I'm not trying to pick on Terraria, but I think it's a great example for the reasons you are bringing up.
Even with the 'value add' of the update, I no longer play the game. Why? Because I invested in learning and mastering the game as it was when I bought it. The forced update removed all value for me, and I'm the one who made the decision to buy it.
If the product is changed significantly after purchase without my consent, then I feel I should be able to revisit my decision to purchase it. Otherwise, it's a sort of bait-and-switch scheme.
I think it's how it's always been with software. It's ephemeral.
When the devs have to keep up with the system updates etc. there is expectation that they keep working on software. I am sure they would love to just push something that would work forever.
So much software that i bought stopped working. Even when you have "lifetime" license - eventually world moves on and you are without hardware to run the software.
I am not saying it's right but i am also not sure how it can be solved.
I would absolutely love to be able to push out software that just "works forever". And this is basically impossible on mobile by design these days.
Hardware evolution isn't a big deal, actually, so long as you can emulate the old on the new. For example, all the old DOS games can still be made to work thanks to DOSBox and PCem. In principle, the same applies to software, except that it evolves too fast for such emulation layers to keep up.
Not sure if you are intending to, but that only further illustrates how broken (in the favor of corporations) the current legal environment is.
You are right in that there probably is a gotcha, you agreed clause in the text that is displayed after I have purchased the item. I also think the idea that is legally binding a farce.
Imagine how popular buying things would be if people actually had to read those agreements.
>Imagine how popular buying things would be if people actually had to read those agreements.
If you ever wondered why your elders are such sticks in the mud on this sort of thing, that is exactly why. Put a contract in front of most people and off they run for the hills.
This is why the click through EULA was the best thing to ever happen to the legal profession.
It has to be displayed before you buy the item, and it is. If you don't read the contracts you sign you only have yourself to blame. You also wouldn't go to a car dealership, skip the contract, sign it and expect good things to happen.
Does it even matter if we read these contracts? No one's going to negotiate terms with the billion dollar company and only lawyers will have a full understanding of the implications of what's written in these things anyway. This last fact alone should be enough to invalidate any consent.
I mean, we're actually talking about "buying" games here. That's how insidious these things are. The few people who read this fine print will know that we're not really "buying" anything, we're being offered extremely limited licenses to the content. Can you blame consumers who fall prey to corporate deception? Marketing leads them to believe they're "buying" stuff. It's not really their fault when they become victims of corporate bullshit like remote content deletion. Nobody should have to consult lawyers before consuming.
Let's summarize all company contracts in an easy to understand manner:
1. We can do whatever we want.
2. You can do nothing we don't want.
3. We own everything.
4. We guarantee nothing.
5. You have no rights.
That does it. That's literally what all these little contracts boil down to. Every single time I read one it's just the above 5 points over and over in mind numbing legal language.
No. Absolutely nothing will change. Declining is not a valid negotiation tactic when you're dealing with literal billion dollar companies. Are you seriously suggesting some company like Amazon is gonna change their terms if we decline them? They couldn't care less about us. Maybe if you're a rich corporation using their services. Sometimes not even then if the horror stories I've read here on HN are to be believed.
Where I live many of these contracts are actually in violation of consumer protection law. I've had actual lawyers tell me I can safely ignore many clauses because they are clearly abusive and judges would strike them down in court. Particularly unacceptable are those that make me give up my rights. Appatently that's a thing in the US, you can just sign away rights such as reverse engineering or even the ability to take companies to court by "agreeing" not to exercise them.
If more people did things differently in this fashion the world would be a very different place. Too bad this doesn't happen and the users who actually decline make up less than 0.01%, probably below any error margin.
People just don't care until they personally get a kick in their face. We all know that and companies bet on it.
Even with the 'value add' of the update, I no longer play the game. Why? Because I invested in learning and mastering the game as it was when I bought it. The forced update removed all value for me, and I'm the one who made the decision to buy it.
If the product is changed significantly after purchase without my consent, then I feel I should be able to revisit my decision to purchase it. Otherwise, it's a sort of bait-and-switch scheme.