UK makes the first move versus bugs it seems

Irritated with evergrowing broken releases?
Tired of alwaysonline crap not specified in singleplayer games?
Disgusted with improper K+M support in ports from consoles?

Pack your bags and emmigrate to UK.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-10-01-new-consumer-rights-act-puts-gamers-in-the-driving-seat

The Consumer Rights Act says goods must be:
Satisfactory quality.
Fit for purpose.
As described.

Click to expand...

If are not:

A refund in this case must be given within 14 days beginning with the day on which the trader agrees the consumer is entitled to a refund, according to the Act.

Click to expand...

Let's see how this works, if it doesn't fail (and I don't see how it could fail), I wouldn't be surprised every country adopts this law with probably some minor changes.
Just a note if someone is confused - the law addresses not only physical but also DIGITAL goods.

Countries that do not have already a similar legislation type are going to adopt it.

It cant fail indeed as UK wont fail to provide the required loop holes for the legislation not to fail.

Steam already set a similar legislation for their early access thing.

It mentions that developpers should depict their Steam Early access release version as it is currently and not on what the product is expected to be after years.

Steam did the job as they leave the developpers the license to determine what is a Steam Early Release version and what is not. Not every release provided by the SEA branch are SEA versions. They only are when devs want them to be.

The consequence is that devs can keep selling their products on the base of what they are supposed to be in years.

Simple trick.

Uk trick is going to be no different, same stuff to protect people handing out bugs, not to protect people who are handed down bugs.

I've always said this when the topic has arisen, how come computer games don't fall under the usual consumer laws. Seems like I've finally been vindicated. Though I do understand that removing every last minor bug is futile, so I wonder where the line will be drawn and who decides?

I don't think it'll be too hard to sort out. As someone mentioned, this is mainly to bring us into line with EU law. In practice, if a game is so bugged that people want a refund, it'll be a bit easier. The writing was already on the wall from the EU, which is why Steam has already implemented a refund system.

The big change in the law is allowing for class action consumer lawsuits in the UK, which will be quite interesting.

Well have to pay an extra £5 a game now to cover the first-day-bugs first-day-lawsuits

lackblogger said:

who decides?

Click to expand...

The devs decide.

This law exists to protect the rights of consumers. Devs are consumers.
Not only they are consumers but they are consumers likely to move to the UK to get their consumer rights protected contrary to other consumers who wont move to the UK (like the customers of devs)

Making a business off releasing faulty products on purpose is quite uncommon. Usually, the opposite is practised: making money off releasing non faulty products.

Given this environment and the abnormality of their business model, devs might wonder legitimately if their right to consume to release faulty wont be jeopardized in a near future.

Many countries' current legislature is unclear about that. The issue grows tenser as so many other consumers are forced by law to release non faulty products.

The UK have clarified the issue: under their law, the devs' right to consume to release faulty products on purpose is protected.

Time for anxious devs to relocate to the UK.

lackblogger said:

Well have to pay an extra £5 a game now to cover the first-day-bugs first-day-lawsuits

Click to expand...

Why would this happen?

When taking a look at digital goods other than video games, it turns obvious they are not targeted by the law.
Other digital goods are usually of satisfying quality, fit for purpose and as described.
No law was required to get that result.

So this part of the law was drafted for video games in first priority.

And the law in the case of video games makes the crowdfunded developpment model the least legally dangerous model.

The crowdfunded model (that is going to be adopted by most devs) is based on releasing on purpose faulty products then promise to mend them over a period of time.

Why would people who buy those products fill complaints on day one to get when they know to come?
They will get answered that what they ask is going to come anyway as it is structurally planned.

Devs who did not understand that the trend is now set to release faulty products and no longer non faulty products are going to have hard times.

They are not the crowdfunded likes though.

Actually, under the terms of the UK law, video game prices should as it takes less to release faulty products. Of course, devs might use that opportunity to increase their margins.

Under the rule of law, people prosper. The army of light is advancing.