what are your arguments against stop killing games?
Posted by nacisticky_krtecek69@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 28 comments
[removed]
Posted by nacisticky_krtecek69@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 28 comments
[removed]
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
Stop buying shitty "live service" games or games that have always-online requirements.
Parabellum12@reddit
They (at least Sony) are also requiring an internet connection every 30 days or all of your games will be locked, even single player offline games.
It’s bullshit that the corporations (even outside of gaming like Ford or John Deere) have started this garbage that you don’t actually own the product, just the right to use it. To me this gaming stuff is just an extension of the “right to repair” fight.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
So don't buy it.
Parabellum12@reddit
Why does it matter if it’s a luxury or a need? If I buy the product, it should be mine. Don’t you agree?
I understand as libertarians we should support a free market but at the same time letting these businesses get away with obviously anti-consumer practices is just silly. If we actually had a free market this wouldn’t be a problem, but we don’t.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
Because you can't just not-buy needs. Luxuries have far more discretion and far more choice.
As an example, emergency healthcare is not a free market. If I crash my car, I can't "shop around" for which hospital to use. The ambulance is taking me to the closest one.
But if I want to get a nose job, that's non-emergency and I can shop around different plastic surgery providers. If I choose a shitty one, that's on me.
You bought a software license. You misunderstanding what you're buying is YOUR fault. And again, really simple solution, stop supporting Sony.
If every morning you went to a coffee shop, and the barista took a scoop of cat litter and dumped it in your coffee before serving it to you, but you keep going back every single day, that's a YOU problem, not a government problem.
dirtyasseating@reddit
That is a very weird take for a libertarian: there are Needs VS Luxury in products.
Parabellum12@reddit
You keep assuming I have actually supported Sonys shit policies. I haven’t bought a game in years and what I purchase is irrelevant to the matter at hand.
Just like whether it’s a luxury or a need, it’s irrelevant. Shit business practices are shit business practices regardless of if it’s a tractor or a video game.
Do you support the right to repair act or do you think John Deere has a right to dictate who/when/how your property gets repaired? Because it’s the exact same concept. If I buy it, I own it and I use it however I please.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
And the solution is very easy. Stop buying it. If people choose to keep buying Sony games, despite the shit business practices, then it's not something that is important enough to need a law.
Parabellum12@reddit
How do you know I didn’t buy a physical disc? You’re getting into the weeds here just to prove a point dude.
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
Ok, and you can do whatever you want with the physical disk. You can shred it, you can use a disc burner to write over it. You can modify the code on the disc.
Go ahead, do whatever you want to the disc.
It's not the governments fault you don't research your entertainment purchases. You bought a license for a game, you agreed to the license terms, sorry about your feelings but you're not a victim of anything except your own lack of due diligence.
darknight9064@reddit
Isn’t it a matter of you have to have your check in again after 30 days on a new purchase but after that you don’t. It was change made to deal with both terrible people and a bad drm protection in Sonys part.
kesarAlbus@reddit
Let's be real, people are addicted to those games and they can't possibly fathom the idea of not playing them, so they need a way to be able to continue playing and still complain and the only way to do that is to ask daddy state to do something
AlphaTangoFoxtrt@reddit
It's like the helldiver's players who have unlocked everything have 200+ hours and complain there's "nothing to do". Like bro you did everything.
Now I complain about HD but I complain about quality issues like bugs and crashes. But I also just play other games when I'm not having fun. And I don't spend more money on the game I don't think they deserve.
Someday the game will shut down but I got my play out of it. My one time purchase does not entitle me to them run ing their servers forever and ever indefinitely.
spooky_redditor@reddit
None. It may not be the best solution but it is better than nothing.
Lord_Jakub_I@reddit
It is statist solution to problem that can be solved through simple libertarian policy: abolish intelectual property.
Unfortunetly, statist solutions are easier to achieve in statist system. They are gonna create new problems, and those problems will be again "solved" by more regulations.
RocksCanOnlyWait@reddit
The idea is good: allow people to continue to play games once the live service shuts down.
The proposed solution is bad. It forces a financial burden onto the company, which is shutting down the service because it's losing money.
A better solution would be that the company gives up legal claims if they shut down the live service game. In other words, the company is not responsible for keeping the service going, but if fans want to set up their own servers, they can't be stopped via copyright claim. There's some legal gray area about making existing account info available, but at least dedicated fans could continue to run the game.
For "phone home" games which otherwise don't require a live service, simply disabling the check if the home server is discontinued is a reasonable request.
Fl0ppyfeet@reddit
That's not the only legal gray area. What if a fan sets up a server and charges for it?
I looked into the legality of 3rd party mods recently and technically any personal modification to the game code is illegal, and spreading it more so, but it is almost universally ignored because it boosts the sales and reputation of the game. Some people have even reverse engineered server code like you're talking about.
Bethesda's experiment with paid mods would be a close analogy to a 3rd party paid server, but that was a disaster and canceled within a week. Scammers took public free mods and rebranded them for sale.
Take Two tried mod banning within the GTA V game code and that was also canceled after community backlash.
With physical items that are patented you can buy, modify and resell as your own with the disclaimer that it is not supported by the original company (see the 3rd party car mod market). With copyright this is not true.
RocksCanOnlyWait@reddit
That's fine. You're not obligated to pay for it or join it.
There were unofficial private servers for World of Warcraft and RuneScape for the original iteration of those games after the official moved on. Some charged a fee or accepted donations and even added content. Yes, they were shut down via DCMA because the official live service was still operating, but my point is that the third party model does work.
The original Half-Life was huge because of mods and private servers.
Keep in mind that the original issue is for games which no longer have official support - they've been abandoned by the original creator or whoever holds the copyright. It's a question of "Can you enforce a copyright for something that you never plan to produce/sell?"
ThunderMuffin233@reddit
If you "sell" a product that you can revoke at any time, that is not a sale, that's fraud. Transparency is key. I'm the type of libertarian that values individual liberties but believes that companies are not individuals, therefore, do not have the same protections, and should be held to a higher standard. "With great power comes great responsibilities". The more powerful an entity becomes, the more responsible they should be
PitsAndPints@reddit
If it's spelled out in the T&C, and the T&C were available to the buyer before they purchased the game, it's not fraud. That's on the buyer for not reading the contract. I don't know what responsibility you're talking about, but it's the responsibility of the buyer to make informed purchases.
Simple solution if you want the gaming industry to change: stop buying their products.
RootHouston@reddit
T&C is usually not provided prior to "purchase". But even then, the argument could be made that the T&C conflicts with the terms used when "selling".
PitsAndPints@reddit
This is incorrect
I just went to Blizzard and when buying Diablo IV, there is a line directly below the payment info bars that says "Buying or purchasing this digital item is a license. By clicking "pay now" you agree to Blizzard End Use License Agreement, Blizzard's Terms of Sale, and Blizzard's Privacy Policy", with all 3 linked in the statement.
I just did something similar w/ the COD-MW4 pre-order. Again, before selecting "buy", there is bold text below that says "Buying or purchasing this digital item is a license. By selecting 'Buy', you agree to the 'Store Terms of Sale', including 'Usage Rules for Digital Goods'", with both linked in the statement.
I just checked in with GTA V and there are similar Terms documents readily available before you even create an account, nevermind buying the game.
Now, I'm not big into gaming so I'm not super familiar with every other studio/publisher's business practices, but I assume most of the big guys have something similar before you select "pay now".
PhilRubdiez@reddit
It’s simple. Don’t buy whatever platform is pulling that shit. No one is forcing you to play CoD, Pokémon, or Barbie Horse Adventure. The government can regulate my balls into their mouths.
RootHouston@reddit
I'm with you, but I see this as more of a contractual dispute. The game companies are trying to "sell" something, and then remove access when they want. This is about making them clarify what you're getting. You can "sell" something then just take it back so you can coax consumers into buying your next grift.
kesarAlbus@reddit
Let's be real, people are addicted to those games and they can't possibly fathom the idea of not playing them, so they need a way to be able to continue playing and still complain and the only way to do that is to ask daddy state to do something
LineZer0_@reddit
in a true free market economy, IP laws would not exist, so if a company decided to shut down a game, people would be allowed to host it on servers.
victimized777@reddit
It's a trojan horse to get institutions in gaming, and start regulating stuff left and right
AutoModerator@reddit
REMOVED: due to a large amount of brigading, we are temporarily restricting posts from drive-by users. If you are unfamiliar with our beliefs or ideology, take some time to lurk, or do some research. Do not message the mod team, this will be reviewed when we have time. Messaging the mod team asking us to approve this will result in an automatic denial and potential ban as we will assume you are a clanker sending automated messages.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.