It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
I'll reply to some contentions here.
First the museum bit. A museum is not a person that charges money in order to see a single painting. The people are paying for the guarding and preservation of the arts, not for profit.

About the Martin Luther King part: you just made my point all the more stronger. Isn't it outrageous that "I have a dream" is copyrighted? Shouldn't it be for everybody? Isn't it a part of every American's history?

Old games, as I see it are like art. When the artist makes his work public, he expects a period of revenue, and that's it. It is not right in my opinion to withhold art from the public for decades. If they want a modest fee for keeping the games up to date, I'll be all for it, but when most games here cost more than year old AAA games that are on sale, it just seems like madness to me. If you were an artist, wouldn't you like for people to be able to enjoy your work freely after it was published for enough time?

I just think the laws are horrible. I absolutely love old games, and I feel completely ripped off. I have to pay a lot of money to people who didn't have anything to do with making the games. It bugs me to no end.
avatar
Ponchik: IIRC they did make it available for free. That doesn't matter either way for me. It is an old game. It had its time to sell. I don't think it is reasonable to charge $10 bucks for a 14 year old game. I think it is not about bringing old games to the public, or giving the developers more compensation for their hard work. In my opinion it is only a way to make an easy buck out of something they happened to get their hands on. It's no different than finding an old painting in the basement, and charging people to see it.

I would also appreciate (from a few certain people here) if you don't treat me like a criminal. I purchase every single game that I play. And even if I didn't, a holier than thou attitude doesn't in fact make you holy.
avatar
KEgstedt: No one just happened to find this game in a basement; and the developer studio involved spent a lot of time and effort on solving the extraordinarily difficult legal issues surrounding the rights to sell this game, and also made sure it works on modern operating systems without relying on unofficial fan-made patches. The man hours involved in these two projects alone are easily worth at least $10.

More importantly, though, people who buy games on Good Old Games firmly believe that classic games are like classic movies or classic literature; . worthwhile to spend time with even decades after their initial releases and certainly worth buying for the very reasonable price of $5-10 each. If you happen to be of a different opinion, then this site is not for you and never will be.
So I have either to agree and pay, or not agree and steal or not play at all.
I think they are worth the money, but it is just wrong. You may think a medicine is worth thousands of dollars to you, but it still doesn't make it right to charge that. I'm not supporting the people who developed the game by paying. I'm not even paying for any real maintenance. I'm paying to people who did not have anything to do with the game, and to people who made a deal with them and just added a Dosbox with a shortcut and a few wallpapers and such.
I want to play 10-20 year old games without paying outrageous sums or being a criminal. Is this too much to ask?
I'll be satisfied even if there were competition, but this is a monopoly.
avatar
cogadh: So-called "abandonware" is illegal distribution of copyright content. Of course it's free, it's software piracy. What GOG does is legally distribute games and for that, you have to pay a price.
avatar
private420: Abandonware is actually Legal and legit in America , any software not sold and or distributed for 8 or more years is fare game according the the library of congress. They are not covered by the DMCA ( Digital Millennium Copy-Right act ) it was ruled that

"games for machines which are no longer available, the copy-protection controls may be bypassed for "archival purposes." He also added that games with copy-protection that require "dongles" that were damaged and could not be replaced were also allowed to circumvent the copy-protection systems. Dongles are hardware devices that users have to physically connect to their machine to authenticate a game and allow them to play it--they first came out in the '80s and have since fallen out of popular use. "

Also removes the ability download games which go back into distribution and were one of the main supporters of at its founding and brought in many supporters of buying games when they were redistributed I honestly would have never bought anything from GoG if it were not for them.

So in closing it is more important to preserve and keep alive the history and memory of these games than to let them fade into obscurity. But also support them if they go back on sale and you loved them.
I won't be supporting them, I'd be supporting a monopoly on art. I would be all for preservation, but this is ripping off people because they can't get the games legally anywhere else.
Post edited February 14, 2013 by Ponchik
avatar
cogadh: So-called "abandonware" is illegal distribution of copyright content. Of course it's free, it's software piracy. What GOG does is legally distribute games and for that, you have to pay a price.
avatar
private420: Abandonware is actually Legal and legit in America , any software not sold and or distributed for 8 or more years is fare game according the the library of congress. They are not covered by the DMCA ( Digital Millennium Copy-Right act ) it was ruled that

"games for machines which are no longer available, the copy-protection controls may be bypassed for "archival purposes." He also added that games with copy-protection that require "dongles" that were damaged and could not be replaced were also allowed to circumvent the copy-protection systems. Dongles are hardware devices that users have to physically connect to their machine to authenticate a game and allow them to play it--they first came out in the '80s and have since fallen out of popular use. "

Also Abandonia.com removes the ability download games which go back into distribution and were one of the main supporters of GoG.com at its founding and brought in many supporters of buying games when they were redistributed I honestly would have never bought anything from GoG if it were not for them.

So in closing it is more important to preserve and keep alive the history and memory of these games than to let them fade into obscurity. But also support them if they go back on sale and you loved them.
No, abandonware is not legal in the US. What that ruling means is that if you already legally own a copy of that software, you are allowed to bypass the existing protections in order for you to personally archive it. It does not give you the right to distribute that to anyone and everyone you choose to, nor does it give anyone else the right to download a copy of it. The DMCA is not even the issue here, the major issue with abandonware is copyright, which is covered internationally by the Berne Convention and states that copyright is valid for the life of the creator plus 50 years, regardless of whether or not that work is being marketed.

Some abandonware sites like Abandonia are "ethical" abandonware sites and they do the right thing when a game does become available legally again or when a rights holder issues a takedown notice, but that does not change the fact that what they are doing is textbook illegal in the first place. We can all agree that the preservation of gaming history is a good thing, but don't kid yourself, the way it is currently being preserved through abandonware download sites is simple software piracy. Until someone comes up with a better solution, it's really all we've got.

avatar
Ponchik: I won't be supporting them, I'd be supporting a monopoly on art. I would be all for preservation, but this is ripping off people because they can't get the games legally anywhere else.
Actually, the game has been legally available through places like E-Bay and Amazon for years... if you are willing to shell out hundreds of dollars for a single copy. $10 or $100, which is actually a rip-off? Besides, how do you expect people to legally get this game without paying for it? It is not available as freeware at all and never has been, so the only only way to get it at all is to buy it. It would be nice if art was free for all, but games are more than just art, they are also a business. If you can't accept that, you picked the wrong hobby.
Post edited February 14, 2013 by cogadh
I have collected and sold games for a couple of decades now , I can tell you that I have sold boxed copies of System Shock 2 for $160 ... so GOG releasing it for $10 is amazing ...ss2 and Looking Glass are some of the most revered entities in gaming ..of course anyone can download or these days stream games for free but increasing numbers of gamers are chosing not to , they support the creators of these games and in a way thank them for their efforts , the more ss2 that sells , the higher the chance that someone will daringly rescue Warren Spector and the Looking Glass crew from Epic Fail Mickey Mouse duty and get them working on System Shock 3 .. kudos to GOG ..now could we have Terra Nova Strike Force Centauri please
avatar
Ponchik: I have to pay a lot of money to people who didn't have anything to do with making the games. It bugs me to no end
You're paying a few bucks to the people who busted their ass to make it available again. Why is that such an issue?
low rated
avatar
Ponchik: I have to pay a lot of money to people who didn't have anything to do with making the games. It bugs me to no end
avatar
Morty_P: You're paying a few bucks to the people who busted their ass to make it available again. Why is that such an issue?
Of course you do not have to agree, I think I have made every point I wanted to make, so if you don't agree now, you'll probably never will.
I knew that the idea would not be popular, but I wanted to know if I am the only one who feels this way. It would have been nice if some of the people who replied were polite, but I got my answer nonetheless.
I have the disk from the first release. But it has been always on my wishlist since I discovered GOG.

The reasons - this game is a masterpiece and it was getting harder and harder to get it working with changes of hardware and operating systems that inevitably were implemented as time goes by.

For me the price that is asked on the release date on GOG is a steal.

First it works like a dream out of the "box" - in this case the first download. Glorious Full HD resolution on my new 16:9 27 '' display. All movies work from the start.

For a person that has waited about 10 years to get it play without the frustration that you get if you manage to have one thing right but at the next moment something has to be sacrificed, this price is more than fair.
Do not get me wrong, I am not computer illiterate but in this age and time you have less and less time to meddle with settings, patches etc.

I very much liked the comparison with Museum. Yes that is the perfect motto for GOG - this is a place for connoisseurs and collectors - people that love their memories and can pick the pearl out of the ashes of time.

Any price is right - this is the price you are prepared to pay if you wish to enjoy something.
avatar
Morty_P: You're paying a few bucks to the people who busted their ass to make it available again. Why is that such an issue?
avatar
Ponchik: Of course you do not have to agree, I think I have made every point I wanted to make, so if you don't agree now, you'll probably never will.
I knew that the idea would not be popular, but I wanted to know if I am the only one who feels this way. It would have been nice if some of the people who replied were polite, but I got my answer nonetheless.
First of all, you're being amazingly defensive, because no one was even close to impoliteness in this thread. Everyone was civil. So, please, don't act like you were stoned or lynched by a mob.

Secondly, what is there to agree or disagree, anyway? That copyright laws have a billion horrible issues? Ok, I agree with you. The thing is, none of those issues apply to this game. And I find 10 bucks pretty good value. I get a DRM free, legal, working version of the game.
avatar
Ponchik: IIRC they did make it available for free.
I believe that they released the first game for download on their forums. Not the second one.
Just don't buy it then. Add me to the list of people who still has a working, original disk copy but bought it instantly. I even had it installed and completely patched up.
avatar
Ponchik: IIRC they did make it available for free.
avatar
Poulscath: I believe that they released the first game for download on their forums. Not the second one.
There is some debate about that. There is a version known as System Shock Portable, but the legality of it is grey at best. It is not included on any reputable listing of legal freeware
avatar
Ponchik: I'll reply to some contentions here.
First the museum bit. A museum is not a person that charges money in order to see a single painting. The people are paying for the guarding and preservation of the arts, not for profit.
This is how I see GOG though. They preserve, archive and maintain these old games for modern computers. I pay for that service more than I pay for the copyright or game files.

I support abadonware as I believe games are culturally important art that should not be lost due to copyright shennanigans. I still support buying a game on GOG or Steam when available and properly supported and archived. If I wanted to play NOLF tomorrow I would "pirate" it due to lack of other real options, but I would rather buy a supported and maintained version on GOG.
avatar
Ponchik: I'll reply to some contentions here.
First the museum bit. A museum is not a person that charges money in order to see a single painting. The people are paying for the guarding and preservation of the arts, not for profit.
avatar
StingingVelvet: This is how I see GOG though. They preserve, archive and maintain these old games for modern computers. I pay for that service more than I pay for the copyright or game files.

I support abadonware as I believe games are culturally important art that should not be lost due to copyright shennanigans. I still support buying a game on GOG or Steam when available and properly supported and archived. If I wanted to play NOLF tomorrow I would "pirate" it due to lack of other real options, but I would rather buy a supported and maintained version on GOG.
Well said.
avatar
Ponchik: IIRC they did make it available for free. That doesn't matter either way for me. It is an old game. It had its time to sell. I don't think it is reasonable to charge $10 bucks for a 14 year old game. I think it is not about bringing old games to the public, or giving the developers more compensation for their hard work. In my opinion it is only a way to make an easy buck out of something they happened to get their hands on. It's no different than finding an old painting in the basement, and charging people to see it.

I would also appreciate (from a few certain people here) if you don't treat me like a criminal. I purchase every single game that I play. And even if I didn't, a holier than thou attitude doesn't in fact make you holy.
So, by your rationale, once a movie is a certain age, it should be free? People invested in making a game financially, emotionally, creatively and with sheer graft. There's not a statute of limitations on the value of art and there never should be. You're not entitled to it for free and GOG has invested in getting this remastered version up and running.

$10 for a classic game that's been out of print for a long time is pretty reasonable when it's optimised for Windows 7.
low rated
avatar
Ponchik: IIRC they did make it available for free. That doesn't matter either way for me. It is an old game. It had its time to sell. I don't think it is reasonable to charge $10 bucks for a 14 year old game. I think it is not about bringing old games to the public, or giving the developers more compensation for their hard work. In my opinion it is only a way to make an easy buck out of something they happened to get their hands on. It's no different than finding an old painting in the basement, and charging people to see it.

I would also appreciate (from a few certain people here) if you don't treat me like a criminal. I purchase every single game that I play. And even if I didn't, a holier than thou attitude doesn't in fact make you holy.
avatar
fluxstuff: So, by your rationale, once a movie is a certain age, it should be free? People invested in making a game financially, emotionally, creatively and with sheer graft. There's not a statute of limitations on the value of art and there never should be. You're not entitled to it for free and GOG has invested in getting this remastered version up and running.

$10 for a classic game that's been out of print for a long time is pretty reasonable when it's optimised for Windows 7.
Definitely. In my opinion a decade old movie should be free. All I would expect to pay for is work and distribution cost, and extras. If you think that the cameramen, director, extras, actors or anyone else that worked on the movie gets a cent, your'e sadly mistaken. You are paying to a money hungry studio for milking a cash cow. The same here.

What I want is this:
1. Revision in copyright law.
2. Competition to Gog.
3. Lower prices.
4. If a game is distributed freely, and the owner is fine with it, leave it be!

I really don't understand what is so outrageous. All I hear is the same arguments made by giant publishers. I'm all for supporting developers and buying games. What I'm not for is having to pay more for a 14 year old game than a 1 year old game, when yesterday it was free and no-one had a problem with it. It is the information age. It is not that difficult to get a hold of old games. All they have to do is say that they had their time with it, and now, after waiting a decade and a half, we can finally enjoy it for free.
avatar
Ponchik: I have a feeling I'll pretty much be alone in this, but Gog seems to take games that are old enough to become abandonware, and are distributed freely without a claim, and sticking a $10 price sticker on them which then gets split between Gog and whatever company happened to purchase the rights along with a random gaming company it bought a decade ago.
It's great when it's a game that is impossible to find, but these kind of deals look really dirty to me.
Get on Ebay and tell us what you'll pay for a non patched game disc! I can't tell if your ignorant or cheap.