5 Months And Still No UT3 For Linux

[Chris]

No matter how you spin it, you bought the -Windows- version. It said so on the box.

And Epic has said that the -Windows- version would be used for the Linux binaries. When a product doesn't work as advertised, you're supposed to be allowed to return it for a refund. It has been advertised that the Windows version would work on Linux when the Linux binaries are released. People have bought the Windows version, in good faith, on the promise that it would work in Linux with the Linux binaries. So far, it does not, because they have not been released.

Again, yes, Epic doesn't owe us Linux binaries, or Linux binaries that use the Windows version. However, for someone having made a purchase, in good faith, on credible information, it's not unreasonable to expect a refund when the product does not come through as promised.

[gilboa]

I don't really agree, but this subject has been over-discussed to death.

... Never the less, let it be a lesson:
Don't but the game unless the Linux binary is -out-. Preferably, get the DVD from a Linux-gaming-shop just to be certain.

- Gilboa

[xav1r]

I don't really agree, but this subject has been over-discussed to death.

... Never the less, let it be a lesson:
Don't but the game unless the Linux binary is -out-. Preferably, get the DVD from a Linux-gaming-shop just to be certain.

- Gilboa

True, but, although its not a legal obligation, Epic, <did> say that the windows version could work under linux with a linux client, which they were gonna provide "later", the promise was not about whether there was gonna be a linux client, but that it was gonna come out "later". I would say its a case of false advertising, until such linux client is released. This subject reminds me of some threads that ocasionally popup in the steampowered forums, under the Sin episodes section. They argue, that Valve is doing false advertising, since they are still promoting and selling episode 1 of the sin games as a game series which will be "continued", when in reality the company that made it, Ritual, went boom, closed down, and got bought out by casual games company Mumbo Jumbo, so there wont be an Sin Episode 2. Others counterargue, "well, there could be a continuation, in the future, if someone picks it up after buying the rights". Well, until thats the case, theyre doing false advertising. Many people will buy that episode 1 thinking and expecting an episode 2 is in the works, but it isnt.

[Svartalf]

And Epic has said that the -Windows- version would be used for the Linux binaries. When a product doesn't work as advertised, you're supposed to be allowed to return it for a refund. It has been advertised that the Windows version would work on Linux when the Linux binaries are released. People have bought the Windows version, in good faith, on the promise that it would work in Linux with the Linux binaries. So far, it does not, because they have not been released.

Until the Linux binaries are released, you bought a WINDOWS version. Period. Full stop. "Good faith" not withstanding, you will find that unless it's on the box, there's not a court in the WORLD that will back up your position unless you can solidly tie them making it available at the same time on the same package as the Windows one.

There is no such official statement that you can pin to Epic on that one.

Again, yes, Epic doesn't owe us Linux binaries, or Linux binaries that use the Windows version. However, for someone having made a purchase, in good faith, on credible information, it's not unreasonable to expect a refund when the product does not come through as promised.

Excuse me. You didn't HAVE credible info. You have their belief that they would provide them on or around the time the Windows binaries would ship. They didn't say officially that they would be doing that. You bought on the belief that they would be able to provide on that belief, whether or not it was going to be the case.

When you bought without an official version, you bought a WINDOWS version.

No store will refund your money based on your position.

No court of law will grant that position to you or a settlement based on it.

The fact that you concede they don't owe you ANYTHING should tell you quite a bit, really.

[Svartalf]

They argue, that Valve is doing false advertising, since they are still promoting and selling episode 1 of the sin games as a game series which will be "continued", when in reality the company that made it, Ritual, went boom, closed down, and got bought out by casual games company Mumbo Jumbo, so there wont be an Sin Episode 2. Others counterargue, "well, there could be a continuation, in the future, if someone picks it up after buying the rights". Well, until thats the case, theyre doing false advertising. Many people will buy that episode 1 thinking and expecting an episode 2 is in the works, but it isnt.

Heh... MumboJumbo hasn't closed out the possibility of revisiting SiN Episodes or licensing it out to someone else (Valve?)- in fact, they just said they were going to focus on the casual stuff for a while yet because it was working for them.

Not knowing anything, I would be hesitant to claim false advertising.

Afterall, most of us didn't know Interplay was still "alive" and licensing out things like Freespace 2 to groups like Good Old Games until recently.

You just can't glibly say that it's false advertising there. Just like you can't glibly say it's false advertising or that you're owed anything on a refund when you bought the Windows copy, expecting to be able to run it on Linux.

[Chris]

Until the Linux binaries are released, you bought a WINDOWS version. Period. Full stop.

And you need the WINDOWS version to be able to play with the forthcoming Linux binaries. That's the current deal: you buy the Windows version, and the Linux binaries will work on it when they're released. According to the information Epic has provided, you must buy the Windows version to use the Linux binaries. People bought the Windows version because they were told they would need to.

As a hypothetical sitaution, if Apple had said their OS would need an IBM-compatible PC to work, you go out and buy an IBM PC, then when you get Apple's OS and find it needs a special Apple PC to work, you don't expect to be able to return the IBM PC?

[Thetargos]

And you need the WINDOWS version to be able to play with the forthcoming Linux binaries.

And this is the key, you are placing a conditional there, which may not even be met. And as previously pointed out, there is NO official statement. Epic isn't liable for not providing the Linux binaries, they didn't say when would the binaries be available, and they can always call them off... Trying to hold Epic responsible is more like trying to hold GNU responsible for GCC causing problems that may lead to unportability of certain code, when it clearly states that THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED AS IS, WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR A CERTAIN PURPOSE... etc, etc. It is the same here! Epic has provided NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND that they would release a Linux binary to use with the Windows assets!

[Chris]

And as previously pointed out, there is NO official statement. Epic isn't liable for not providing the Linux binaries, they didn't say when would the binaries be available, and they can always call them off...

There is an official statement. The FAQ is done by an employee on behalf of Epic. That's official.

And again, I agree that Epic isn't required to provide binaries. All I said was that the person who bought the game based the (possibly) incorrect information provided by Epic should be allowed to return it for a refund when the deal doesn't come through as promised. This would be done at the store it was bought from, not by Epic.

EDIT:
If you pay someone to paint your house blue for you, then when the person gets there for the job and they say "By the way, I changed my mind, I'm going to paint it green for you", would you not be allowed to break the deal and get your money back?

[EasyTarget]

I've lurked around here for quite some time and I really can't stand people making these pointles arguments...

There is an official statement. The FAQ is done by an employee on behalf of Epic. That's official.

And again, I agree that Epic isn't required to provide binaries. All I said was that the person who bought the game based the (possibly) incorrect information provided by Epic should be allowed to return it for a refund when the deal doesn't come through as promised. This would be done at the store it was bought from, not by Epic.

Epic so far hasn't failed to come through on their promise. They said the Windows disc would work when the Linux binaries came out. Although they still haven't come out, Epic has responded right here on these forums to say that it is still coming out. You said you bought it on good faith, so show some. It's no one's fault but your own that you bought it before the binaries were out.

EDIT:
If you pay someone to paint your house blue for you, then when the person gets there for the job and they say "By the way, I changed my mind, I'm going to paint it green for you", would you not be allowed to break the deal and get your money back?

Ugh, you should only make analogies that actually apply. Epic never tried to "paint it green." This is more like someone saying, "Sure I'll paint it Blue for you, but I'm not exactly sure when I'll be able to." Would you have paid the someone who said that? I know I wouldn't have. Just let it go. Other than closing/locking threads instead of providing answers in their forums, Epic has done nothing wrong here. It's not Epic's fault that a handful of people bought their software before it was compatible with their platform.

[Chris]

Epic so far hasn't failed to come through on their promise. They said the Windows disc would work when the Linux binaries came out. Although they still haven't come out, Epic has responded right here on these forums to say that it is still coming out. You said you bought it on good faith, so show some. It's no one's fault but your own that you bought it before the binaries were out.

I personally haven't bought the game, but other people have. If I had, yes, I would actually wait a bit more. As we can see, though, the waiting is trying on people's patience, and for a game that relies on player interest (how useful would the game be if no one else was playing it?), you can't wait forever.

Ugh, you should only make analogies that actually apply. Epic never tried to "paint it green." This is more like someone saying, "Sure I'll paint it Blue for you, but I'm not exactly sure when I'll be able to." Would you have paid the someone who said that? I know I wouldn't have.

If they were good about coming out to do it in the past, and I trusted them, sure I would. I would also expect to get my money back if they weren't able to in a reasonable time-frame.

And that analogy was directed at the argument that Epic could decide to not release binaries that work on the Windows version, but instead some other way (eg. a Linux-only DVD, or using the Mac version). For which, yes, they have every right to do that.. but at the same time, people should be able to get their money back for the purchase already made based on Epic's previous announcements.

It's not Epic's fault that a handful of people bought their software before it was compatible with their platform.

I never said it was Epic's fault. All I said was people be able to return the game if the Linux binaries don't come out as expected (ie. using the Windows version) in a reasonable time frame.