago because I bought it, then found out there was a bundle with ME1 and ME2 for the same price. And that is by far not the only game that I've refunded.

As implied, the console versions are very different from the PC. These are simple ports that has been admitted were not tested in house before release. They didn't have to because... tadaaa... customers are not eligible for refunds as the exemption from DSR's stand...

Surely you must see how this knock-on effect works? The exemption supports abuse.

Free market; "The idea is that the consumer influences the producer, but the producer knows the consumer is thick as ****"

As I said, it doesn't affect me. When it does affect me, perhaps I'll care. For now, I'm quite happy with the service that my game sales platform provides. I'm eligible for refunds whenever I feel like it. I don't shop from marketplaces that don't offer refunds unless the price is low enough to make the risk worthwhile.

I don't see why you're dead set on dragging everyone else who isn't having a problem down into your little cess pit of anger.

And I'll thank you not to imply that I or any other consumer is stupid. I seem to be getting by just fine, with intelligent selection of platform and retailer. You, however, seem to be quite upset with the result of some of your own choices. Apply the logic to yourself for a minute, eh?

 

[FuriousDemon]

Ah yes. Sorry I stand corrected. It must've been the more than 2 hours of play time I got shafted on. The tutorials took longer than that, so I would never have discovered the problem in that time anyway. So I wouldn't call that easy. The 14 days is a bit irrelevant as that would imply you've bought a product but not used it.

DSR's would still extend this to 14 days however - you can use a product as much as you like in those 14 days, as long as it is returned in perfectly re-sellable condition in it's original packaging.

I’ve stayed away from this thread but this last part about returning a game within 14 days with any amount of playtime is crazy. It can work for MMO games, but any game that has a single player campaign would suffer a lot from it. Imagine, you buy a game and 14 days is plenty to finish the campaign. Most of them are 10-15 hours long, so just playing an hour a day you can get the game completed.

Otherwise, if the console digital return policy is not the same as Steam (2 hours in 14 days), i would agree it should at least match that.

 

[lancia delta hf]

What is the policy on PSN? I know my friend was refunded for a game because he wasn't happy with something but don't recall the issue now. If I bought GTS and was not happy with always online, or simply couldn't accept being locked out during down time, would they refund me?

 

[mattikake]

I was merely pointing out the fallacy that you've invested 1500+ euro in a single game. You haven't. You bought sim racing gear that you can and have used to play many games.

Had you spent 1500 euro on a single game, you'd be an idiot.

Well 2 games. It could easily have been just pc2 even I only got the setup a few months ago. So I could've done and other people could've easily done so. Whatever. Fair point I guess.

The Distance Selling Regulations allow fair sales of goods to protect the consumer against faulty workmanship and bad business practices. It has a purpose that is clearly defined to stop abuse of sales! It's a critical part of how internet/remote sales are regulated to stop scams and fraud. If these regs didn't exist e-commerce couldn't function due to the number of scammers that would be rife.

But e-commerce does function, and the number of scammers is not rife. So you're saying that the rules work and that we don't need additional rules? I agree. Glad we could find something we have similar views on.

Quoted myself for context; The point I made is that generally e-commerce functions correctly BECAUSE of the DSR's for everything BUT games. If it did function for games we wouldn't be getting all these continual dodgy releases because people would be constantly returning products.

As such it is difficult to buy a non-gaming product that doesn't work properly and get a refund. The number of games released that are riddled with bugs to the point that many have decided not to use it and/or not use it until patches come out - a later release - is so common, many just seem to accept it as the norm. It's only the norm because of the exclusion of games to the DSR's.

As I've pointed out and you seem to be ignoring, I can get refunds. I have got refunds. You're yet to demonstrate why we need more rules, because your argument seems to rest on the fact that I can't get refunds which is false on the face of it. I refunded Mass Effect 2 just a few months ago because I bought it, then found out there was a bundle with ME1 and ME2 for the same price. And that is by far not the only game that I've refunded.

How did that happen? The PSN refund policy seems to say that the moment you start the game you are not eligible for a refund unless it is faulty.

"If you change your mind about a purchase made from the PlayStation®Store, you can request a refund to your PSN wallet within 14 days from the date of transaction, provided that you have not started downloading or streaming your purchase."

I take that to mean if you start downloading it, you're committed to unconditional ownership if you can't prove it's faulty, if "faulty" is subjective. Proving that a game that runs is only faulty due to the number of bugs making it unplayable would appear to be a convenient loophole. Including games in the DSR's would close this loophole that is currently and obviously being exploited.

As I said, it doesn't affect me. When it does affect me, perhaps I'll care. For now, I'm quite happy with the service that my game sales platform provides. I'm eligible for refunds whenever I feel like it. I don't shop from marketplaces that don't offer refunds unless the price is low enough to make the risk worthwhile.

Fair enough. That's your prerogative. But why should there be risk involved in buying a product? If you know there is risk involved then there is a problem with fair trade.

Where we differ is we clearly have a different viewpoint on what represents a fair sale and what doesn't. I don't consider a bug ridden pre-release beta a fair sale of a game suitable for a full release, especially considering the PSN refund policy above. You obviously do. So it's probably worth leaving it there.

 

[jake2013guy]

Putting this in the PC2 section is ridiculous. It's a functional game. If you actually wanted to change the games industry, you would have put it into the Console & PC Gaming section and I'd say it fits well there.

Also. This quote bugs me massively.

Obviously regarding PC2 we all want a fix and we want to be sure a fix is going to happen. There is nothing in law that forces a developer to continue support or to fix a product after sale. It's ripe for exploitation. PC2 (and No Man's Sky) are just the start.

You're never going to force a developer of any application to support a product after sale. It would be a logistical nightmare. PC2 already has and will get updates. That's why I vote no.

Sure, at face value, voting yes seems to be the obvious option.

 

[Wolfe]

Oh so it's MY fault! Actually I got the setup for PC1 but whatever. How wrong of me to create a setup to play a game as it is intended to be played. And there's me thinking I should do things like buy running shoes before I join a running club...

There's no obligation to spend £1500+ on a pair of NASA-researched titanium-reinforced carbon fiber running shoes to join a running club when an ordinary pair of Dual Sneakers 4™ will suffice; at the very least to determine if the game is what you expected it to be.

I waited until I could try PCARS2 for myself before seriously considering a Drive Hub converter to enable me to use the Logitech G25 I already own, and that's $90. I'm still waiting, to see how the handling might be tweaked in the coming months.

The point I made is that generally e-commerce functions correctly BECAUSE of the DSR's for everything BUT games. If it did function for games we wouldn't be getting all these continual dodgy releases because people would be constantly returning products.

As such it is difficult to buy a non-gaming product that doesn't work properly and get a refund. The number of games released that are riddled with bugs to the point that many have decided not to use it and/or not use it until patches come out - a later release - is so common, many just seem to accept it as the norm. It's only the norm because of the exclusion of games to the DSR's.

It's only the norm or a common occurrence if you have a habit of buying dodgy releases riddled with bugs. This is the only buggy game I've bought this year. If you ask me, 2017 has been stupendous in terms of games. No one is stopping you from playing better ones.

Like @Imari, I put some care into the games I choose to play and which games I buy digitally or as a physical copy, depending on the platform and price. I don't think I've ever paid full retail price for digital on a console. Frankly, I don't get why it caught on so much -- giving up your return, resale, and lending rights just to avoid driving to a store or waiting for a package, and swapping discs or storing the cases. If someone else thinks it's worth it, to each their own.

I don't think digital distribution on consoles should be the way it is, but it's also on consumers to take some responsibility for their purchasing decisions. And sorry, but you're coming at this for the wrong reasons. As has been said, if you were really acting in good faith, this wouldn't be about PCARS2 or posted in this subforum.

 

[Ian Bell]

What a preposterous thread. People like your really do put us off trying to make games for you. Which is exactly what we did. With constant sim community interaction for years, adding every feature they desired.... We're rating higher than GT Sport and Forza and I have to read guff like this.

Good luck with your petition. You'll put more than us off of the notion of raising the bar in this genre.

We currently have zero game breaking bugs BTW. And don't link me to that Reddit thread with 40 items, 35 of which are feature requests or design calls...

 

[Imari]

The number of games released that are riddled with bugs to the point that many have decided not to use it and/or not use it until patches come out - a later release - is so common, many just seem to accept it as the norm.

I'm not sure that it's as prevalent as you think it is. I've not come across any showstopper bugs in PC2, just a few annoying but not critical bugs. Mostly stuff to do with the setups saving. It's not like Bubble Bobble Revolution where the game was unable to be completed.

For my own interest, what games released this year would you count as falling under your above description? If the list extends beyond 12 feel free to stop there, but I'm interested to see what level of broken counts.

How did that happen? The PSN refund policy seems to say that the moment you start the game you are not eligible for a refund unless it is faulty.

"If you change your mind about a purchase made from the PlayStation®Store, you can request a refund to your PSN wallet within 14 days from the date of transaction, provided that you have not started downloading or streaming your purchase."

Because I mentioned several times that I purchase from Steam, but it seems like it went in one ear and out the other.

Fair enough. That's your prerogative. But why should there be risk involved in buying a product? If you know there is risk involved then there is a problem with fair trade.

Not really. Have you ever bought anything second hand? Have you ever gambled? People are totally willing to accept risk as part of the bargain and it's totally fair to do so, provided that the risk is visible to the consumer.

Where we differ is we clearly have a different viewpoint on what represents a fair sale and what doesn't. I don't consider a bug ridden pre-release beta a fair sale of a game suitable for a full release, especially considering the PSN refund policy above. You obviously do. So it's probably worth leaving it there.

I don't think we differ that much on what's a fair sale, but we do differ on what counts as a "bug ridden pre-release beta". I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the games that I consider to fit that description. pCARS 2 is a long, long way from No Man's Sky and Aliens Colonial Marines. Not even on the same planet, really.

 

[ApparitionLOD]

What a preposterous thread. People like your really do put us off trying to make games for you. Which is exactly what we did. With constant sim community interaction for years, adding every feature they desired.... We're rating higher than GT Sport and Forza and I have to read guff like this.

Good luck with your petition. You'll put more than us off of the notion of raising the bar in this genre.

We currently have zero game breaking bugs BTW. And don't link me to that Reddit thread with 40 items, 35 of which are feature requests or design calls...

Agreed. I was very confused seeing this thread because I have experienced no issues with the game that would cause a demand like the one OP suggests. Is there a thread that lists all of these supposed issues?

 

[mattikake]

What a preposterous thread. People like your really do put us off trying to make games for you. Which is exactly what we did. With constant sim community interaction for years, adding every feature they desired.... We're rating higher than GT Sport and Forza and I have to read guff like this.

Good luck with your petition. You'll put more than us off of the notion of raising the bar in this genre.

It's not me you need to worry about. There are a large number of negative articles and videos out on the internet regarding how this release happened.

I don't have a problem with your efforts. I appreciate them. But I have a problem with the way the industry conducts its business, in that it is, in some areas, exempt from the same regulations that govern all other e-commerce business. I have a problem with the way Bandai Namco Ent forced unrealistic release dates on yourselves and how it was obvious they only wanted you to beat the release of GT Sport and Forza. I have a problem with how the game was mis-advertised and hyped and how some advertised features were removed to make the release date - I can't see how that was good for you or the consumer (e.g. online championships. Indeed, will we ever see this feature?). I have a problem with overall the quality of the product on release and how you were forced to port the game from PC to console, that testing had to be outsourced, rushed and ultimately taken out of the hands of the people who know the product the best - yourselves.

Also a separate issue with the Consumer Rights Act is the requirement for a retailer to provide a timely fix for a faulty product if a consumer makes that request. It is not realistically in the hands of the retailer to bug fix a game themselves, but to hope the developer does. I see nothing in law that forces this action on developers, so the only workable recourse is to make sure a product doesn't need fixing fixing in the first place. DSR's refunds will promote that in the face of falling sales. Otherwise all the consumer can get is a refund and no game, which it not what any of us want.

None of these things have helped you, your image or the consumers' experience and consumer confidence. There are many I know who did not buy PC2 because of what happened with PC1.

If standards were to change I see it motivating publishers to be more abiding with developer requirements. Ultimately giving you more time, resources and leniency to make sure a product is right on release and as advertised. DSR's/Consumer Contracts Regulations, have enabled the e-commerce industry to go from strength to strength. Before 2000 when DSR's were initially introduced, the e-commerce industry was considered to be at breaking point by many economists and the MSM with competition over prices the only battle ground. One could argue this single-handedly saved the e-commerce industry. - Increasing consumer confidence through quality and protection, fuels sales.

It may put you off, but won't put others off. Gaming is big business, there is money to be made and technology always moves forwards. That will only attract more developers and more professionalism. More clearly defined and consistent regulation and standards in all other areas of business always eventually serve to improve the quality of products and continues to drive competition. You know this because it has. NB: this isn't MORE regulation, it's the same regulation that affects everyone else.

The question I put to you is; if you had better support and more bargaining power with the publisher, would the release have been better? (given you position I would only expect a diplomatic reply to that, if any)

We currently have zero game breaking bugs BTW. And don't link me to that Reddit thread with 40 items, 35 of which are feature requests or design calls...

I hope and expecting you're watching this thread:- https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/project-cars-2-bug-report-q-a.359113/

There are several other threads here that talk about other issues in more depth.

Ultimately what is game-breaking is subjective to the user. If someone decides they cannot play due to a particular issue, that is game-breaking for them. It's not anyone's place to force their subjectivity on others. But you can try reason to change their mind!

 

[BrandonW77]

Ultimately what is game-breaking is subjective to the user. If someone decides they cannot play due to a particular issue, that is game-breaking for them. It's not anyone's place to force their subjectivity on others. But you can try reason to change their mind!

In the eyes of the law "game breaking" would likely be something that either prevented you from playing at all or prevented you from finishing the game. So far none of the issues I've seen would fall into either of those categories as it's certainly possible to both play and complete the game. The law doesn't care if your tires aren't at optimal temps/pressures during a night race, for example, yet plenty of people still try to describe that issue as game breaking even though it would not meet the legal definition.

 

[mattikake]

In the eyes of the law "game breaking" would likely be something that either prevented you from playing at all or prevented you from finishing the game. So far none of the issues I've seen would fall into either of those categories as it's certainly possible to both play and complete the game. The law doesn't care if your tires aren't at optimal temps/pressures during a night race, for example, yet plenty of people still try to describe that issue as game breaking even though it would not meet the legal definition.

As I said, one's subjective opinion of game-breaking can be anything that stops them playing and could come in many forms. The game-breaking claims being bandied around are subjective remarks not legal claims.

For me it was initially that FFB was broken. I can't race on the limit without feeling the limit. It was gut-wrenching and I stopped playing, sought forums for help and reverted to PC1. Fortunately it was fixed quickly in patch 2.0.

Others are experiencing issues like frequent disconnections. Bad in itself, but a knock-on effect is that this ruins your licence rating, which means you're forced to race with U drivers where you can struggle to get out of that hole. Meaning you face even more U drivers, probably non-serious people with poor connection speeds, making disconnections worse, fuelling a poor licence rating... and so on. It's not hard to see why they may give up.

There are others that are coming to a complete stop in the career mode due to weather problems and unbeatable AI that are unaffected. That stops them dead in their tracks making it not possible to finish the game.

And so they go on as we all know.

But it's subjective. If it was legal there would be other issues coming to light. What isn't subjective is how DSR's/CCR's and CRA's work.

BTW remember, don't lose focus. My petition is general. It is not aimed or worded at SMS or BN. I used them and posted here because people can related to WHY I created this petition.

My petition:

Include software digital downloads in the Distance Selling Regulations (DSR's)

Software digital downloads are exempt from the DSR's. There's a trend developing where developers are producing software which doesn't do as claimed. Customers pay for downloads in advance and cannot get a refund if the software turns out not to be as described. Devs should also release demos first.

This refers to PS4 and XBox digital download stores. Copying software (piracy) was once a problem but with subscriptions to gaming networks and digital signatures this is no longer possible, nor is it possible to use the games without these subscriptions. Some developers are now taking to "hyping" their games to promote pre-orders - to take money first and worry about problems later and there is nothing to stop the developer abandoning game support after sale. The DSR's are being exploited.

 

[BrandonW77]

As I said, one's subjective opinion of game-breaking can be anything that stops them playing and could come in many forms. The game-breaking claims being bandied around are subjective remarks not legal claims.

But this is a thread about laws so one person's subjective opinion of what they consider game breaking doesn't matter. What matters is what the law considers game breaking and while that may vary from one location to another I don't think any of the current problems with the game would qualify under the legal definition.

For me it was initially that FFB was broken. I can't race on the limit without feeling the limit. It was gut-wrenching and I stopped playing, sought forums for help and reverted to PC1. Fortunately it was fixed quickly in patch 2.0.

That's a preference thing though. It's still possible to take the car on track and race against other cars which meets the basic legal requirements regardless of whether you can race in a way that suits your particular comfort level. Sucks for people who are struggling with at the limit feeling, but the law doesn't care about that one bit.

Others are experiencing issues like frequent disconnections. Bad in itself, but a knock-on effect is that this ruins your licence rating, which means you're forced to race with U drivers where you can struggle to get out of that hole. Meaning you face even more U drivers, probably non-serious people with poor connection speeds, making disconnections worse, fuelling a poor licence rating... and so on. It's not hard to see why they may give up.

Again, the law doesn't care about this. You can race online against other drivers, so the basic legal requirements are met. The law doesn't care if you have to race against drivers with a U rating. Just think about that, if you went to a judge and complained that this game makes you play against players with poor ratings you'd be escorted from the building and possibly held in contempt for wasting their time.

There are others that are coming to a complete stop in the career mode due to weather problems and unbeatable AI that are unaffected. That stops them dead in their tracks making it not possible to finish the game.

I've not been into the career mode but it's my understanding that you can have multiple drivers at once going through different career ladders. If a player encounters a problem with one of them they can switch to a different championship where the problem isn't present and thus complete the game. And I'm also pretty sure you can turn the AI level down if you encounter a situation where they're "unbeatable" which will allow them to progress past that stage and complete the game. Not ideal, sure, but in the eyes of the law this still probably wouldn't qualify as game breaking. This is just an educated guess, but as far as the law is concerned the bar for "game breaking" is probably very high and they won't care about these little complaints.

 

[Deadheadbill]

What a preposterous thread. People like your really do put us off trying to make games for you. Which is exactly what we did. With constant sim community interaction for years, adding every feature they desired.... We're rating higher than GT Sport and Forza and I have to read guff like this.

Good luck with your petition. You'll put more than us off of the notion of raising the bar in this genre.

We currently have zero game breaking bugs BTW. And don't link me to that Reddit thread with 40 items, 35 of which are feature requests or design calls...

Is saving setups not working a design call? Just asking.

 

[jake2013guy]

Is saving setups not working a design call? Just asking.

It's not gamebreaking.

Seriously. Why is this thread here? It doesn't belong here at all.

 

[twitcher]

It's not gamebreaking.

Seriously. Why is this thread here? It doesn't belong here at all.

Lol how is setup save issue not game braking in a racing sim. Apologize harder

 

[jake2013guy]

Lol how is setup save issue not game braking in a racing sim. Apologize harder

You can still progress through the game. You can still race in all modes. Therefore, not game breaking. Inconvenient, yes. Bug, yes. Game breaking, no.

Also, it's breaking. Not braking.

 

[twitcher]

What a preposterous thread. People like your really do put us off trying to make games for you. Which is exactly what we did. With constant sim community interaction for years, adding every feature they desired.... We're rating higher than GT Sport and Forza and I have to read guff like this.

Good luck with your petition. You'll put more than us off of the notion of raising the bar in this genre.

We currently have zero game breaking bugs BTW. And don't link me to that Reddit thread with 40 items, 35 of which are feature requests or design calls...

What a preposterous response. People like you really do put me off of wanting to participate in the virtual racing community as my hobby...the thing I spent my hard earned money on.

You sell a product on an open market, and got some negative response (along with lots of positive). Whoa is you, your day job is so tough. Don't take this too seriously, but you don't have to play "we're so hard done by" card.

 

[BrandonW77]

Lol how is setup save issue not game braking in a racing sim. Apologize harder

Thanks for proving my point. Not even close to being game breaking seeing as it doesn't prevent you from playing the game in any way. I never tune cars, no need to save setups at all, yet I can drive cars on tracks just fine. Plus I'm pretty sure you can save setups fine if you use the "save as new" button instead of "save over existing".

 

[McKiernan]

Lol how is setup save issue not game braking in a racing sim. Apologize harder

Is it impossible to save set ups? Is it a case of it not working as intended and a ball ache but possible?

 

[twitcher]

If the game loads the wrong setup for an online race, that may not be game breaking for you, but it is for me. You guys must take your online racing super casual.

If I spent 6 hours making a tune, and the game doesn't load it when I race, that's a complete waste of my time. Makes me want to not play at all. Breaks the game for me.

And thanks for the spelling lesson @jake2013guy, what would I do without you? Never occurred to you that sometimes iPhones auto correct words to other words, and people miss it? Really helps you prove your point though

 

[PzR Slim]

If the game loads the wrong setup for an online race, that may not be game breaking for you, but it is for me. You guys must take your online racing super casual.

If I spent 6 hours making a tune, and the game doesn't load it when I race, that's a complete waste of my time. Makes me want to not play at all. Breaks the game for me.

And thanks for the spelling lesson @jake2013guy, what would I do without you? Never occurred to you that sometimes iPhones auto correct words to other words, and people miss it? Really helps you prove your point though

No doubt you'll be starting a thread about a petition over on mac rumours about the utter failure of apple to provide a phone without spelling-breaking bugs...

If you want to change the world @mattikake , a thread on the GT Planet forum is not the place to try.

 

[Animera]

It didn't take me long to realise that sometimes I was getting the wrong setup loaded for an online race.
Now I take 15s to load my setup during the 'Get ready' stage before the race, and I've had no problems since.

 

[PzR Slim]

It didn't take me long to realise that sometimes I was getting the wrong setup loaded for an online race.
Now I take 15s to load my setup during the 'Get ready' stage before the race, and I've had no problems since.

Ah but realising that doesn't allow you to bitch and moan on an internet forum so clearly you're losing!