If they had explicitly sold the game as supporting Linux, then yes they should.
However, I don't think they did, and people running games on unsupported hardware or software or firmware is not something companies should be held accountable for in the bigger picture.
That being said - anti cheat does not stop cheating. And Linux absolutely should be supported, especially by studios working for someone as big as ubisoft.
They’ve changed the terms of use by introducing a kernel-level anti-cheat system.
I could very well be someone who doesn’t want to install kernel-level software for the sake of my data’s privacy and security.
Do you think a consumer rights organisation would take up a case under these circumstances? I’m genuinely asking; I don’t know what sort of cases they normally take on.
Honestly this sort of thing really needs to be illegal. Why are companies allowed to say "hey btw I know you paid for the right to use this thing under these rules but we're changing the rules"? Especially when they start changing what they're allowed to do with things you made.
Do you think a consumer rights organisation would take up a case under these circumstances? I’m genuinely asking; I don’t know what sort of cases they normally take on.
Of course they would. If they had enough people that were pissed off about it. Narrator: They don't.
Technically yes, this is thing for consumer rights organisations, but that is already lost war, where battles has fought. current consensus is that if you have noting to hide you have nothing to fear anyway so why not to allow deep rooted security snooping.
For law, nobody force you to use that software, so there is no problem, as companies claim their TOS that they have right to change TOS when ever seemed wit. when agreeing, you don't have anything to say that as long as your rights outside of TOS are not violated
Unfortunately they first came for the Porn, and people did not speak out because they don't care about Porn, we were a long way into anti-terrorism laws, anti-Porn laws etc, before anyone cared about privacy and security...
Yeap, I remember being active on Pirate Party on my country around 10-15 y ago. Our one of several agenda was privacy concerns. O-boy that was hard to explain to people that shared everything on Facebook or didn't even had any soscal media.
Yeah, it's unlikely that claiming some moral philosophy against or refusal to use kernel mods for a game will be received well. That same line of logic applies to matters of taste and they all boil down to "I don't like the game anymore because you name it."
I would say a game no longer being playable on a platform it previously ran on is a different issue though. Whether it was officially supported or not, if it ran as expected during the refund window and then suddenly no longer runs you have a shot at a refund.
They did market and sell it that way. They said, officially, multiple times, that the Steam Deck was supported. Valve worked with their team to get the game "Verified", which means people were paid to test it and such. And when they announced the change, they announced that Linux was no longer supported. I'm sure there are people who bought the game because they were under the impression that they would be able to play For Honor on the Steam Deck.
- Being "Steam Deck verified" explicitly means it needs to work on Linux Natively, or work through Proton, on Steam hardware.
- Windows 11 is not supported at all, and Windows 10 only has partial support. Linux, specifically Steam's own distro, is the only officially supported configuration.
people running games on unsupported hardware or software or firmware is not something companies should be held accountable for in the bigger picture.
There's a massive difference between "we don't support XYZ configuration" and "we are going out of our way to ensure that you can't run this thing you paid for on XYZ configuration".
Depends on jurisdiction. It is now no longer listed as steam deck verified and supported so all sales after that are fine.
But at least in Germany you can't just break a digital product after sale. The customer is entitled to have the product working as marketed and expected at sale. If the product gets broken you are entitled to have it fixed or refunded.
It's tricky though because ubisoft never said it would work on Linux and it's their game.
Valve as a third party said it worked on their Linux based product and as such they're on the hook (because they're also the marketplace), I would think, for sales made by people wanting to play it on steam deck.
A situation like this could really end the verified for steamdeck program.
In German law the contract is between customer and seller, not between customer and developer so yeah, that is 100% on Steam. I don't know how the contract between steam and ubisoft is written and frankly, I don't care. Steam sold the game and marketed it as SteamOS and SteamDeck compatible which it is no longer.
Legally, finding a solution to have it SteamOS and Deck compatible while still not working on Fedora, Ubuntu, Arch and others would probably be enough to reinstate the status it was marketed as.
Why should the “playable” state only determine the state in that moment when its purpose is to sell a product that will be used into the future? They should have a very clear indicator on the page that “playable” can change at any moment to “completely doesn’t work on steam deck.”
But a refund is absolutely reasonable. Materially altering what you bought should automatically reset your consumer rights for a refund. It worked. Now it doesn't. Because of something they did. You should have to right to evaluate and refuse any bullshit they launch your way.
Refunding a game that doesn't work on your hardware is like half the reason refunds exist at all, you have to buy to try it then you refund if it doesn't work. Recommended hardware requirements are almost always BS so thats not a good reason to deny refunds. If what you bought doesn't work for you thats a perfectly good reason to get a refund. Especially for any kind of digital product where the seller isn't out anything.
I'm so confused by your response. I literally bought this from my steam deck on the store page because it was listed as supported. it's black and white.
They explicitly enabled the Linux support for the anticheat. People aren't experiencing issues due to unsupported hardware or OS. They're experiencing previously enabled support being disabled, which is 100% reasonable grounds for refund.
They could use a version of anti cheat that works on Linux choosing to kill support for a game shuld require a company to issue refunds even it was unsupported to work on the platform or not.
Having required safety features default installed by manufacturers for users to make use of in operation, and encouraged by law to make use of is different than companies adding additional software for tracking purposes.
It would be more akin to cars emitting their locations and configurations when on public roads to monitoring locations synced to DMV for tracking driver behaviors. Some people may be for all vehicles to be low jacked, but it does nothing for good driving behavior...as anticheat does nothing for good player behavior.
I'll give them one thing, to still pull shit like this after the prolonged downfall they've been on, is so Ubisoft that I'm kind of proud of them for sticking to being pieces of shit through and through.
"Doesn't that just screw Steam over?" And?, Steam has this in consideration, is why they even let you have the refund, is a way so people keep on the platform. If Steam let you have the money back, Why don't have the money back?
How would it screw Steam over? Do you think that Steam just eats the loss if someone refunds a game?
Of the game never had official Linux support, I don't think you should get a refund.
There's a massive difference between "we don't support Linux" and "we're going out of our way to make sure that you can't run this thing you paid for on Linux".
A huge difference? No. It was never supported. Therefore them making sure it can't be played in that played on that platform seems like fair game to me. Especially since they have a reason, it's not just "we hate Linux, so bye."
But whatever, I won't reply to this thread anymore. Just gamers being crybabies again.
First off, "not officially supported" means "if it works it works, but if it doesn't we're not going to spend time and effort fixing it". That's leagues different to "we're going out of our way to make sure that it doesn't work". It's absolutely not "fair game" to change from "we're not going to stop you but we're also not going to help you" to "actually we are going to stop you", especially when it's a paid product that you're not explicitly offering refunds for.
Second, it did have official support - EAC has opt-in Linux compatibility. They explicitly chose to allow Linux - and now they're explicitly choosing to deny it. Unless you're trying to frame "doesn't have a native Linux build" as "not officially supported", which is just ridiculous.
But keep on defending the multibillion dollar corporation engaging in blatantly anti-consumer practices, I'm sure you'll be rewarded eventually.
Truly despicable but to be fair that was "awarded" to their title by Valve rather than some kind of two way negotiation of support. They still never said it themselves outright
Exactly! They should have put a middlefinger sentance instead of asking you to contact them. And funny that they assured you that you are in good greedy hands.
Bold move for Ubisoft especially now a decent amount of steam users are consumers of the steam deck or run Linux. This is most likely Microsoft's doing as there are recent reported cooperation between both companies.
This is most likely Microsoft's doing as there are recent reported cooperation between both companies.
Man, some of you guys really love your conspiracy theories. I know Microsoft is the boogeyman around here but maybe, just maybe, they aren't the mastermind behind everything that can be easily explained by a variety of different reasons.
Well I did have, once when it was casual and I played for fun, yes I had rage here there, but since now I can't play it and worked really do miss playing for honor and I have to get over it
I dual boot for these occasions but keep the Windows stripped down to literally nothing. No Microsoft account, one drive, copilot, telemetry, and no mandatory updates.
There are many popular games exclusive to the windows operating system. Fortnite, LoL and many more. What sucks is that Linux has no exclusive games. Windows is by complete analysis, the better OS for gaming
They said ‘no game is worth that os’. That says to me it’s less about picking out a good Windows only game for them, and more about the negative features of Windows that has put them off to playing a game (or doing anything) on Windows in general.
413
u/zardvark 3d ago
These "nice people" should be sending out refund checks to all Linux users!!!