Borderlands 2 is temporarily free to grab on Steam, as it continues to be review bombed for non-Randy Pitchford tweet reasons
Borderlands 2 is temporarily free to grab on Steam, as it continues to be review bombed for non-Randy Pitchford tweet reasons
Free spyware! LOL What a way to spin things, devs. Well played! /s
The actual game files for Borderlands 2 haven’t been updated in several years. Sure, you could argue that the new TOS is just setting things up to quietly slip the spyware in later after the attention has waned. But as it currently stands, all of the new TOS stuff was just bringing their older games up to match their newer releases that are still being actively supported. Chances are very good that they never actually update Borderlands 2, and simply use the new TOS for future releases; It’s simply an indicator that their future releases will have some gnarly anti cheat bullshit bolted on.
But that doesn’t make headlines, nor does it fuel gamers’ nebulous rage. And yes, the “chances are good” part means the chance is a non-zero number. If I told you “there’s a poisoned skittle in this gigantic bowl, but the chances are good that any single skittle won’t kill you,” how many skittles would you be inclined to eat?
If their future releases need root level access they can keep them. No thank you.
Buuuuuuuuuut they changed the EULA and now it has root level access to your system. As in its literally spyware.
Fuck free. You couldn't pay me to install this shit. Do so at your own risk. I want less massive corporations rooting around in my stuff. Not more.
Please forgive my ignorance. What if we already have the game on Steam? Do I have to approve something? Or do they just have that access now?
The game being free now doesn’t change anything. Just like any update to a game everyone got it.
You mean like you don't play Civilization because of having the same problematic 2K EULAs or watch YouTube because of its Terms of Service?
the article says the EULA is "typical"
That clause reads as follows: “You will not use exploits or illegal or unauthorised means to interfere with or adversely impact any other user’s ability to use the services as intended; to gain unfair gameplay advantage; or to gain access to virtual items or other content to which you do not have valid entitlement. This includes the use of cheats or so-called ‘mod menus’, unauthorised mods, hacks, glitches, or any other technical exploits, and phishing, scamming, or social engineering.”
So, something that could maybe affect modders generally - not that prominent Borderlands modders seem concerned - but sounds to me more like fairly typical EULA stuff designed specifically to discourage the use of mods or cheats online, where they could affect the experience had by other players. You know, like the checks fellow Take-Two-owned GTA Online developers Rockstar have tried to institute to stop your session being ambushed by invincible gods who fly around magically giving everyone vast sums of free money.
i still haven't seen anyone credibly demonstrate that BL2 is now more "spyware" than any other game, let alone that it hijacks root access-- anyone?
It’s because it isn’t spyware. There is no kernel level anticheat or admin requirements as people keep suggesting . And the only things it sends back to gearbox is related to game functions:
I literally went to the point of packet inspection and found nothing to be concerned about.
EDIT: clarified reply was about it being called spyware.
They don’t need to collect all this data, see the list below. Some, yes, but the majority has nothing to do with the service offered.
Collected Data Types:
\
• Identifiers / Contact Information: Name, user name, gamertag, postal and email address, phone number, unique IDs, mobile device ID, platform ID, gaming service ID, advertising ID (IDFA, Android ID) and IP address
\
• Protected Characteristics: Age and gender
\
• Commercial Information: Purchase and usage history and preferences, including gameplay information
\
• Billing Information: Payment information (credit / debit card information) and shipping address
\
• Internet / Electronic Activity: Web / app browsing and gameplay information related to the Services; information about your online interaction(s) with the Services or our advertising; and details about the games and platforms you use and other information related to installed applications
\
• Device and Usage Data: Device type, software and hardware details, language settings, browser type and version, operating system, and information about how users use and interact with the Services (e.g., content viewed, pages visited, clicks, scrolls)
\
• Profile Inferences: Inferences made from your information and web activity to help create a personalized profile so we can identify goods and services that may be of interest
\
• Audio / Visual Information: Account photos, images, and avatars, audio information via chat features and functionality, and gameplay recordings and video footage (such as when you participate in playtesting)
\
• Sensitive Information: Precise location information (if you allow the Services to collect your location), account credentials (user name and password), and contents of communications via chat features and functionality.
You will not use exploits or illegal or unauthorised means to interfere with or adversely impact any other user’s ability to use the services as intended; to gain unfair gameplay advantage; or to gain access to virtual items or other content to which you do not have valid entitlement. This includes the use of cheats or so-called ‘mod menus’, unauthorised mods, hacks, glitches, or any other technical exploits, and phishing, scamming, or social engineering.
In legalese, does 'this includes' mean 'additionally' or 'specifically'?
Also note that this is for a game without competitive multiplayet
Additionally.
It's outlaying the parameters and then it goes on to give some common examples so a rational actor can get a good idea behind the meaning of the parameters. It's not an exhaustive list of all activities that could violate their parameters.
So it doesn't seem like it's collecting all of the information from the updated EULA yet, but likely will start doing so soon.
Does anyone know if you can still connect to multiplayer servers if you aren't on the latest patch? I might just turn off auto-updates and prevent the game from ever updating, but I'd like to have the option to play some more with friends in the future
If any of us took the time to read the EULA on just about all of our services/devices you'd see all kinds of crap like this. The real question is would you still click "Accept"?
Everyone who clicks "accept" is complicit in this behavior.
absolutely worth it to get, btw. still play it to this day.
and Borderlands 3 I think is like 2 dollars on steam at the moment. absolutely grab that.
edit: here
I suppose you didn’t hear about the new EULA for Take-Two/2K/Rockstar games eh?
Long story short they have explicit permission to install a root kit on your system which is a popular type of malware. If the developers knowingly install a root kit on your system and someone who is savvy enough decides to abuse it, well… let’s just say the outcome isn’t pretty for the end-user.
I love BL1 & BL2 but this is justification to put those games to rest or run them offline or in LAN, having a back door to people’s systems on any online game will backfire.
Borderlands 3 has such insanely horrible writing though.
imho people tend to exaggerate nowadays when it comes to that stuff.
the writing isnt "horrible" its just not the best in the series. i found it to be alright, honestly.
Reminder review bombing is just the way corporate media describes legitimate consumer complaints
The thing of it is, Steam reviews are entirely subjective. They don't ask if the game is good or worth playing, they ask if you'd recommend it to others. And whether or not you recommend a game can depend on things other than the way the game plays. I changed my recommendation on Borderlands 2 because I don't recommend anyone gives a single cent to Gearbox for any reason.
"I cannot recommend Borderlands 2 despite it being a great game, because by giving it a 'not recommended' I can make Randy Pitchford cry."
Does the same logic apply to the "woke nonsense" reviews for The Last of Us Part 2 when it was released, or any media featuring a minority group for that matter?
Gamers love woke nonsense. 🤷
Well, I'm not going to pretend you don't have a point. Anything popular enough is going to attract some sort of hate. But I'd argue that being woke is not enough to get your game review bombed.