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
avatar
XxXSprayvWarXxX: Because, it is just logic, they just can't have 2 guys on their support! And with voice lots of things can happen! If you are so toxic, nothing will happen.
avatar
moonshineshadow: Clearly you have not received answers from support often...

And it has nothing to do with toxic, I even linked the wishlist entry which you did not... this is just common sense and keeping support open for people that need it, it is slow enough at times.
I have.

Well, what's your problem, then? Why do you fight me over nothing. I voted for it, no need for another wish.... like I told you, people can mark it as feedback. Feedback is acceptable from GoG.
avatar
real.geizterfahr: It's even easier: Stop signing contracts for limited time licenses! They're just stupid! Car manufaturers don't need to be afraid that some video game developer gets filthy rich selling a 10 years old computer game with "free" Porsches and Ferraris (or Fords and Subarus, since this is a Rally game).

Copyright and licensing is important, but limiting the time you're allowed to use the brands in a video game is bullshit. It's a waste of money, because you'd need to pay someone to supervise all this crap. Just make it lifetime licenses for one single game (no add-ons, sequels, remakes, etc.). Sometimes it's not too bad to use your common sense instead of a lawyer.
I don't think anyone would ever agree to a lifetime license. Aside from being significantly more expensive for the licensee, the licensor would be unable to pull away from a contract with a licensee (in case relations between them deteriorated) without risking a lawsuit. There are probably even more downsides to the whole process.
The only way to make this happen is the lure of (large amounts of) money, 10-1000 people posting tickets isn't going to change anything.
avatar
Grargar: I don't think anyone would ever agree to a lifetime license.
Neither do I ;)

avatar
Grargar: Aside from being significantly more expensive for the licensee
But why? As I said: Sometimes it's not too bad to use common sense instead of a lawyer. We're talking about video games here. People don't buy five years old games, no matter if the licenses for the brands are lifetime or limited time. People buy and play the "new" (it's old already, but the newest game of the series) GRID Autosport and not Race Driver GRID. Car manufaturers don't have to fear any "losses" from old games. The license doesn't have to be more expensive. That's just what their lawyers say.

avatar
Grargar: the licensor would be unable to pull away from a contract with a licensee (in case relations between them deteriorated) without risking a lawsuit.
Yes, Porsche and Ferrari would be unable to act like spoilt brats in case they don't like Codemasters anymore. They'd lose the possibility to revoke licenses for games that no one buys anymore.

Again: It's just stupid for video games. Car manufacturers won't lose any sales or licensing money (since the licenses won't get renewed anyway). The only difference is that every single brand now has to supervise if Codemasters isn't violating their rights. AND that some weirdos on a website for old games hate them, because they took away a game from them ;)
avatar
real.geizterfahr: But why? As I said: Sometimes it's not too bad to use common sense instead of a lawyer. We're talking about video games here. People don't buy five years old games, no matter if the licenses for the brands are lifetime or limited time. People buy and play the "new" (it's old already, but the newest game of the series) GRID Autosport and not Race Driver GRID. Car manufaturers don't have to fear any "losses" from old games. The license doesn't have to be more expensive. That's just what their lawyers say.
What if part of the licensing requires an annual maintenance fee? What if instead of % they require a specific amount of money to retain a license, with said specific amount becoming more difficult to pay as the game using it gets cheaper and cheaper? Multiply this by many licensing brands and it can become a nightmare. I imagine at some point that someone thought the same as you, then took a look at the costs and the hassle versus returning benefits and he thought "Screw this". Like I said, there are probably more downsides to this, but I'm no lawyer to state them out.


avatar
real.geizterfahr: Yes, Porsche and Ferrari would be unable to act like spoilt brats in case they don't like Codemasters anymore. They'd lose the possibility to revoke licenses for games that no one buys anymore.

Again: It's just stupid for video games. Car manufacturers won't lose any sales or licensing money (since the licenses won't get renewed anyway). The only difference is that every single brand now has to supervise if Codemasters isn't violating their rights. AND that some weirdos on a website for old games hate them, because they took away a game from them ;)
What if Codemasters gets embroiled in a scandal and the companies associated with them want to pull away as fast as possible? A short term license would allow them to get away relatively scott-free, but a lifetime one? Too risky.
avatar
Grargar: What if part of the licensing requires an annual maintenance fee? What if instead of % they require a specific amount of money to retain a license, with said specific amount becoming more difficult to pay as the game using it gets cheaper and cheaper?
Then it's a stupid deal. The licenses don't get renewed because it doesn't make any sense from a business point of view (too expensive). Just keep the deals as they are, but add a little "If this license runs out, the game (not any remakes, anniversary editions, add ons, etc) can still be sold." If you want, you can translate this into more refined legalese.

avatar
Grargar: more downsides
Which downsides? The same downsides we have with the retail versions that are still around? There are no real downsides.

avatar
Grargar: What if Codemasters gets embroiled in a scandal and the companies associated with them want to pull away as fast as possible? A short term license would allow them to get away relatively scott-free, but a lifetime one? Too risky.
Then you'd be one of the many companies who allowed Codemasters to use your cars in a video game 10 years ago. You did this anyway, no matter of the details of the license. And who cares for the 10 years old game? Especially when there are 4 more years where Codemasters can sell GRID Autosprt, their newest game (which probably has a 5 years or more license) which also has some of your cars ;)

Really, I don't see any problems with lifetime licenses on a game by game basis.
avatar
real.geizterfahr: Then it's a stupid deal. The licenses don't get renewed because it doesn't make any sense from a business point of view (too expensive). Just keep the deals as they are, but add a little "If this license runs out, the game (not any remakes, anniversary editions, add ons, etc) can still be sold." If you want, you can translate this into more refined legalese.
Like I said, more than likely costly and hassleworthy for what is essentially very little profit. Both parties (licensor and licensee) want profit. If there is no significant one to to be found, then the deal is terminated.
avatar
real.geizterfahr: Which downsides? The same downsides we have with the retail versions that are still around? There are no real downsides.
There are definitely downsides, which we aren't privy to. As for your retail comparison, that's not exactly correct, since the company is indeed not supplying stores with anymore copies, as they no longer have the license to do so. Me selling you a copy of Colin McRae Dirt (unofficial) is not the same as Steam selling you a copy of it (official).
avatar
real.geizterfahr: Then you'd be one of the many companies who allowed Codemasters to use your cars in a video game 10 years ago. You did this anyway, no matter of the details of the license. And who cares for the 10 years old game? Especially when there are 4 more years where Codemasters can sell GRID Autosprt, their newest game (which probably has a 5 years or more license) which also has some of your cars ;)
Really, I don't see any problems with lifetime licenses on a game by game basis.
Yes, past history can't be erased, but if X is found out to be a publicly-unsavoury business partner, you don't want to be known as the company to still be hanging around with them and officially endorsing their products. You want out as fast and as cheap as possible, with the possibility of retaining your brand's value intact (or with as little damage as possible).
When I first saw this I thought that someone with a bit of money was looking to gain the rights from Codemasters and maybe wanted people to sign a petition for them to show the manufacturers. I guess my hopes were misplaced.
avatar
CharlesGrey: That bad? I'm generally all for more GOG releases, as long as they're not complete trash, or feature "in-App purchases" or anything like that.

Does Codemasters still hold the rights for Clive Barker's "Jericho"? For that matter, do they still release much of anything these days?
I was about to just assume they did. But Jericho isn't on Steam so I'm not sure what the problem is there. Surely Clive Barker's name hasn't turned this into some kind of licensed property?

As to their other output, very rarely have they ever produced something that's not a racing game that's worth paying attention to. The last thing they did that I'm aware of is F1 2015 and that sucked too. So I think they're on their way out of they go on like this. Their lifeblood is racing games and their last two releases in that area have been pants.
That game was taken off here right before I joined, and to this day I have nightmares about that!

We need some more quality racers here, that's for sure.
avatar
XxXSprayvWarXxX: Hey guys, don;t get discouraged by the licensing issues, they might bring it back if they hear us!
What, they'll just ignore the licencing issues and release it illegally? Great plan!
avatar
R8V9F5A2: The whole issue just feels silly, I mean you can buy these games on console and play them without any of these licensing issues, yet for PC they seem to enforce these rules simply because they can.
Really? I wasn't aware they were producing new copies of Colin McRae Rally 2005 or gave them a digital release on Xbox Live or PSN. Is this true?
Post edited September 27, 2015 by SirPrimalform
low rated
avatar
XxXSprayvWarXxX: Hey guys, don;t get discouraged by the licensing issues, they might bring it back if they hear us!
avatar
SirPrimalform: What, they'll just ignore the licencing issues and release it illegally? Great plan!
avatar
R8V9F5A2: The whole issue just feels silly, I mean you can buy these games on console and play them without any of these licensing issues, yet for PC they seem to enforce these rules simply because they can.
avatar
SirPrimalform: Really? I wasn't aware they were producing new copies of Colin McRae Rally 2005 or gave them a digital release on Xbox Live or PSN. Is this true?
I didn't say ingore them! They may renew them.
low rated
Okay, some people say that it's a license problem! But let me tell you that it isn't, because they have licenses already active on DiRT Rally, it's the same companies, but more than Colin Mcrae 2005. So there isn't any problem with that.
^I don't think that is correct. I assume there would be an agreement to use the cars in Dirt and a seperate agreements to use the same cars in Colin McRae, I don't think you can just swap them around even if it's the same developer.

But then again, I'm not a Lawyer.
avatar
XxXSprayvWarXxX: I didn't say ingore them! They may renew them.
If they thought it was economical to renew them, they would have done so when they expired.