Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eve Online axes Linux Port

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
    This isn't about "rights" this is about a company falsely advertising its product, ignoring its paying customers (they offer a service and advertise support for said service) and the people that don't realize that this what to expect from the company on this platform.
    Ahh... But it did support it for a time. The reality is, it only needs to meet the requirements at the time of purchase. It did, if only marginally, do that.

    Former Cedega users know how poorly transgaming supports the platform and how misleading the advertising is which is illegal in some jurisdictions.
    But not all of them. And the people behind Eve Online will only point to Transgaminng and say "sue them" because they were took by them and honestly believed Transgaming would give them what they needed to support Linux users. And they're still supporting them. Just not the way YOU keep insisting they do- the game isn't a traditional one, the bulk of the game actually resides on their servers and is more of a service than the games we're used to.

    The courts will tell you that they're still supporting it as agreed upon by your TOS as the Eve Online people point you to the better compatibility layer to run the game that they provided to you on your still supported OS.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by RobbieAB View Post
      1) Goods must be as advertised.
      2) Goods must be of merchantable quality.
      Unfortunately, the Eve Online stuff initially met (within moderate values of that...) those criteria. But as time went on, it didn't. Rather than fight with Transgaming and get nowhere, they admitted defeat and support the WINE/CrossOver Games answers with their Windows version (which isn't really any different than what they sold you- save that it largely WORKS...).

      Comment


      • #18
        Times like this is where it's easy to not like Cedega... I never did and I do choose Crossover over Transgaming everytime. But still the fact remains that Linux needs all the help it can get in the gaming space.

        Comment


        • #19
          Back then when Transgaming launched WineX IIRC they implied that they might be willing to aid companies actually make ports of their game titles, while providing the means to run games unmodified on Linux (later MacOS, as well). I only knew of a few titles they did actually help porting, but for MacOS PPC rather than Linux. I remember that at the time it actually sounded like really good idea to have a company providing the infrastructure to run games unmodified on Linux, but at the same time be willing and able to port game natively on Linux. I guess that at some point the latter was not possible or no company actually showed interest in them porting their games to Linux. Pity.

          Comment


          • #20
            Unless the games work on a common code basis ( same game engine with forks not modified too much ) then it would work but the way it is currently in game development each game is a new endeavor. I don't envy Svartalf and LGP for their porting work. I personally hate porting. Wrapping your head around foreign code, often more or less spaghetti with strange coding rules and then getting that fixed to run on a system it had been never intended to run on... "that's no easy thing" ( to quote Garret ).

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Dragonlord View Post
              Not in software. You do not have the right ( for any software ) that it runs correctly on your system. So you can not hold reliable a company if a software does not work for one reason or the other. I don't think you can uphold such a claim in court especially since EULAs tend to explicitly state this circumstance although not explicitly required.
              Kindly point out a legal decision that upholds this.

              Comment


              • #22
                I don't have URLs around right now but as mentioned before EULAs got shot down in court. It's known that buying software you are mostly on your own. Not only does support most of the time suck horribly but especially in the end if it does not work the excuse is always "special system config... not our fault" and then they are out of trouble since you can not predict what config a user uses your software with. Especially in games I've never ever seen anybody taking back a game if it didn't work on my system for some reason.

                Comment


                • #23
                  ? I've seen that happen quite often - the returning of PC games back to the store because they didn't run on the customer's comp.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    As have I, I'm still waiting for links to either legal decisions or summaries that show that consumers have no rights when it comes to software.

                    To the best of my knowledge when Transgaming claims that a game works out of the box with Cedega and clearly doesn't, as they have in the past, they are violating truth in advertising laws. While we may not have a problem with changing configurations, that is most certainly not an "Out of the Box" experience.

                    False claims in advertising can't be thrown out by an EULA as it hasn't been agreed to yet, the advertising leads to the consumer making the purchase and no amount of legalese in a bad license agreement can get around that fact.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                      False claims in advertising can't be thrown out by an EULA as it hasn't been agreed to yet, the advertising leads to the consumer making the purchase and no amount of legalese in a bad license agreement can get around that fact.
                      Rather than bitching about it, why don't you sue them over it?

                      I concur that it's bogus what they've been doing and that they screwed several different companies over time (EA and CCP being two on that list...) and LOADS of individual consumers with their provably false claims- but the statement I made earlier stands. You've no standing with regards to CCP because they believed in the crap Transgaming was shovelling at the time they announced a "Linux Port" and they are still supporting any Linux customer playing on their MMOG even though they've jettisoned Transgaming. For them to be out of hot water, that's all THEY need, really in most jurisdictions.

                      If you're one of CCP's customers that got screwed by this, you have standing with regards to taking Transgaming's lies on (right along with CCP, EA and others...) as does any of Transgaming's customers.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by curaga View Post
                        ? I've seen that happen quite often - the returning of PC games back to the store because they didn't run on the customer's comp.
                        Many stores won't take stuff back under those conditions. You can get an in-kind exchange but you can't return it. (Quite in violation of the law in most jurisdictions, really...) The main reason they've taken to putting up resistance to accepting it back when it doesn't work on a machine is because the "pirate" crowd would go and buy the game rip it off into a form usable for propagation via IRC, USENET, or Bittorrent and then return the title in question, having obtained the 0-Day for themselves and everyone else.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                          Rather than bitching about it, why don't you sue them over it?
                          Because I'm not a Canadian citizen, US and State consumer protection laws won't apply until they start operating out of the US. Businesses are well protected against extraterritorial false advertising under US law, but not consumers.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                            Because I'm not a Canadian citizen, US and State consumer protection laws won't apply until they start operating out of the US. Businesses are well protected against extraterritorial false advertising under US law, but not consumers.
                            Since they operate within your country, the Canadian Consumer protection laws apply to them. Now, having said this, it'll be...fun...getting the suit filed, etc. if they're not resident in your country.

                            If you can't sue because of logistics or laws, perhaps a better answer than gritching might be a capital suggestion, no?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The best solution is anyways to not use their product. No sales = more punishment than getting sued

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Dragonlord View Post
                                The best solution is anyways to not use their product. No sales = more punishment than getting sued
                                Heh...I was alluding to something like that...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X