>be ancient mesopotamia times >council of elders is created >"it sucks when people steal the meat you bought. hmmm... maybe we should... ban stealing? " >"no" >"why?" >I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT >REGULATE ME HARDER DADDY
>be ancient cavemen times >council of elders is created >"it sucks when health unga takes my boar away that i gave him 20 rocks to rent" >"but it die and stinky" >"IT ME BOAR, EVEN THOUGH ME ONLY RENT IT!!! ARGHHH!!"
then he throws the boar in the back of his cave to rot untouched
even your caveman allegory is moronic
what shop takes away your food after it gets old
I paid for this my cheese and if I want I will use it to grow mold
>be ancient mesopotamia >"elder, the food storage storage is starting to rot. Maybe we should let the people take from it for use" >"nah too much effort and cost to do that. lets just keep it to rot"
>be ancient mesopotamia times >council of elders is created >"I don't like when it's story telling time and we only tell violent stories" -says one elder >"So we should make new stories with interesting new things for the new grugs, right?"-said another elder >"NO! WE SHOULD BAN ALL VIOLENT STORIES"- the first elder said calmly. >we are here
now mention a law that isn't a right like taxation, if you have to resort to laws based on natural rights (which are a minority of laws) it's not a real argument
>be ancient mesopotamia >elders meet >hmm, the stealing ban doesn't work >well... Maybe we could hire some people to uphold it? >we don't have any money though. >what if everyone pays? >but what about the ones who don't want to pay? >they don't want to pay because they want theft to be legal. Frick those guys
also this isn't ancient mesopotamia, the further technology increases the less you need heirarchy, essentially mankinds first technology to enfource civility
>be ancient Inca empire >council of elders is created >"it sucks when people sell poisoned meat to people. hmmm... maybe we should... ban selling poisoned food? " >"no" >"why?" >I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT >REGULATE ME HARDER DADDY
>what the frick what do you mean I can't hire five-year-olds in my factory and pay them exclusively in companybux instead of dollars, what's next am I going to have to start letting them have breaks?
You joke but Republicans are against child labor laws and labor laws in general. They are quite literally in favor of everything you described. They are working hard to make it happen, stripping regulations away bit by bit.
>autonomy
Anon... being forced to work as a child is not autonomy (and believe me, they're not gonna stop at 14). This isn't simply going to be a way to make some spending money, this is a way to generate a permanent underclass of workers who work from cradle to grave. They will be forced to work by necessity at the expense of their childhood and education.
you need money to live
you need to work to make money
ergo, you need to work to live
so if you want to be alive, you're forced to work
are you moronic or just have no self preservation instinct
3 months ago
Anonymous
I think you might be moronic if you think 14 year olds pay bills.
3 months ago
Anonymous
life isnt coercion, and its certainly not something you 'solve' through actual coercion.
As long as they've hit puberty I still don't see a problem. Farm kids even today work far younger and no one bats an eye at that. They're just going to make these kids mop shit 99% of the time.
the autonomy of getting crushed in an industrial accident for 5 dollars an hour
That could happen to an adult too. Maybe they'll take safety seriously when kids are involved.
Except teenagers can already get jobs you absolute omega homosexual. Who the frick do you think is serving you your McDonalds you bought for dinner? The issue is that a teenager is both too underpaid and stupid to even serve your burger correctly, why the hell would you want to same little morons hanging around industrial assembly lines?
40 year old women are serving me McDonald's most of the time. I know of teenagers that can't get jobs because old ass useless Gen X and Millenials wasted their lives and now take jobs from enterprising young people.
Banning it won't make a positive difference as the underclass still exists now even without child labor. I don't see the positive of removing opportunities for people.
Except teenagers can already get jobs you absolute omega homosexual. Who the frick do you think is serving you your McDonalds you bought for dinner? The issue is that a teenager is both too underpaid and stupid to even serve your burger correctly, why the hell would you want to same little morons hanging around industrial assembly lines?
>underpaid
If you're underpaid, don't take the fricking job. If you are competitive as you say you are, find a job else where. Biden says the economy is booming and we need illegals to fill in the gaps of the job market. Don't see why Jamal nor Sanique would be threated by a teenager.
those middleclass lazy c**ts arent underpaid, and child workers (real ones that actually have to work to stave off starvation for their families) are on the smarter side for having needed to have grown up.
I wouldn't say kids that didn't develop fully in childhood from lack of nutrition and education are "on the smarter side" in reality, street smart and able to survive under duress maybe.
Ahaha
Your idea of autonomy is to work for a corporation? And to get money? Not to learn to take responsibility of your actions, find self-determination, and looking after yourself?
But to work for corpos.
I thought murican corpo love was a meme but its reality. If you wrote a book with characters and culture like that, you would be called a bad writer.
Money allows you to do things, yes, so it is autonomy. Working for someone is the reality for majority of the world regardless of the country you're in too so I don't know what you're point is.
>Working for someone is the reality for majority of the world regardless of the country you're in too so I don't know what you're point is
To not work for megacorps and maybe, possibly, improve the system? Doing work for money rather than because it's needed in society or brings you satisfaction is horrid way to live. You teach children that making Billionares and shareholders rich is not only the norm, but also admirable and sign of "autonomy".
Listen to yourself dude. Say it aloud to yourself >"Making billionares and shareholders more wealthy is the sign of autonomy and the norm, this is good way to live and makes me and people around me happy"
If you don't feel wrong at all after that, then I don't know man. Maybe your society is too far gone.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>needed in society
this shit is actual nightmare fuel >or brings you satisfaction
is not mutually exclusive to making money.
and about working for money aka creating value to sustain yourself: is there literally anything in life that is fundamentally outside that idea? everything from entertainment to soul searching is a form of nourishment for survival.
and NOT creating a value or diverting the nature in which you gain such nourishment seems more likely to frick with your natural sources of satisfaction/fulfillment/happiness
you are misunderstanding what life is about because you wish to evade it. this (internet) life and world is fake compared to the mundane outside that door to wagecuck life and world. its up to us to face it and make amends. dont lie to yourself.
3 months ago
Anonymous
My happiness doesn't need a pricetag or statistic. You trying to wrangle "Well, soul searching and corporations pseudo-enslaving is kinda the same thing... Why not just let them have 15 yo workforce, okay?" Is horrid. You attempt to constantly defend the fact that poorest people working harder sustains the richest people. That corpos use cheap labor in poorer countries.
I draw because I enjoy it. I make music because I enjoy it. I help people because I enjoy it.
Not for money, not for gain. Your life should have meaning, not just admission of "well, corpos might be corrupted, use child labor now and then, crush competition, make life miserable for millions of people while chasing profit, letting people die so line goes up, but complaining about it isn't okay. Face the reality, stop criticizing rich people"-shit.
Genuinely, get a life. Even F-List furries are living more than a wagie who desperately tries to equate happiness to how much you(and your 15 child) works for multi-billion corporations for money.
Genuinely feels like you have been groomed by rich people to "accept your place in the world". Or worse "if you just work hard enough, you can be a millionare too".
3 months ago
Anonymous
Quality post
3 months ago
Anonymous
you made it a point that your happiness MUSNT have a pricetag or "statistic"(arbitrary, your happiness isnt a measure of anyone else')
youve characterized meaning without defining its nature and how it comes into being that just lazily add "well it makes me happy" without the why.
the rest of your post just talks about superfluous other entities.
i posted this because these are my beliefs. not for politics, not for 'rich people'.
3 months ago
Anonymous
That's cool and all but again this is the reality of the world. You could decry it all you want but no practical alternatives is meaningless. People work for money because money is required to live. You need money for the games you buy, assuming this is common ground we share. Without that you don't have autonomy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well, see this
My happiness doesn't need a pricetag or statistic. You trying to wrangle "Well, soul searching and corporations pseudo-enslaving is kinda the same thing... Why not just let them have 15 yo workforce, okay?" Is horrid. You attempt to constantly defend the fact that poorest people working harder sustains the richest people. That corpos use cheap labor in poorer countries.
I draw because I enjoy it. I make music because I enjoy it. I help people because I enjoy it.
Not for money, not for gain. Your life should have meaning, not just admission of "well, corpos might be corrupted, use child labor now and then, crush competition, make life miserable for millions of people while chasing profit, letting people die so line goes up, but complaining about it isn't okay. Face the reality, stop criticizing rich people"-shit.
Genuinely, get a life. Even F-List furries are living more than a wagie who desperately tries to equate happiness to how much you(and your 15 child) works for multi-billion corporations for money.
Genuinely feels like you have been groomed by rich people to "accept your place in the world". Or worse "if you just work hard enough, you can be a millionare too".
as well. I'm kinda sad and depressed now so I'll go to rest.
I hope you find other happiness than work for rich people. We should all be equal.
>serving alcohol at 16
don't you have to be 21 to drink?
I understand it being allowed here since you can drink at 16 here & waiter seems like a perfect job for some teenager.
But like what the frick, meat coolers & assembly lines? Fourteen year olds? What the hell are they thinking
I had a gf working at godfather's pizza that the age of serving alcohol was actually a huge pain.
You're thinking in euro terms here possibly, a lot of normal family restaurants in the states have beer or spritzers and while a 16 yo could serve pizza without problem, when the drinks were made they "technically" had to have someone else come over and help serve them.
When the pizza ranch teen can't serve drinks it's annoying for everyone.
This whole thread is some weird pilpul since it's government restrictions that caused this problem in the first place. I can't legally go murder someone who takes away my purchase for theft.
working at mcdonalds in the hood is actually really safe because you're behind bullet proof glass and there are cops stationed there during business hours :^)
its just so discouraging seeing the pattern of urbanization just removing the groundedness of people's perspective of how life actually works. as if living on an entirely different planet.
You joke but Republicans are against child labor laws and labor laws in general. They are quite literally in favor of everything you described. They are working hard to make it happen, stripping regulations away bit by bit.
the people who this helps the most are poverty stricken and broken families. sweatshops are unironically good, those kids would otherwise be dead in a rice farm.
So destroying your own working class is actually an act of charity because you're helping some kid across the world make a pittance while enriching yourself.
You're actually an altruist! A highly effective one at that!
ALL HAIL THE JOB CREATORS
>'your'
a national socialist huh >some kid
oh so 'some kid' who is on absolute poverty is less 'working class' than truck drivers and some western teens who wants le latest shoes? jobs aren't being 'stolen'. get real.
how survival works isnt a charity.
my last point on this and using your words: what sort of man would pride himself of living off the charity of not having to compete with literal children in broken homes. that same man isn't fighting life and limb to feed his family but doing a 'comfortable' job below his actual competency. again what sort of man can feel pride in that?
3 months ago
Anonymous
What kind of argument is this? That anyone that can physically do a job should be allowed to do it? Your argument is just that exploitative practices of a rich community in a poor one allowing for literal slave labor is perfectly ethical by simple virtue that they are able to do it. The only reason why this practice continues is ironically because of a lack of concerted effort worldwide to limit its practice.
3 months ago
Anonymous
a kid who would otherwise die in a field of intensive labour taking up a job that is much less intensive - isn't slavery.
bringing up the third party benefactors does not change the nature of what the child is doing: exchanging value he has no use for, like physical exertion, manual assembly, sewing shit; for value he does: money for food, shelter etc.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>a kid who would otherwise die in a field of intensive labour taking up a job that is much less intensive - isn't slavery.
Yes it is. You're arguing it's okay to underpay people because they are poor and would likely die without your unethical practice anyway. It's even worse because it incentivizes those better off to make a community poorer so they can more easily exploit them.
>bringing up the third party benefactors does not change the nature of what the child is doing: exchanging value he has no use for, like physical exertion, manual assembly, sewing shit; for value he does: money for food, shelter etc.
The practice is necessarily unethical and exploitative of a person who is not developed either physically or mentally. It is entirely irrelevant whether or not a child could possibly add some level of objective value in performing a task. A baby has some nutritional value, that doesn't automatically make it ethical to eat one.
3 months ago
Anonymous
well said anon
3 months ago
Anonymous
you cant define what underpaying means. one is paid what one is willing to work for.
and whatever we agree with the deserved development of a child, life is just what it is: that child, as young as a child, needs the work, the money because the alternative is death and he chooses life.
all of us have our own circumstances but the same choice is unaffected.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>whatever we agree
Repulsive human trafficker apologist
3 months ago
Anonymous
>you cant define what underpaying means. one is paid what one is willing to work for.
You absolutely can. You might argue that it's not a fair definition but it's much better than simply argue that anything goes like it's the Purge. Chaos is not a valid alternative to an imperfect order.
>and whatever we agree with the deserved development of a child, life is just what it is: that child, as young as a child, needs the work, the money because the alternative is death and he chooses life.
It is telling that only two scenarios you can see is "the child dies in the field" and "I enslave the child by making him work in a factory 20 hours a day." Sure anon.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you cannot fathom what work means fundamentally. you keep adding your politics into it no matter how many times i bring up what a worker actually faces. you dont comprehend it because you don't understand how someone lives, you havent lived.
commies, commies everywhere, pushing facist laws and trying to trick you into thinking you didn't get to this point because of prior laws not because the company has some kind of natural monopoly on a online game
Not that anon but sometimes when governments fund games they want more control over the product.
Making a shitload of money off of YOUR money, then locking the product away in a vault forever can piss off a government.
govermetns only do this so companies can be more dependent on them, Nintendo is in decline because they are using the goverment to subsidize them because goverment now views them as too influencial to foreign optics to fail
A company offering a good or service and then eventually no longer offering that good or service is completely normal. Gamers just tend to be selfish children who need endless coddling. Especially PC cultists.
Is it normal for a company to no longer offer a good and your good to stop working as a result? When they stopped making the 82 Camarro did the one I own stop being able to work?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Is it normal for a company to no longer offer a good and your good to stop working as a result?
Yeah it's most likely covered in the user agreements that the service isn't everlasting and may expire. >When they stopped making the 82 Camarro did the one I own stop being able to work?
No because that's a car and not an online video game.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Is it normal for singleplayer games to have to connect to a server and to stop working when the dev stops supporting it? Would you say this practice is common?
>No because that's a car and not an online video game.
Then why did you use a car in your example?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Is it normal for singleplayer games to have to connect to a server and to stop working when the dev stops supporting it? Would you say this practice is common
Yes companies often stop offeringng goods and services, I already explained this. >Then why did you use a car in your example?
Do you not also get worked up when something like the 3DS and Wii stores get taken down and Nintendo doesn't let you keep buying things? You seem like the kind of PC cultist that bases her entire identity on consumer rights, voting with your wallet, has an unhealthy hatred for Disney and copyright laws, and says things like "the mouse", and is also an unemployed NEET.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>aw shit, home depot turned off my shovel
3 months ago
Anonymous
No they didn't. But if they stopped selling that shovel you get just as pissy. Just like you do when eshops get taken down.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Did that actually make sense in your head? By what sort of moron logic does someone no longer selling something I already own impact me the same way as someone breaking/taking away something I already own?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Calm down. You're getting angry.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Oh, come on. Don't give up that easy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Really? You think if Home Depot stopped selling a shovel I have that I would be angry? Why?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Because you get mad and throw fits when eshops get taken down.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why do you think I get mad when eshops get taken down? You're bringing that up a lot in this topic
3 months ago
Anonymous
>you get mad and throw fits when eshops get taken down.
Is that really what this is about lol
You're seriously just a Tendie whose butthurt over people complaining about Nintendo however long ago
3 months ago
Anonymous
So it's true?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>shovel goes missing >look up info online >home depot discontinued the shovel, also recalling licenses on all active shovels >call home depot >get told my receipt of purchase was actually just a short term licensing agreement >leaving store with receipt constituted a noverbal agreement to licensing terms allowing license to be revoked at any time >"dont worry, Shovel 2 is on sale now!"
frick off
3 months ago
Anonymous
goes missing
Skill issue
3 months ago
Anonymous
how the frick do you lose a shovel
the joke is that my license for my shovel was revoked and they removed my shovel from my home. thought about including that specifically but that the subtext was clear. apparently i am wrong about the average literacy here
3 months ago
Anonymous
>my shovel was revoked and they removed my shovel from my home.
Ok so why does your analogy require impossible events taking place and how was that a "joke"?
3 months ago
Anonymous
much like an 82 camaro being rendered inoperable once they stopped making it, my analogy requires you to make aconnection to real world events (buying a car, shovel shopping at home depot) and, heh, putting my sick and twisted wit to work imagining a silly scenario for anons to untangle...
3 months ago
Anonymous
Ok but then why do you get mad when Nintendo shuts down eshops?
3 months ago
Anonymous
i think you have mistaken me for someone else. im not that anon and, personally, havent owned a nintendo console since the first ds.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not him but closing down a storefront or multiplayer modes are different from closing down entire access to games.
Splatoon multiplayer may be down but I can still play the single player campaign and local stuff.
3 months ago
Anonymous
If it's different then why are you also outraged when eshops shut down?
3 months ago
Anonymous
The last Nintendo system I bought was a Gamecube, why would I care about the eShops?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The last Nintendo system I bought was a Gamecube
Ok then why do you get outraged when eshops shut down?
3 months ago
Anonymous
i think if i ctrl-f "eshop" (22 hits) you are ~60% of its mentions and also the first in the thread to bring this up in any way whatsoever when your car analogy was called shite
3 months ago
Anonymous
If the play works then why stop running it?
3 months ago
Anonymous
What makes you think I did?
3 months ago
Anonymous
The fact that all consumer rights obsessed vitrue signaling pirates like yourself always throw shitfits when eshops get taken down
3 months ago
Anonymous
23 hits
3 months ago
Anonymous
23 apt car analogies
3 months ago
Anonymous
Anon, when you assume you make an ass out of you and me.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You still haven’t told me how much they’re paying you.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You've been conditioned to believe anyone who bothers you is paid to do so. You must have run out of arguments.
3 months ago
Anonymous
> You've been conditioned to believe anyone who bothers you is paid to do so.
No, I’m just being generous and assuming you’re not actually as stupid as you act. >You must have run out of arguments.
You already conceded to me.
3 months ago
Anonymous
this poster gets upset when people emulate nintendo games and also seethes at basic consumer rights
interesting
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not really. I'm in this thread on record telling people to pirate games probably at least a 23 times now.
3 months ago
Anonymous
how the frick do you lose a shovel
3 months ago
Anonymous
>dude, like, you can't just own things, corporations should be able to take them away at any time for any reason >don't like it? what? do you base your entire identity around not getting fricked in the ass? what's wrong with you???
3 months ago
Anonymous
Must have quoted the wrong post. I didn't say these things.
3 months ago
Anonymous
no, you did since you seem to think a corporation deciding to stop offering a service means it's okay for them to take things away from you that you've already purchased
3 months ago
Anonymous
Maybe read the service agreement next time. If it wasn't plainly stated then file a class action lawsuit since you will be justified in doing so. But I'm sure the company's lawyers weren't that shortsighted so I doubt it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
EULAs are not legally binding. Maybe the publisher should put an end of service date on the packaging? Oh wait, they of course they won't because then people won't buy the fricking game.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Nah you'll still buy it and still be just as hilariously outraged when it gets pulled
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Nah you'll still buy it
I have not bought an ubisoft game in over 15 years now.
> still be just as hilariously outraged when it gets pulled
Why am I not allowed to be outraged at corpos trying to steal from people?
3 months ago
Anonymous
You're allowed to be as annoying and obnoxious as you please.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why does people owning things annoy you so much?
3 months ago
Anonymous
It doesn't
3 months ago
Anonymous
Then why are you complaining about people wanting to own things?
3 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not
3 months ago
Anonymous
service agreements are a fricking joke if they aren't forced to be read and agreed with BEFORE payment
3 months ago
Anonymous
Fool me twice, shame on me. Maybe be better?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Yes companies often stop offeringng goods and services, I already explained this.
The answer is no, it is not normal for singleplayer goods to have to connect to a server, and for the game to stop working once support ceases.
>Do you not also get worked up when something like the 3DS and Wii stores get taken down and Nintendo doesn't let you keep buying things?
No, because I didn't pay for the store. You are really bad at analogies.
> You seem like the kind of PC cultist that bases her entire identity on consumer rights, voting with your wallet, has an unhealthy hatred for Disney and copyright laws, and says things like "the mouse", and is also an unemployed NEET.
You sound like you are having a really rough time coming up with a cogent argument, but I don't blame you. You sound more adept at making up things in your head than explaining yourself.
3 months ago
Anonymous
No I think I did a pretty good job explaining myself. Yes you do get mad when eshops get taken down, no need to lie to yourself. Yes it's normal for companies to stop offering services.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Yes you do get mad when eshops get taken down, no need to lie to yourself.
Why would I get mad when eshops get taken down, anon? What does this have to do with what we are discussing?
>Yes it's normal for companies to stop offering services.
I never said it is not normal for companies to stop offering services. I said that it not normal for companies to cease supporting a good and for that good to be rendered inoperable immediately as a direct result. This isn't true even for digital goods, most games that are no longer supported by developers are still perfectly playable but simply do not have access to multiplayer functions.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Why would I get mad when eshops get taken down, anon?
I don't know but I fully expect your outrage to be found in the next WiiU/3DS eshop takedown thread
Why do you think I get mad when eshops get taken down? You're bringing that up a lot in this topic
Because you're one of those annoying consumer rights advocates and this is one of the things you freaks constantly bring up.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't know but I fully expect your outrage to be found in the next WiiU/3DS eshop takedown thread
Why? You keep bringing this up but you can't even offer a vague reason why you brought it up. It sounds like you're autistic and this just came into your head lol. Why would I get mad at an eShop disappearing? It doesn't do anything to the products I own, it has nothing to do with consumer rights, why do you think they're at all related? I'm genuinely confused at your thought process.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Why? You keep bringing this up but you can't even offer a vague reason why you brought it up
You're the one that keeps asking me to defend the car analogy. If you don't want to talk about it then stop talking about it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Anon...you switched to the eshop after I pointed out the flaws in your car analogy. That's my point. It came out of nowhere. Nothing we are discussing has anything to do with any eshops. Are you okay? Are you on drugs?
3 months ago
Anonymous
There was no flaw in the car analogy. Chevy stopped selling 82 Camaros. Nintendo stopped selling WiiU and 3DS eshop games. Completely normal stuff. Both should trigger you since you're another one of those cookie cutter consumer rights activist.
3 months ago
Anonymous
When Chevy stopped selling 82 Camaros, they didn't get taken away from everyone who bought one, you stupid homosexual.
3 months ago
Anonymous
games get shut down all the time
3 months ago
Anonymous
Ok? And? How does that change the argument?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Same argument I've been making since the start: this is normal, and you're getting outraged at normalcy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>not owning things is normal
It isn't. I can still go back and play all my old games. This only really started in the 2010s when publishers abandoned dedicated servers because they wanted more control.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I can still go back and play all my old games.
You actually own those games because they're offline physical copies.
3 months ago
Anonymous
No, I can still play my older digital games as well. Only post-2012 games are like this.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>You actually own those games
Actually, you don't, and that’s the problem here.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Chevy didn't require you to phone their 1-800 number to start the engine every time, and then just discontinue it one day.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah how fricking stupid would consumers be to buy a product like that. Couldn't be me.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>corporation with anti-consumer practices steals from consumers >haha you deserve it >NOOOOOOO STOP DON'T TRY TO CHANCE CONSUMER LAWS PLEASE THINK OF THE CORPORATION
3 months ago
Anonymous
>buys an online only game >buys a digital only game >gets mad that she doesn't own anything after consciously making these decisions
3 months ago
Anonymous
>buy game at launch >no or minimal drm >major update hits >denovo drm and always online
nothing personnel kid
3 months ago
Anonymous
name one (1) example of a game that shipped without denuvo and "always online" then added it later.
That being said, most Denuvo games aren't always online, but it often acts that way due to its terms or various bugs.
3 months ago
Anonymous
capcom added enigma to 15 year old games
3 months ago
Anonymous
>these updates that I agreed to are happening
Yes.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah haha, if you get defrauded that's your problem, pal. Your demented mother swindled of her life savings? Tough luck. Child robbed of his jacket, shoes and belongings? Buy private escort.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It's digital and online. You never owned the game to begin with so you didn't lose anything.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yup, every man for himself. Hope that car jacker isn't more nimble than you!
3 months ago
Anonymous
that carjacker doesn't have to outrun me, he has to outrun a bullet from my gun.
3 months ago
Anonymous
THERE WAS A FIREFIIIIGHT
3 months ago
Anonymous
If there aren't consumer protections, then people will just pirate or stop buying entirely and the industry will crash.
3 months ago
Anonymous
except this has never been the case, and certainly won't be the case in a market where nobody is providing a quality service with consumer protections as an alternative.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>except this has never been the case
it will be, since people like owning things
3 months ago
Anonymous
>people like owning things
Then why do you buy digital licenses expecting to own a game?
3 months ago
Anonymous
No people will continue buying and playing fun online games understanding its a limited time experience and won't throw fits on the intetnet when it inevitably gets taken down.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>moronic analogy gets BTFO >moves goalpost
Every time.
3 months ago
Anonymous
In capitalism it's supposed to be the opposite. It's literally supposed to put power in the hands of the consumer at the expense of the corporation. If the company fricks up or does wrong its their problem, not the consumers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Because you're one of those annoying consumer rights advocates and this is one of the things you freaks constantly bring up.
I can smell hamburgers with a side of fries and an XL cola when I read this sentence.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yes I am a white American. Does this also trigger you?
3 months ago
Anonymous
No such thing.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well, it was obvious you're trailer trash by your garbage opinion, but thanks for the confirmation
>didn't capitalize White
Nice try, israelite boy.
Sure.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well, it was obvious you're trailer trash by your garbage opinion, but thanks for the confirmation
3 months ago
Anonymous
>didn't capitalize White
Nice try, israelite boy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>No because that's a car and not an online video game.
That's fast becoming a non-destinction.
You're not superior in anything but obesity you fricking mutt. Your country is infested with Black folk and your white women spread themselves open for them and openly mock you.
You have the lowest IQ and literacy rates in the entire western world.
You eat processed food like candy along with candy.
Your military is a paper tiger and folds to sandBlack folk.
You bend the knee to Israel at every turn.
Just fricking die you piece of shit.
im from india you stupid mutt. we will pass ahead of you and no muh shitting streets propaganda will change that. and even before we do that we will infiltrate and stablish the caste system in every company of your disgusting country so its even easier to assimilate it when were done
The tl;dr for Ross' crusade is that he's tech-illiterate and as a result his demands are vague and stupid.
He's trying to argue that games are a good legally distinct from all other software (it's not), that purchase of the game entitles you to permanent use (it doesn't), and that by not leaving the game in a permanently playable state after support ends (undue imposition for an entire branch of software development) or releasing the necessary tools and data for the community to build out their own version (flagrant violation of IP rights) devs are violating consumer rights.
Ross and the dipshits spamming Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work - they just want to play games for free after support ends. You can see their total lack of understanding in how they argue - point out that plenty of modern software dev relies on scalable clouds and enterprise licenses and isn't just a singular exe that runs on any windows machine and they'll just parrot "but (game from mid 2000's) has community servers!"
It's remarkably stupid and just another way to funnel anger over shitty business practices away from efforts that mighy actually work, like demanding unions or breaking up the mega-publishers.
>I definitely think this is a prime time to try and see if anything can be done
The problem is that you can't get "anything" done, you need to get a CONCRETE AND WELL-THOUGHT OUT GOAL done. Law requires great specificity.
"I want all games to work after support ends" is some dumb vague bullshit that is divorced from reality. It's a non-starter.
"All Software that requires an internet connection to run must be clearly labelled as such," now that's something reasonable that might pass muster if the committee can work out details like "what constitutes clearly labelled" (this is why laws take forever and a billion people and committees)
I think the closest thing I can think of to this general idea that has an articulable and reasonably-arguable point would be something like "Software that runs entirely on the client but requires digital rights management authorization from a home server must disable the authorization requirement within X days of the home server shutting down."
Problem is that if a company is shutting down their auth server they're probably about to not exist and thus don't really care about the potential for a civil judgement.
>I definitely think this is a prime time to try and see if anything can be done
The problem is that you can't get "anything" done, you need to get a CONCRETE AND WELL-THOUGHT OUT GOAL done. Law requires great specificity.
"I want all games to work after support ends" is some dumb vague bullshit that is divorced from reality. It's a non-starter.
"All Software that requires an internet connection to run must be clearly labelled as such," now that's something reasonable that might pass muster if the committee can work out details like "what constitutes clearly labelled" (this is why laws take forever and a billion people and committees)
I think the closest thing I can think of to this general idea that has an articulable and reasonably-arguable point would be something like "Software that runs entirely on the client but requires digital rights management authorization from a home server must disable the authorization requirement within X days of the home server shutting down."
Problem is that if a company is shutting down their auth server they're probably about to not exist and thus don't really care about the potential for a civil judgement.
Wow, that's a very compelling argument. Can you explain why the Crew will no longer be able to be played and absolutely required company internet connection to function at all? Can you let us know how requiring gaming companies be incapable of developing a game such that it requires an internet connection to function regardless of whether it is a multiplayer game will impact future games development, and how disallowing this practice would hurt consumers more than help them? Because unless you can, I think you're a huge mega homosexual shill and should be fed to a woodchipper feet-first
>Can you explain why The Crew
The Crew and whether or not it in particular can run with just the disabling of auth (there is no evidence that it can) is irrelevant. >Can you let us know how requiring gaming companies be incapable of developing a game such that it requires an internet connection to function regardless of whether it is a multiplayer game will impact future games development
Games and general software cannot be pulled apart in IP law, so any restrictions made here would impact ALL software development. It would essentially kill all distributed server architecture as a whole as the costs of compliance are prohibitive. In terms of just games, you'd see most multiplayer games simply stop development entirely because absolutely no one wants to build their own old-school server bank and no one is willing to just give out the entirety of their codebase to be mined by users.
Eat my entire butthole you dumb motherfricker
>He's trying to argue that games are a good legally distinct from all other software (it's not)
this is true in the many parts of the EU. >muh america though
cool, he already conceded the case is lost in America because one guy (no one on Ganker btw check the archives) gave a case precedent from the early 90s about it.
>this is true in the many parts of the EU.
It isn't. The cases Ross cites do not say what he thinks they say. In fact they explicitly say the opposite.
>why
because there is no distinction and figuring out where the line is would be an intensive and almost certainly futile effort that has no benefit. Software is software. The same laws govern Devil May Cry, Microsoft Excel, and Flight Sim 95.
>It isn't. The cases Ross cites do not say what he thinks they say. In fact they explicitly say the opposite.
would you like to prove that to us?
>would you like to do my homework for me
Literally just google them.
My favorite is the EU case where the judgement literally says "These are a good only insofar as this specific law applies and not broadly"
>because there is no distinction and figuring out where the line is would be an intensive and almost certainly futile effort that has no benefit. Software is software. The same laws govern Devil May Cry, Microsoft Excel, and Flight Sim 95.
Why would that be futile? It's central to the problem. The issue is not whether or not a corporation should have to support a game into perpetuity but whether it is ethical to produce a game that requires internet access to function when it is not necessary. That should be a perfectly reasonable ask and if the laws are not capable of accommodating that then the law should obviously change.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The issue is not whether or not a corporation should have to support a game into perpetuity
Tell that to Ross lol
You kids and your backpedaling >It's about games requiring access when it's not necessary!
It's not, but see
>I definitely think this is a prime time to try and see if anything can be done
The problem is that you can't get "anything" done, you need to get a CONCRETE AND WELL-THOUGHT OUT GOAL done. Law requires great specificity.
"I want all games to work after support ends" is some dumb vague bullshit that is divorced from reality. It's a non-starter.
"All Software that requires an internet connection to run must be clearly labelled as such," now that's something reasonable that might pass muster if the committee can work out details like "what constitutes clearly labelled" (this is why laws take forever and a billion people and committees)
I think the closest thing I can think of to this general idea that has an articulable and reasonably-arguable point would be something like "Software that runs entirely on the client but requires digital rights management authorization from a home server must disable the authorization requirement within X days of the home server shutting down."
Problem is that if a company is shutting down their auth server they're probably about to not exist and thus don't really care about the potential for a civil judgement.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Tell that to Ross lol >You kids and your backpedaling
Ross explicitly stated that he is against devs being forced to support a game into perpetuity and far beyond the scope of his argument. You've continued latching onto this because the mere notion that it may be possible in some way to penalize companies from requiring a service to play any game at all terrifies you. Why I don't know
3 months ago
Anonymous
Anon you change what it's about every time you're shown to be moronic
It's sad
3 months ago
Anonymous
Point out a single time that Ross ever said that companies should be forced into supporting games into perpetuity. In fact, point out the time where I myself said that in this topic. You're so adamant to be a contrarian that you've constructed strawmen to argue with. So I'll congratulate you, good job on pointing out that no company should have to support games forever. But that's not what is being argued for.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Tell that to Ross lol >You kids and your backpedaling
Either you don't even understand the argument being presented or you are intentionally being intellectually dishonest.
>The CJEU ruled that for the purposes of the Directive, software is a "good" regardless of the medium on which it is supplied. Consequently, computer software supplied to customers by granting a perpetual licence does constitute a "sale of goods".
you may now shit your pants and tell me to vote with my wallet now.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>for the purposes of the directive
that choice of language seems pretty fricking important, anon.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>doesn't even know what the Directives refer to
anon...
>The Crew and whether or not it in particular can run with just the disabling of auth (there is no evidence that it can) is irrelevant.
No it isn't. Are you insane? That is like a car you bought 6 years ago not starting because the manufacturer doesn't want to upkeep a server it used to connect for GPS and social media applications at startup. I bet that you would genuinely hop to defend Ford in same case. >"B-Buh the car would still work without the server..."
And so would The Crew.
Corporate bootlicking ape. You're worse than tankies
>He's trying to argue that games are a good legally distinct from all other software (it's not)
this is true in the many parts of the EU. >muh america though
cool, he already conceded the case is lost in America because one guy (no one on Ganker btw check the archives) gave a case precedent from the early 90s about it.
If a game I bought can’t be played until I die, it shouldn’t exist. Also a game that can be played single player shouldn’t require an online connection and if it does, the servers should be required to stay up indefinitely or the game patched to run offline.
>Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work - they just want to play games for free after support ends.
Yes. It's not our job to know or care. If it's impossible for them to have done otherwise they should have never made those games in the first place. If you think otherwise you're business illiterate.
Genuine question about IP law. Shouldn’t it be common sense that a community should be able to host their own servers, disseminate the game, mod it , emulate it, etc. if the IP holder has purposely ended support? The counter argument for this is that if corporations don’t “defend” and claim their IP they can legally lose rights to it. So isn’t the issue with the IP laws in the first place? People should be able to play Splatoon 1 on private servers without Nintendo going after them and Nintendo shouldn’t be at risk of losing their rights to Splatoon. Seems like there can be a happy medium.
>that purchase of the game entitles you to permanent use
sure it can, the stealing of data is an abstract concept and void once you prove the hardware you own to copy information (which is inactionable) is a right granted to anyone alive who can observe the world around them and act on it
tl:dr you would download a car and it would hurt nobody
>Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work
Release the server software. That's all they have to do you dumb frick.
I think a fair setup is they either release all the server tools for the game, or they relinquish all rights to the game once they stop hosting servers for it.
Game isn't profitable to run? Oh hey then people can do whatever they want with it and you can't sue them, haha
Going out on a limb here with this brave opinion:
Frick Ubisoft and their shitty "games", I mean live action services
Frick the government and their shitty regulations
Yes, wanting Ubisoft to go out of business is status quo. Now let's have a 5 paragraph long semantics debate on philosophies of government in this basket weaving forum.
I think it's just wild that ubisoft has sent para-legals on here to argue a point.
In the end we all know the courts will invalidate the EULA based on the fact that everyone thought they were buying a game not renting a license to one.
>sent para-legals on here to argue a point.
not even a point. it seems to be a constant deflection from the actual point to tangents seemingly connected but not really (constant blame shift to store level issues, saying this is a demand for "infinite service", etc.)
Wait so you're saying your not some jnr law grad shill.
You're actually arguing this point because... why are you arguing this point here? It doesn't make sense.
Everyone thinks you're a c**t. Your argument is shit, you're throwing your toys out of the pram over some very simple legislative instruments that any design team can account got going forwards.
Being serious for a second all it takes for a SP game is a patch to be put in the digital copyright data vault they submit to the EUIPO and other relevant agencies.
If they chose to stop selling the title then you can issue a request to release the online requirement patch.
After the first few cases everything will be a biz process for every game made in the EU.
None of this is the issue you're making it out to be.
3 months ago
Anonymous
mate im pro-offline capabilities, im just drawing attention to the half thought out distractions being brought up in this thread
I like the part where Ganker suddenly has pro gaas diehards and anti player hosted server hardliners the moment there's any kind media buzz about it being bad.
Ganker is full of people who think they're trolling and being contrarian, but they're really just temporarily embarrassed CEOs mad people are questioning the status quo
It's people who initially sided against Ross, realized they were wrong but couldn't accept it and now they keep digging that hole deeper. It's been happening on Ganker as long as I can remember, this is just an advanced case.
The bigger issue here is that selling games as a service isn't illegal, nor is providing services for a limited amount of time. In fact, there's not a single industry where anyone is expected to provide a service indefinitely, especially without any continued compensation, making Ross' argument pretty weak.
Could the game in question (The Crew) have been made to work offline? Sure, the Forza Horizon series has the same sort of online functionality, but doesn't require an internet connection whatsoever. Is Ubishit legally or contractually obligated to make changes for that to happen, either during the initial development of future games or after the end of service announcement for the current ones? No.
Rather than delusionally hoping that the government does something about it (which it likely won't), people should simply stop being moronic and not support those practices. >b-but voting with your wallet doesn't work
Maybe not every time, especially in regards to what those big companies do, because there's a legion of morons out there willing to pay for that shit. Supporting the developers who don't do this shit does work though, and there's no shortage of games that don't follow the GaaS model.
>imagine being so contrarian you defend big business to just take away your rights to playing videos game that you refuse government intervention
thats right, conservatives are cucks
Bug business can go OUT of business if it stops making money. Big govt’ can subsidize big business if it gets involved, and they ALWAYS subsidize all corps. And the last thing I want is VIDEO GAME corps getting tax money for stupid shit.
Unfortunately, the technology to make dedicated servers were lost when Carmack slipped and bumped his head in the early 2010s. You can't make companies do the impossible.
>1924 >anon learns about black lung, child labor, disease ridden factories and people falling into vats and getting turned into lard >WHAT ARE YOU A FRICKING COMMIE, IF WE REGULATE THAT STUFF SOCIETY WILL COLLAPSE!
False equivalency. Labor laws were bad for kids and adults back then.
Now we have actual labor safety regulations, it would be an entirely different climate.
The best part is even if they're correct on that insane assumption it doesn't mean anything. Just because a company can't undo their bad business practices doesn't mean they can't be punished for them. >lmao our criminal negligence got your husband killed but what do you want us to do? Bring him back to life?
>it's another thread where people go about on the topics as it's all or nothing
at least it's one liner shitposting for the sake of baiting, how long till we get that one person who is going to go full reply mode
Reminder that any attempt to frame this as political or related to "culture war" nonsense in any way is a blatant D&C attempt by shills. Don't fall for it.
Theres a very easily aggravated demogrpahic that seems to be vehemently against anything changing.
If X doesnt bother them then anyone complaining about X will just cause unnesecery trouble and might make things worse.
Any possibility of things turning out for the better doesnt exist because they dont seem to have the capacity to imagining things and only focus on the now as in "Its not so bad, shut up".
>Corporation makes your life worse because it profits them. >Anon is okay with that because "muh freedom". >Doesn't want to use elected representatives to help.
it's simple
once you are going to end service for a product, release the source code and make it FOSS. I'd recommend using a license that doesn't allow you to re sell the stuff as your own, but licenses don't mean shit
>release the source code and make it FOSS
no one is going to do that and releasing binaries for a dedicated server or just patching in an offline mode is sufficient
all this guy wants is to be able to host servers themselves after the game dies. the devs dont even allow that. effecively fricking you over. they could just shut the game down after a few months making your purchase invalid
Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
No, shutting off a game you were able to play for 10+ years and YOU agreed could shut down in the far future isn't "stealing"
>Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
It's Indians and Russians training for social media astroturfing before they go live on facebook for the election
>actually our projector stopped working >can I get a refund
"Yes it's under warranty" >but I bought the digital online projector and not the physical one
"We are not liable for your decision making, please exit the line, this line is for people who own products"
for my entire life buying a game has meant owning it
up until recently, now buying a game is suddenly no longer owning it and it can be taken away at any time for any reason? how about no? how about put an expiration on the cover? oh no, would that hurt sales? ohhhh that's too bad 🙁
>for my entire life buying a game has meant owning it
except that's not fundamentally true. it meant you owned a license for it and it always has. it's never meant that you "owned" the game.
Don't care about your homosexual semantics. I can still go back and play those older games and they can't be taken away from me so I own them. Why are you defending not owning things so hard? Wouldn't you like to own things instead of suddenly not being able to own things?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm right because I reject your arguments! ha ha I win!
I'm not talking about technicalities. All you're doing is having a reddit tier fit
3 months ago
Anonymous
You're arguing semantics over the copy of a physical game actually being a license to play it. My point is that that is irrelevant. I can play the older game today. I can't play the newer game that the publisher decides to shut down and that is the distinction that matters. My only point is that the newer game should be left in a state where I can still play it after service ends.
3 months ago
Anonymous
and my point that the legal difference here is that you own a physical copy that can't be disabled. LEGALLY the only difference. It makes no practical difference because nintendo isn't going to come revoke your physical copy of mario because it isn't practical. Learn the difference between objective truths and subjective truths and stop crying like a woman.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not an argument, bootlicker.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>semantics
The law >they can't be taken away from me
Legally they can, and legally you don’t actually own them. That’s why this is a big deal, but you’re too stupid to realize this.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Legally they can, and legally you don’t actually own them
I'd like to see sega legally break into my house and take my copy of sonic adventure 2 for the sega dreamcast.
3 months ago
Anonymous
If they really wanted to they could sue your ass to kingdom come. Both Bungie and Nintendo have already done stuff like that. You literally need their permission to play legally. If you had half a brain you'd realize how stupid this is and try to do something about it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I play those older games >so I own them
Not really. Someone who pirated those same games you bought is also playing them and they own nothing so there has to be more to it.
ehhhh this isnt a store issue that is having attention drawn to it here. i bought Starforge in early access in like 2013 and the devs pulled it from all store fronts. i can still download and play that game a decade later. the issue is with the published completely revoking access to a perfectly working game
>Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
Every time I see people complaining about their rights being infringed they're non americans and non white. Very curious. Do these people ever stop complaining?
>oppression by government bad >oppression by corporation good
Maybe some people dont want to get fricked up the ass by either of them. Why do you low IQ morons always have to make everything so black and white and devoid of nuance. Getting paid nothing by your corpo overlords who own all the land and housing isnt any better or worse than getting paid nothing because your government is incompetant and just left the money printer on the point where your currency is useless. Like almost anything in life, there has to be a balance, you cant let anything ever go too far in any direction.
anon, this is the shitpost thread where where people make one liners to bait replies
it was more fun when unique posters were visible and you saw a 20 minute reply that didn't increase the post count
I try to buy physical media when I can but sometimes digital is just easier and so I pirate that. I rarely ever buy digital media other than steam games and ive never lost access to any of my steam games, even ones that are no longer available for sale havent dissappeared from my library.
The second that stops being true I will no longer buy games on steam. I trust them because they have never given me a reason not to trust them.
this whole copyright shit or whatever wasn't really a problem back then with games. I'm sure companies shut down their games so you don't just keep playing them and eventually have to buy their new stuff.
This is a better fight but ross is too moronic. Just let people freely modify their games, make emulators and reverse engineering, private servers,etc. It's much more important if you care about videogame preservation and freedom in general.
This whole situation shows how capitalism went wrong. Normally, it's supposed to be that running a business is a risky gamble at the best of times, so you've got to ensure you make the best product for the consumer or else you could go bankrupt any day. Now, that why dynamic has been flipped on its head. If a company does something moronic it stays in business and the consumer gets blamed. Regulation was part of the old way of capitalism, too. If your company could only stay in business via a polluting technique that was made unworkable by pollution laws the answer you got was "oh well, that's capitalism, adapt or die". Nowadays that company would just throw a temper tantrum to the government.
>I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT
No you don't. You hecking love unlimited corporate power. With how much you're fellating them and advocating for them to be able to do whatever the frick they want, even at your own and everyone else's expense.
Consumer rights aren't communism. Why are you like this?
It's like you're deathly afraid of regulation when it's the government. But how can you be so blind to the fact that corporations have just as much if not more power than the government? They can and do regulate you too. But for some reason you appear to be fine with it when it's corporations. How come?
>dont worry bro companies will totally self regulate bro dont worry >government reg is bad bro please dont reevaluate this we will be good for stock holders and self reg bro
big pharma has been flagrantly flauting regs for decades and its still better than life without those regs that selfsame companies say makes it expensive to operate in america
you vill live in ze pods and eat ze bugs. companies like blackrock are buying up all houses from banks in order to prevent people from owning them. rent is far more expensive than a mortgage. this is the future you want.
You mean the housing crisis that was caused by parasitic landlords that do everything they can to stop new housing projects just so their house go up in value? I just want cheap housing
if you want the real redpill on the housing economy then start looking up zoning laws for your city or wherever. these people literally make it illegal to make more than a certain amount of houses at any one time just so they can keep the prices hyper inflated due to low supply.
oh another thing i forgot to mention is look up how big fricking parking lots are in big cities and realize how they dont need that much space and it could be used to build more housing
>build expansive suburb hell scapes as tumorous growths outside of major cities because miles of real estateis spent paving over earth for those suburb commuter vehicles
a lot of those parking lots were built back when the company that owned the building actually had customers. there's a mall in my city built in the 80s when people went to malls, and its parking lot is as big as a neighborhood. of course there's less than 10 cars there at any given time now, but it would cost a lot of money to tear it up so they just leave it there.
Corporations successfully made undyingly loyal brand slaves years ago DUDE.
The same "progressive" morons that cry out shit like "EAT THE RICH" will then turn around and gloat about said rich people overreaching to hell and back in your fictional media with strawmen like "LOL YOU SAID LE Black person WORD AND GOT BANNED YOU LE GET WHAT YOU DESERVE" whenever people are denied playing a game they paid for, for literally ANY reason.
Hell, in blizzard's case they were saying it a few months ago when people were getting banned for using the voice lines they themselves put into the game. They are by far and away the biggest defenders of the economic elite, and that's why consoomers are the plague killing vidya.
So why is corporation bad but government doing the same good?
both are bad but when given the opportunity I will happily use one to frick the other when it benefits me the same way they try to use each other to frick me every chance they get
that's not what's being asked at all and the more you try to strawman, the more disingenuous you come across
see also
>Tell that to Ross lol >You kids and your backpedaling
Either you don't even understand the argument being presented or you are intentionally being intellectually dishonest.
>I'm straw manning
agreed, thank you for conceding
>you are buying a product with an expiration date.
no, I don't think so
3 months ago
Anonymous
I win. You lose. Now run along and play your single player game that was never popular because of online and only has 12 current players in its lobby.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you win what? at boasting about using logically fallacies and admitting to strawmanning after being proven wrong?
3 months ago
Anonymous
I've been proven wrong and yet you have no legal grounds for what you are saying. If you did the crew wouldn't be shutting down. Here in reality land, it is.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The crew shutting down is completely irrelevant to the point. Games are allowed to end service, that's not the issue. The issue is the game should continue to function, either with a release of dedicated servers or an offline patch.
3 months ago
Anonymous
yes this is why i brought up .hack//fragment because even though the official servers are shut down, fans had very little trouble setting up emulated servers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
That's nice, but it should not be on the onus of the consumer to fix the game broken by the publisher.
3 months ago
Anonymous
i feel like there is a distinction between broken by the publisher and simply barring access. the crew is not broken, is still playable.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Pirates aren't consumers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
obviously not and consumers is exactly what the game needs to stay alive. GASP you mean pirates don't contribute to a games health?!?!
3 months ago
Anonymous
>the reason for the thread existing is irrelevant
Mods, clean it up.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you can continue to ignore the point but it just makes you look dishonest and/or moronic
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The issue is the game should continue to function, either with a release of dedicated servers or an offline patch.
Hack it and set up your own servers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Hack it and set up your own servers.
Not my responsibility. I didn't intentionally break the game. The publisher did. It's their problem.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Then pound sand instead of playing the game you want to play.
3 months ago
Anonymous
People who do this often get c&ds because the company feels a need to protect its property rights. It’s a shitty unintended consequence of IP law that didn’t account for software when it was first legislated.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>creators shouldnt own their creations and starve so I can bing bing wahoo
lol
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not what I said.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>fans should get punished for trying to fix a game the IP holder refuses to
ah, I see you are a tendie
3 months ago
Anonymous
>People who do this often get c&ds
No they don't. This rarely happens only when someone is mass distributing or profiting. Nobody got C&Dd just for pirating a video game.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Pirating isn’t the question. Running private servers or creating fan made remakes is what we’re talking about, and yes, it does happen often.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It's a single player game so you're fine. See
Is it normal for singleplayer games to have to connect to a server and to stop working when the dev stops supporting it? Would you say this practice is common?
>No because that's a car and not an online video game.
Then why did you use a car in your example?
>Yes companies often stop offeringng goods and services, I already explained this.
The answer is no, it is not normal for singleplayer goods to have to connect to a server, and for the game to stop working once support ceases.
>Do you not also get worked up when something like the 3DS and Wii stores get taken down and Nintendo doesn't let you keep buying things?
No, because I didn't pay for the store. You are really bad at analogies.
> You seem like the kind of PC cultist that bases her entire identity on consumer rights, voting with your wallet, has an unhealthy hatred for Disney and copyright laws, and says things like "the mouse", and is also an unemployed NEET.
You sound like you are having a really rough time coming up with a cogent argument, but I don't blame you. You sound more adept at making up things in your head than explaining yourself.
If a game I bought can’t be played until I die, it shouldn’t exist. Also a game that can be played single player shouldn’t require an online connection and if it does, the servers should be required to stay up indefinitely or the game patched to run offline.
it is fricking not, the crew's MMO bullshit was completely insignificant, it was just an open world racing game in the style of test drive unlimited (which is 2006 game which you can still play completely offline to this day) with a fully fledged singleplayer mode, the game even has an offline mode in the files that's dummied out and locked behind the game's 3 layers of drm bullshit
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Hack it >Get sent Cease and Desist letters or straight up sued for “unauthorized access” or whatever.
infinite existence is not the mandate here. you are misconstruing the topic at hand.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>game is only good because it has a large online population >population shrinks below maintenance level >it can't exist anymore
You could solve this right now by getting a million people to log in to The Crew but you won't. Curious.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>game is only good because it has a large online population >only good >only
thats a word meant to distract form the arguement at hand and is load bearing. picking into it, i probably enjoyed the online components at the time of release. however, what drew me to the game was, like american truck simulator, driving across america. would still log in every few years after i traveled somewhere to see if A) it was in the game and B) how it compared.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>let me run away from the point with word salad as I obsess over one word in a sentence
I take it youre one of the people who knows he can stop this by playing the Crew but won't?
3 months ago
Anonymous
your "one word" in a sentence implies the only reason someone would play a racing game in a "faithfully recreated" America is because of ingame twitter, leaderboards and a cash shop. rather than, you know, a racing game with a neat open world conceit. your word choice has meaning anon. >game is only good because it has a large online population
3 months ago
Anonymous
The game in question is entirely based on having a large online population that is no longer there. You want it to keep going? Then start playing it and convince a couple million others to do so as well. It should be easy right? I mean clearly you and lots of others care a lot about this games online population staying above maintenance level right?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The game in question is entirely based on having a large online population that is no longer there.
That is just not true. A component, sure but the game shipped with a full single-player campaign anon like come on lol.
3 months ago
Anonymous
it is fricking not, the crew's MMO bullshit was completely insignificant, it was just an open world racing game in the style of test drive unlimited (which is 2006 game which you can still play completely offline to this day) with a fully fledged singleplayer mode, the game even has an offline mode in the files that's dummied out and locked behind the game's 3 layers of drm bullshit
>game can't be accessed without joining an online server >ITS A SINGLE PLAYER GAME
This doesn't pass the smell test.
3 months ago
Anonymous
But enough about Nu-Hitman
3 months ago
Anonymous
Live service missions
3 months ago
Anonymous
I was referring to the mastery system, dummy.
Much like GT Sport (before it was updated after the servers shut down) if you try to play the single player content offline you’re unable to save your mastery progress and cannot unlock any items.
3 months ago
Anonymous
disingenuous Black folk like you deserve buckshot to the head
3 months ago
Anonymous
>no arguments
take that L and go by a happy meal with the money you didnt use to support The Crew.
3 months ago
Anonymous
watch your mother take the buckshot right in front of you before i castrate you
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Not a screenshot of him and a million of his friends currently playing >not even currently installed
LMAO you fricking owned yourself and showed everyone why the game is being shut down.
3 months ago
Anonymous
12 gauge
head
NOW
3 months ago
Anonymous
Install the game you complain about dying NOW
Prove that its audience isn't all uninstalled.
3 months ago
Anonymous
bro, the game could have 0 players, it still needs to remain a functional product after service ends
3 months ago
Anonymous
>a product could have zero supporters but it should still exist forever
why?
3 months ago
Anonymous
because people bought it, the number of players is irrelevant. any single person who bought the game is still entitled to it being functional, even if the servers go down
3 months ago
Anonymous
>the number of players in an online only game are irrelevant
I thought people knew vidya here? that's as far from the truth as you can get. Fortnite would shut down instantly if they went an entire month with less than 100 concurrent players like The Crew did.
3 months ago
Anonymous
are you braindead? the shutdown isn't the issue, games can shut down servers. the issue is the game needs an end of life patch to continue functioning
3 months ago
Anonymous
The game in question was built on servers. You can't play the game in any capacity without logging into a server.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Then give the community the code for the servers so they can host their own.
3 months ago
Anonymous
That's the company's choice since they own the ip. You just own a copy. Buy The Crew outright and do it. Otherwise you can rely on someone else's good will like a homeless person.
3 months ago
Anonymous
What will you say when the law forces them to .
3 months ago
Anonymous
any day now I'm sure.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Your stupid ass realizes the devs have an offline version where they test their shit right?
3 months ago
Anonymous
not my problem and that's also not even true
people have already found that the game has an offline mode built in that users just can't access which makes leaving it in a non-functional state even more inexcusable because it would take minimal effort to enable it
3 months ago
Anonymous
Your stupid ass realizes the devs have an offline version where they test their shit right?
You didnt buy the offline only version. It was never for sale.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>You didnt buy the offline only version. It was never for sale.
i see were moving goalposts, cause that wasnt your argument
3 months ago
Anonymous
because >less than 100 concurrent players
is very arbitrary. What if the companies shut down the game with 10 millions players just to cash out and frick off forever?
3 months ago
Anonymous
The amount of consistent revenue it takes to maintain a product is arbitrary, different for every product, yes. The Crew fell below its mark and stayed there for too long. If you and a million friends all decided to start playing it then you could have saved it, but you didnt.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I agree, but why not change the status quo just for the kicks of it? I want to see Ubisoft burns.
3 months ago
Anonymous
are you could just play it whenever because it's your fricking job to care about wether Ubisoft can maintain it or not and if you can host it then it should be yours, your work and effort, the idea is arbritery and unenforceable as originating from anyone or anywhere
3 months ago
Anonymous
Or you and a couple million of your friends could play it now and give it some revenue so it can pay for its servers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
this issue at the core of this is that game shut downs are the norm. that loss of value and history is the norm for the industry at large, primarily driven by cost benefit analysis. this is hsitory being lost, sure its game history but that is still entire worlds just disappearing. the drive for this is get a clear, definitive answer to whether that is ok or not. ross scott has had problems with this going all the way back to darkspore, and it sickens him that the accepted attitude is just that new product comes, old product exits
he has a gut feeling that this doesnt sit right with a lot of people. i still play thief fan missions 25 years later and have dealt with mission hosting sites dying, insane mappers nuking their archives, hosting sites losing everything in a server flood but these maps still return because of the collective effort of the small but passionate fan base around it. the crew may have released as an always online racing game but if possible people would be hosting private servers for years and years.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>game shutdowns are the norm
Yes. Any online game you play has a lifespan. Welcome to 20 years ago, or would you care to log into halo 2 online and tell the class how many people are playing. Is it 10 million like in 2005? or is it less than a few thousand. Eventually the MCC will stop being maintained too. you may not want to hear this but I'm telling you now so you don't act surprised when it happens.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why not frick the devs up through government regulation just to force them to maintain the servers anyway? Ignoring logistic, morality and all that. Just as a big frick you.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Because I'm not a small brain idiot who changes laws to benefit me now only to get fricked by them later, Hillary.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>only to get fricked by them
Then abolish it by protesting again you lazy bum
3 months ago
Anonymous
two wrongs don't make a right.
3 months ago
Anonymous
If the current status quo sucks, change it. If the new one sucks, change it again.
It's that simple.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The number of people playing a video game at any given time is completely irrelevant. A video game doesn't stop existing just because less people are playing it. Likewise, less people playing is not grounds to take the game away from everyone. If you don't want to host servers anymore because the popularity of the game has gone down the drain, that's completely fine. What isn't fine is leaving the game in such a state that it is impossible for anyone to play.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The number of people playing a video game at any given time is completely irrelevant.
Never heard a less true statement in my life even if we weren't talking about online only games, which we are.
3 months ago
Anonymous
thank you for the non-argument
3 months ago
Anonymous
There's no reason to argue with someone who thinks an online games player count doesn't matter.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It certainly doesn't matter when it comes to the ownership status of a video game. Going back to the analogy from earlier in the thread, a low number of 82 camaros on the road is not grounds to take them away from their owners under any circumstance. It is completely irrelevant. It could not be more irrelevant.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Welcome to 20 years ago
And yet there are games from 20 years ago that have bots or custom servers. Curious.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you literally can't play the fricking game anymore you subhuman street shitting pajeetgroid
now stream yourself taking 12 gauge to the head, the world demands it, make sure to kill your family too
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why didnt you and a million The Crew fans log in to prove it wasn't a ded online game?
3 months ago
Anonymous
why havent you taken that buckshot mouthwash? >b-b-but that's not an argum-ACK
millions of people would cheer when they see you pull the trigger live on stream
3 months ago
Anonymous
That's a million more people than those who were playing the crew pre shutdown announcement
3 months ago
Anonymous
then why haven't you done it?
get to it NOW >i-i-i don't want t-
i'm an ubisoft exec actually, i own your fricking life and i demand you take yourself offline permanently, begin to stream your suicide NOW
3 months ago
Anonymous
This man has lost his cool, the true sign of defeat. I will be gracious in my acceptance of victory.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you will be gracious when i feed you your mother's guts before sodomizing you with scorching coal
3 months ago
Anonymous
Is that what your dominatrix says to you when she's whipping your nuts?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>you literally can't play the fricking game anymore
Hack it
3 months ago
Anonymous
it is fricking not, the crew's MMO bullshit was completely insignificant, it was just an open world racing game in the style of test drive unlimited (which is 2006 game which you can still play completely offline to this day) with a fully fledged singleplayer mode, the game even has an offline mode in the files that's dummied out and locked behind the game's 3 layers of drm bullshit
So why is corporation bad but government doing the same good?
Truth is that Governments and Corporations are only different in name. Lolbertarians and Autistarian are just people gaslite to fight each other while Govs and Corps work together for their own profits.
>Truth is that Governments and Corporations are only different in name.
this is something that, if you view the world a certain way feels right to say but is actually completely, categorically incorrect.
Because you can just take your business elsewhere to a different corporation, unless you know you got idiot lefties creating super corporations with no small businesses to take local market share because of excess taxation and regulation
>Just vote with your wallet.
how uninformed
Corporations don't care about your money. That's why they target games/movies to tiny demographics that don't even pay for them.
>Immoral and bad business gets replaced by moral and good business.
it really doesn't anymore. a lot of shit companies are "too big to fail" like wells fargo, which just means that the government will bail them out because their services are so ingrained in society. when there's no competition, they will literally never fail if they provide a desired service, and that ;ast part applies to game companies too.
>oppression by government bad >oppression by corporation good
Maybe some people dont want to get fricked up the ass by either of them. Why do you low IQ morons always have to make everything so black and white and devoid of nuance. Getting paid nothing by your corpo overlords who own all the land and housing isnt any better or worse than getting paid nothing because your government is incompetant and just left the money printer on the point where your currency is useless. Like almost anything in life, there has to be a balance, you cant let anything ever go too far in any direction.
>be me >buy jedi academy for PC in 2003 >play online with lots of people >dedicated servers >be me >reinstall jedi academy for pc in 2024 >it still works online because it has dedicated servers
ok anon >be me >emulate .hack.//fragement the mmo for PS2 in 2024 many years after the official servers are done >can still play with people online because we can emulate servers as well
If you dare to try to tell me an mmo isnt a live service im going to laugh so fricking hard.
This is why I stopped playing CoD. They had hosted servers with 4, and they never have since. The last good game in the series imo. Keeps the game alive way longer and you also don’t have the company policing speech or content. If you don’t like the server you simply quit and filter it out of your searches.
Except when Chevy released the 83 Camaro they didn't remotely deactivate all the 82s and recall them without a refund. If you can’t understand this fundamental difference you are beyond saving.
The only one bringing up eshops is you. If they want to stop selling stuff that’s one thing, if they break things that they already sold me that’s a different thing. Black person
3 months ago
Anonymous
Ok then just one small favor to ask: when an eshop closed down stop shitting your diaper
3 months ago
Anonymous
And I have favor to ask you: Tell me how much they pay you to try to derail threads.
I can't tell if there are people on this board actually defending the practice of arbitrarily making games online only and unplayable even though it should be easy to just release an offline version, or if it's just shitposting.
Will this lead to anything other than certain markets being ignored so companies don't have to deal with it? That always seems to be the realistic outcome
If you are a normal person and you have been tricked by billionaires into helping these massive monopolies take shits on your chest, you are absolutely pathetic.
I sincerely hope a movement like this takes off. I'm just concerned that people on the Internet will do what they do best and completely forget about this once the next big thing catches everyone's attention.
If that happens, it'll more than likely be another decade before something like this happens again and we'll all be worse off for it. Here's to hoping people here will know what's good for them and not let this go.
Honestly, idpol shitposting aside. It would be great for there to be means of which people can host the private servers or have publicly available source codes for games that the companies themselves don't want to run anymore. Games like private servers of dead MMOs would benefit greatly from this by actually making shit easier to do by reducing grind or whatever.
If people are willing to go as far as to make mods for all sorts of currently active games, I'm sure the playerbase would be willing to keep old games alive, and even continuing to support them in their own way by making events. It would be like community servers but better.
If you frickers don't like America, leave!
We've always been a country defined by Winners. Might makes right. If you don't like it, you're free to try and complete against the strong companies and see if you survive.
when big companies start buying out their competition, there's a fundamentally moronic problem with this logic. activision got to where it was because they were pretty much the only company in their market in the united states, not because they were producing quality.
TSMT >M-muh preservation
Bulldoze all historical pre Amerigod buildings and replace them with mcdonalds and walmarts America won Anglobalism won KYS lostmediatroons
Statues fall under infrasctrure and their incredibly small maintenance cost is gladly covered by the tax payer who appreciates not living in a town where everything is falling apart.
>maintain roads, bridges and statues.
are those statues and historical monuments moron?
>tax money that could goto walkable cities and public transport
who's money are you planning to steal when all the white people leave your third world immigrant and crime-filled "walkable cities"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runyon_v._McCrary
Theres no freedom of association law in the US, if seen to be racially motivated white flight is illegal
3 months ago
Anonymous
>is that statue really a statue?
3 months ago
Anonymous
People pay for bridges and roads if there was an option to pay less taxes if it meant not preserving statues and historical BS guess what? Nobody would pay for gay bullshit comemorating Baron Chudcel of the Autism empire
3 months ago
Anonymous
>source: my ass
3 months ago
Anonymous
You'd pay extra taxes to keep around the slums where the italian mafia and Irish mob used to lynch eachother 100 years ago? >so heckin historic and must be preserved!
>tax money that could goto walkable cities and public transport
who's money are you planning to steal when all the white people leave your third world immigrant and crime-filled "walkable cities"?
it'd be nice if you morons knew that cars are what destroyed the white community.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Ok walker
3 months ago
Anonymous
What mental gymnastics caused you to come to that conclusion?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Kinoethnic divisions/racewar byrthnic neighborhoods keeping to eachother catholic neighbourhoods vs anglo-jew-prot areas etc, inter ethnic tension between wops and micks in poorgay areas, jooz and WASPS in richgay areas >Now:Sóyburbs make everything generic bland cultureless nonviolent "whites"
damn I guess China somehow operates on different laws of reality, as history has shown goverment doesn't always lead to the same phenemena happening every single time regardless of society or culture in some weird pattern that seems forever locked to human nature
3 months ago
Anonymous
only counter to goverment historically is the mafia/cartel/organized crime which is just a more overt display of rule by violence and gets overtaken by goverment everytime as the latter is able to more discretly rule by violence and trick everyone to choosing them over the obvious violence with feminized violence, which immediatly wins over large portions of society who will align with any side who shows obvious feminine social cues on a large scale
3 months ago
Anonymous
because woman are naturally attuned to feminine collective rule over masculine ones, the exception being their lover (who if they don't fit the criteria they'll just abandon eventually), and men out of fear of getting rejected by woman will follow women rules, these are the weaker men in society but their numbers are enough to frick things over
3 months ago
Anonymous
Being physically weaker doesn't matter anymore when israelites go out of their way to give these men a voice and take away the voices of others. We used to just solve problems with violence but now only brown countries do that
To everyone arguing against this: I can play Phantasy Star Online: Blue Burst right now, and Sega hasn't gone bankrupt. They also didn't lose the IP rights to Phantasy Star. So tell me again how users running their own servers is a horrible crime that would destroy the world.
i can boot up the orange box on ps3 and host tf2 servers for an extremely small community of people still interested in vanilla tf2. they never even added hats to it
Reminder this is pushed by shitskins and liberal Eurotards, most who got The Crew for free as 90% of the playerbase did.
If this passes it will only give just cause to AAA publishers to become worse, raise prices and accelerate other games shutting down their services before the bill passes.
Anyone who supports this is unironically moronic and cannot reply with any other insult than "corpo bootlicker" because it is the only insult allowed on reddit. Ross is a fricking pseudo intellectual caveman who is getting a free handjob from social media merely for his e-celebrity status, he is nothing more than a sperg who occasionally makes videos.
>to AAA publishers to become worse,
seems like a huge bonus to me. let the AAA companies get even worse so they continue to lose money and implode under all of their greed and bad practices. The AAA video game industry deserves to crash almost as much as the housing market does.
Indies and AA games will keep video gaming alive and well, just as they have done for almost 2 decades now.
>Reminder this is pushed by shitskins and liberal Eurotards, most who got The Crew for free as 90% of the playerbase did. >If this passes it will only give just cause to AAA publishers to become worse, raise prices and accelerate other games shutting down their services before the bill passes.
Okay, and then after that bill passes they're going to have to code their games such that when shut off people can continue to play them. They can go ahead and raise prices, they were going to anyway.
>Anyone who supports this is unironically moronic and cannot reply with any other insult than "corpo bootlicker" because it is the only insult allowed on reddit. Ross is a fricking pseudo intellectual caveman who is getting a free handjob from social media merely for his e-celebrity status, he is nothing more than a sperg who occasionally makes videos.
Ross actually cares about what he's discussing and is actively working to try and make the industry better. The industry is not getting better without governmental interference because the entire industry is not practicing ethically.
You're either part of the wealthy who doesn't need government to protect your rights and pay any price for your comfort and needs or you're a person who needs protection.
>litertarian cucks like op when copyright laws are used by corpos to rape consumers in the ass >zzzzz
>litertarian cucks like op when consumer protection laws are made to protect people from the abuse of big corpos >"NO YOU CANT INTERFERE IN THE FREE MARKET. STOP THIS, STOP THIS, STOP THIS"
So if you made something that sold gangbusters you shouldn't own it or make any money off it and pajeets should get rich making ai elsagate slop of your work?
Copyright laws and IP rights are the only thing keeping corporations and the highest bidders from gobbling up indies and grass roots devs. Removing copyright is the most pro corporation move you could make.
>highest bidders from gobbling up indies and grass roots devs.
im sorry what, what does copyright and ip rights, have to do with either of these two?
3 months ago
Anonymous
If there were no copyright laws, there's nothing to stop Activision from making their own undertale or whatever indie games. There's no incentive for anybody to make new IPs. Nothing new will ever created. Are you an actual moron?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>there's nothing to stop Activision from making their own undertale or whatever indie games.
And why would they do that, if I'm just gonna pirate it anyway? A big company won't take an IP if it's not profitable.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Based literal moron
3 months ago
Anonymous
3 months ago
Anonymous
So that goes to my other point. Nothing new would ever get made. There'd be nothing to pirate.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Only if your'e a soulless golem who needs money to enjoy something.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Nothing NEW would be made everything would just be inbred fanfictions.
3 months ago
Anonymous
People aren't going to work for free if society still requires money to survive. That's a whole other fundamental problem though.
Maybe art should only be allowed to exist for the sake of passion, since clearly profit has not done anything for us. All it does is guarantee inbred disney fanfiction and endless rehashed sequels.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Consoles and PCs wouldn't exist if all software was free outside of maybe command line software.
3 months ago
Anonymous
People aren't going to work for free if society still requires money to survive. That's a whole other fundamental problem though.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You're too stupid to be reasoned with. I'm actually laughing to my self that I'm not going to help you understand.
so? let them be eaten, if a company can take a indie game and make it better that's a good thing, the indie should adapt, work with the company to keep faith with the community good or just fail if he can't think of a solution
3 months ago
Anonymous
There's no reason for the company to bring the indie on board though. They'd have to pay them. They can just steal the property with no consequence.
these aren't libertarians, they're new wave communists who always go to bat for corporations and hate the idea of da chuds owning things. same people who love the say word, money stolen shit
Most leftards call themselves communist but they don't understand that there's no difference between a company that sells entertainment media products and one that sells services
It's americanized maoism. The method doesn't matter to these people and they believe the ends justify the means. They think that corporations stifling people they disagree with is a great thing.
Pirates aren't consumers. Already covered this. Also intellectual property is real. And no, owning IPs isn't a monopoly. Just figured I would cover all the bases before cracking open this can.
So as a paying customer, explain to me the mortal sin of making a backup copy of a game I bought, so I can enjoy it long after the disk has broken, or long after the hardware has stopped.
Explain to me the horrible destruction being wrought when a user makes their own dedicated servers to play an MMO with his friends, long after it shut down.
Making a backup is fine. Stealing it from the internet even if you own it is still stealing. The Pokémon red rom I have on my computer isn't a backup of the copy I owned as a kid. Yes, I stole the rom.
Tendies are so fricking stupid. You cant steal something by making a copy of it. Im not steal a jpeg i save off of Ganker from the person who posted it.
forgery/counterfeiting is a crime >wtf I didnt steal any money I just made a copy!
3 months ago
Anonymous
Then making a backup copy would be a crime too, since you're making a copy. Why did you say otherwise?
3 months ago
Anonymous
tendies are actually fricking moronic. forgeries are only illegal if you try to sell them. it is not illegal for someone to make a perfect replica of something else, its only illegal to sell it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
youre right but its less moronic rather than incorrectly making laws off of minor moral disputes. theres a tangible difference between a guy pointing a gun to your head to take your only shovel than a sneaky guy who used binoculars to see your secret recipe
At no point were you ever obligated to pay for the jpeg unless your name is Saucy
>Stealing it from the internet even if you own it is still stealing
I hope you understand that this makes zero sense. It is the exact same game. The company has been given their money. They cannot cry about theft in any capacity.
>Making a backup is fine
LOL
Ask Nintendo if ripping your own legal copy is fine. They will shit on you with the fury of a thousand rising suns. They'll go on about how all games have copy protection in them, and circumventing that is theft.
Strange how you pick and choose when breaking the law is okay. 🙂
And you're a moron because you don't understand what a license agreement. I bought my car, so if it gets stolen it's okay for me to go steal another one. That's what you literally believe.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I bought my car, so if it gets stolen it's okay for me to go steal another one. That's what you literally believe.
Stealing would imply that I have removed it from someone else's possession. This does not happen with digital property. And since we've already established that I've paid them their legal tender, the exact amount they asked for, then you cannot cry about lost sales either.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Thank you for at least acknowledging that you don't know or don't understand what a license agreement is.
3 months ago
Anonymous
And what obligation do I have to abide by a license agreement that doesn't benefit me in the slightest? You got paid for your game, stop being greedy and demanding that I pay more, especially when it's a singleplayer game that doesn't need an online connection.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Ah so now it makes sense that you don't understand a license agreement. You're literally a petulant child who just wants everything for free and doesn't understand that there's a world that exists outside of your personal experience.
3 months ago
Anonymous
A few things wrong with your post.
>petulant child
I'm an adult who doesn't like being screwed over by corporations.
>everything for free
I already paid them for their work. What obligation do I have to them afterward?
>doesn't understand that there's a world that exists outside of your personal experience.
I don't care what happens outside of my personal preference. Not gonna be your martyr, not gonna be your slave. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some Zelda romhacks to enjoy, like Indigo and that nice MM/OOT randomizer.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I think what he is saying is that he doesn't value the current state of license agreements. Which is fair. I do not either, and I seek to undermine them at every turn. Unless and until I can purchase a game and own it into perpetuity then I will not give my money for it, period. If you want to make some vague reference to EULA's and digital rights being bunk, that's all fine. I'm simply not going to subsidize unethical behavior from a company and support any movement that gets closer to giving me the ability to own goods I pay for.
>Stealing it from the internet even if you own it is still stealing
I hope you understand that this makes zero sense. It is the exact same game. The company has been given their money. They cannot cry about theft in any capacity.
>Making a backup is fine
LOL
Ask Nintendo if ripping your own legal copy is fine. They will shit on you with the fury of a thousand rising suns. They'll go on about how all games have copy protection in them, and circumventing that is theft.
Strange how you pick and choose when breaking the law is okay. 🙂
basically you just have less laws and you can fork online games without having to make more laws like an idiot
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMAF037uQwKb92TBxs9H95fEbMVj2hG4W
It just came to my mind that most likely this bill will pass on Europe so an alt solution would be to exclude the EU from online play and Steam begins restricting the sales of online games on Europe similar to how you could not get Wolf 3D in Germany.
Imagine a world where you never have to play with muslims (french), aussies, muslims (spaniards), hindus, muslims (germany), blacks (italy).
so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11, I should be able to sue the game dev? Why not microsoft for halting production of Windows 95 machines?
>if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11, I should be able to sue the game dev?
Did the devs force you to update to Windows 10?
>so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11
no, because the game was made to run on windows 95, not later platforms. the game's last patch should still function on windows 95 though
>so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11
Hindsight is 20/20. You couldn't design a game in 1996 with 2015 OS in mind. So it's perfectly fine.
No. I think what most sane people are arguing for itt is the exact opposite. The company should have no recourse to punish you legally for making their software run on modern systems, whether that’s through private servers, cracking it, or remaking it using their original software. The company has admitted it has intentionally left it dilapidated and has voluntarily bowed out of a 2-way software agreement. If they were still selling and supporting the game on modern systems then they would still be engaged with the contract entered with the consumer, allowing them to go after people doing those things described. I know this isn’t how the law is now, but it would be better if it was.
>Games shouldn’t always be online and provide means to play multiplayer without official servers >WHAT!?!??! YOU CAN’T ASK FOR THAT THINK OF THE INDIE DEVS WHO DON’T MAKE ALWAYS ONLINE GAME!!! IT’S UBISOFT’S-I MEAN SMALL INDIE DEV’S RIGHT TO MAKE PRODUCTS YOU PAID FOR NON-FUNCTIONAL AFTER SOME TIME!!!
Why are shills like this? I get you’re defending always online crap because you’re paid to do so or are bots, but at least try to not sound like broken records or sound like real people
I like how morons and shills keep regurgitating shit that was already explained in the videos. It's almost like they're specifically baiting with these fake talking points to deceive people.
the removal of the ip counter is the best thing that happened to this site, i can actually have fun false flagging and acting like different anons without having to autistically time my posts
I mean the legal system is literally designed to just makes things inaccesible and locked away, tax breaks for failed movies have put countless IPs into terrirtory where you'll be breaking the law by even acknowledging them, it only gets fixed by getting rid of bullshit laws and abolishing copyright
>abolishing copyright
Without copyright there's no obligation to pay for anything. Video games and movies would fly cease to exist except for free ones made by indies who just love games
there's no obligation to pay for anything, and people will still make video games and movies anyway, people will just shift what they use money on, instead of the product they'll spend money on things like CEMU's patreon, or spend money on smaller teams doing fork projects on things that used to be maintained by larger companies, pretty soon AI will do away with the majority of jobs anyway so saying people won't be motivated without a job isn't an argument in a post AI world
very true of the consequences. doesnt make it less right to do. im leaning to the idea that the vast majority of these consumable products only exist at the level they do because of being protected.
was there ever truly a reason for one person to be able to tell one story for his life + some arbitrary extra years?
now that the dust has settled, let's see how often the french was reference in a thread about a company in france >5 hits, 2 are me
now let's see america's count >26
impressive, very nice
>if you dont like hyper consumerism you might be a socialist or communist
Typical amerimutt low IQ logic. You dont even know what the word nuance means do you, you only see things in extremes because you have been groomed to do so by your media. What a perfect example of a good little goy you are.
they've been groomed and gaslight their entire lives to worship corpos who rape them for every penny
To elaborate, think about one of the biggest pillars of american culture, which is hyper consumerism. Hyper consumerism is the perfect example of companies grooming entire generations of people to just mindlessly consumer product and never ask any questions. Americans might try to deny it, but the rest of the world is keenly aware of the hyper consumerism because it infects every aspect of their society, including the media they produce for the world to see. It is so heavily ingrained into their psyche that they barely even notice it, almost like a frog slowly boiling in a pot of water. Most of them have never lived in a place where pharmaceutical companies who have been sued dozens of times for extremely shady shit will still be advertising on every major network television.
you socialists here trample and belittle the circumstances of the living all so you can parade your political virtue signal: taking the cigar off of some fat cat will not better the conditions that a starving third-worlder faces when the assembly shuts down.
Yes, anon, I am sure you were thinking only of that third-worlder. Which is why when I next say that we should definitely help those people and lift them out of poverty your argument will be...?
Ready for round 2?
>be ancient mesopotamia times
>council of elders is created
>"it sucks when people steal the meat you bought. hmmm... maybe we should... ban stealing? "
>"no"
>"why?"
>I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT
>REGULATE ME HARDER DADDY
>be ancient cavemen times
>council of elders is created
>"it sucks when health unga takes my boar away that i gave him 20 rocks to rent"
>"but it die and stinky"
>"IT ME BOAR, EVEN THOUGH ME ONLY RENT IT!!! ARGHHH!!"
then he throws the boar in the back of his cave to rot untouched
even your caveman allegory is moronic
what shop takes away your food after it gets old
I paid for this my cheese and if I want I will use it to grow mold
>be ancient mesopotamia
>"elder, the food storage storage is starting to rot. Maybe we should let the people take from it for use"
>"nah too much effort and cost to do that. lets just keep it to rot"
>le food analogy
fat
That's not even ancient mesopotamia, stores today do that. Well, they throw it away early but close enough.
the thing with giving away unsold foodstuffs is that the store could be responsible if whatever guy that ate the 1995 fermented ham kicks the bucket.
Software doesn't rot
actually it does, but that gets into HD / SD life cycles. tldr occasionally copy over saved files
>can't explore world, can't play single player, cant even race the AI
hmmm this is stinking!
>be ancient mesopotamia times
>council of elders is created
>"I don't like when it's story telling time and we only tell violent stories" -says one elder
>"So we should make new stories with interesting new things for the new grugs, right?"-said another elder
>"NO! WE SHOULD BAN ALL VIOLENT STORIES"- the first elder said calmly.
>we are here
now mention a law that isn't a right like taxation, if you have to resort to laws based on natural rights (which are a minority of laws) it's not a real argument
>be ancient mesopotamia
>elders meet
>hmm, the stealing ban doesn't work
>well... Maybe we could hire some people to uphold it?
>we don't have any money though.
>what if everyone pays?
>but what about the ones who don't want to pay?
>they don't want to pay because they want theft to be legal. Frick those guys
also this isn't ancient mesopotamia, the further technology increases the less you need heirarchy, essentially mankinds first technology to enfource civility
I guess OP just loves Bidens America
>be ancient mesopotamia times
>Black person
>be ancient Inca empire
>council of elders is created
>"it sucks when people sell poisoned meat to people. hmmm... maybe we should... ban selling poisoned food? "
>"no"
>"why?"
>I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT
>REGULATE ME HARDER DADDY
yea its a good thing that i cant play the thing i paid for because
>first thread archives
>next thread immediately pops up
You aren’t even false flagging you’re an actual shill
>NOOOOOO YOU CANT STOP BP FROM DUMPING OIL INTO THE OCEAN THATS GOING TO HURT SMALL BUSINESSES
>what the frick what do you mean I can't hire five-year-olds in my factory and pay them exclusively in companybux instead of dollars, what's next am I going to have to start letting them have breaks?
Did she get a 13 or a B?
She got an /3
You joke but Republicans are against child labor laws and labor laws in general. They are quite literally in favor of everything you described. They are working hard to make it happen, stripping regulations away bit by bit.
I don't see what the problem is. Now a teenager can get actual income and have some degree of autonomy.
>autonomy
Anon... being forced to work as a child is not autonomy (and believe me, they're not gonna stop at 14). This isn't simply going to be a way to make some spending money, this is a way to generate a permanent underclass of workers who work from cradle to grave. They will be forced to work by necessity at the expense of their childhood and education.
Shut the frick up commie lmao
rude
>being forced to work as a child is not autonomy
Who is forcing them?
you need money to live
you need to work to make money
ergo, you need to work to live
so if you want to be alive, you're forced to work
are you moronic or just have no self preservation instinct
I think you might be moronic if you think 14 year olds pay bills.
life isnt coercion, and its certainly not something you 'solve' through actual coercion.
As long as they've hit puberty I still don't see a problem. Farm kids even today work far younger and no one bats an eye at that. They're just going to make these kids mop shit 99% of the time.
That could happen to an adult too. Maybe they'll take safety seriously when kids are involved.
40 year old women are serving me McDonald's most of the time. I know of teenagers that can't get jobs because old ass useless Gen X and Millenials wasted their lives and now take jobs from enterprising young people.
Kids don't work in farms anymore. It's all migrants in the U.S. and Canada.
A giant factory or corporate farm yeah but there are plenty of regular farms in the US where it's just a family working.
>tries to weasel in his zoomer vs boomer shit
Nice try moron
You know as well as I do that it's an actual problem. Go to any fast food joint and you'll see workers far older than 16 are the majority.
Banning it won't make a positive difference as the underclass still exists now even without child labor. I don't see the positive of removing opportunities for people.
the autonomy of getting crushed in an industrial accident for 5 dollars an hour
Except teenagers can already get jobs you absolute omega homosexual. Who the frick do you think is serving you your McDonalds you bought for dinner? The issue is that a teenager is both too underpaid and stupid to even serve your burger correctly, why the hell would you want to same little morons hanging around industrial assembly lines?
Good, it cleans out teh gene pool
This is the most dysgenic civilization has ever been, moron.
>Who the frick do you think is serving you your McDonalds you bought for dinner?
Where do you live where it's still the 1980s?
2/3 of minimum wage service sector workers work in these kind of jobs for their entire lives.
You live in an alternate dimension that doesn't exist.
>underpaid
If you're underpaid, don't take the fricking job. If you are competitive as you say you are, find a job else where. Biden says the economy is booming and we need illegals to fill in the gaps of the job market. Don't see why Jamal nor Sanique would be threated by a teenager.
those middleclass lazy c**ts arent underpaid, and child workers (real ones that actually have to work to stave off starvation for their families) are on the smarter side for having needed to have grown up.
I wouldn't say kids that didn't develop fully in childhood from lack of nutrition and education are "on the smarter side" in reality, street smart and able to survive under duress maybe.
Good idea. Dilute the job market even more. Women and foreigners weren't enough huh?
The child rollback is to prevent immigration.
No one actually believes this shit. It will be migrant children
>well they're just doing the jobs american children won't do
>you think you're too good for 2.50/hr johnny? fricking generation beta!!!
I as a teenager would have loved to work but I would be afraid that my parents would take all my money
Good decision: I worked as a teen, one day my mom drained my bank account.
Ahaha
Your idea of autonomy is to work for a corporation? And to get money? Not to learn to take responsibility of your actions, find self-determination, and looking after yourself?
But to work for corpos.
I thought murican corpo love was a meme but its reality. If you wrote a book with characters and culture like that, you would be called a bad writer.
Money allows you to do things, yes, so it is autonomy. Working for someone is the reality for majority of the world regardless of the country you're in too so I don't know what you're point is.
>Working for someone is the reality for majority of the world regardless of the country you're in too so I don't know what you're point is
To not work for megacorps and maybe, possibly, improve the system? Doing work for money rather than because it's needed in society or brings you satisfaction is horrid way to live. You teach children that making Billionares and shareholders rich is not only the norm, but also admirable and sign of "autonomy".
Listen to yourself dude. Say it aloud to yourself
>"Making billionares and shareholders more wealthy is the sign of autonomy and the norm, this is good way to live and makes me and people around me happy"
If you don't feel wrong at all after that, then I don't know man. Maybe your society is too far gone.
>needed in society
this shit is actual nightmare fuel
>or brings you satisfaction
is not mutually exclusive to making money.
and about working for money aka creating value to sustain yourself: is there literally anything in life that is fundamentally outside that idea? everything from entertainment to soul searching is a form of nourishment for survival.
and NOT creating a value or diverting the nature in which you gain such nourishment seems more likely to frick with your natural sources of satisfaction/fulfillment/happiness
you are misunderstanding what life is about because you wish to evade it. this (internet) life and world is fake compared to the mundane outside that door to wagecuck life and world. its up to us to face it and make amends. dont lie to yourself.
My happiness doesn't need a pricetag or statistic. You trying to wrangle "Well, soul searching and corporations pseudo-enslaving is kinda the same thing... Why not just let them have 15 yo workforce, okay?" Is horrid. You attempt to constantly defend the fact that poorest people working harder sustains the richest people. That corpos use cheap labor in poorer countries.
I draw because I enjoy it. I make music because I enjoy it. I help people because I enjoy it.
Not for money, not for gain. Your life should have meaning, not just admission of "well, corpos might be corrupted, use child labor now and then, crush competition, make life miserable for millions of people while chasing profit, letting people die so line goes up, but complaining about it isn't okay. Face the reality, stop criticizing rich people"-shit.
Genuinely, get a life. Even F-List furries are living more than a wagie who desperately tries to equate happiness to how much you(and your 15 child) works for multi-billion corporations for money.
Genuinely feels like you have been groomed by rich people to "accept your place in the world". Or worse "if you just work hard enough, you can be a millionare too".
Quality post
you made it a point that your happiness MUSNT have a pricetag or "statistic"(arbitrary, your happiness isnt a measure of anyone else')
youve characterized meaning without defining its nature and how it comes into being that just lazily add "well it makes me happy" without the why.
the rest of your post just talks about superfluous other entities.
i posted this because these are my beliefs. not for politics, not for 'rich people'.
That's cool and all but again this is the reality of the world. You could decry it all you want but no practical alternatives is meaningless. People work for money because money is required to live. You need money for the games you buy, assuming this is common ground we share. Without that you don't have autonomy.
Well, see this
as well. I'm kinda sad and depressed now so I'll go to rest.
I hope you find other happiness than work for rich people. We should all be equal.
>serving alcohol at 16
don't you have to be 21 to drink?
I understand it being allowed here since you can drink at 16 here & waiter seems like a perfect job for some teenager.
But like what the frick, meat coolers & assembly lines? Fourteen year olds? What the hell are they thinking
Expanding the labor pool, obviously
Same reason why countries import people by the boatload
I had a gf working at godfather's pizza that the age of serving alcohol was actually a huge pain.
You're thinking in euro terms here possibly, a lot of normal family restaurants in the states have beer or spritzers and while a 16 yo could serve pizza without problem, when the drinks were made they "technically" had to have someone else come over and help serve them.
When the pizza ranch teen can't serve drinks it's annoying for everyone.
This whole thread is some weird pilpul since it's government restrictions that caused this problem in the first place. I can't legally go murder someone who takes away my purchase for theft.
line MUST go up
Chop chop old noseberg needs a 5th yacht and gotta raise those ceo wages. They're milking everything before it all sinks
Working at McDonald’s is more dangerous than all those jobs combined, especially in the hood.
The frying oil always scared me
working at mcdonalds in the hood is actually really safe because you're behind bullet proof glass and there are cops stationed there during business hours :^)
this is for families who operate farms. i know that's a foreign concept to you city slickers.
>paying your own kids a salary, involving taxation
Shut the frick up moron
those family farms with assembly lines and wienertails
its just so discouraging seeing the pattern of urbanization just removing the groundedness of people's perspective of how life actually works. as if living on an entirely different planet.
I hate having to give uncle sam 20% of my child's allowance, but country boys make due and pay their dues
the people who this helps the most are poverty stricken and broken families. sweatshops are unironically good, those kids would otherwise be dead in a rice farm.
So destroying your own working class is actually an act of charity because you're helping some kid across the world make a pittance while enriching yourself.
You're actually an altruist! A highly effective one at that!
ALL HAIL THE JOB CREATORS
>'your'
a national socialist huh
>some kid
oh so 'some kid' who is on absolute poverty is less 'working class' than truck drivers and some western teens who wants le latest shoes? jobs aren't being 'stolen'. get real.
You should get an award for your charity work, maybe paid through tax dollars
how survival works isnt a charity.
my last point on this and using your words: what sort of man would pride himself of living off the charity of not having to compete with literal children in broken homes. that same man isn't fighting life and limb to feed his family but doing a 'comfortable' job below his actual competency. again what sort of man can feel pride in that?
What kind of argument is this? That anyone that can physically do a job should be allowed to do it? Your argument is just that exploitative practices of a rich community in a poor one allowing for literal slave labor is perfectly ethical by simple virtue that they are able to do it. The only reason why this practice continues is ironically because of a lack of concerted effort worldwide to limit its practice.
a kid who would otherwise die in a field of intensive labour taking up a job that is much less intensive - isn't slavery.
bringing up the third party benefactors does not change the nature of what the child is doing: exchanging value he has no use for, like physical exertion, manual assembly, sewing shit; for value he does: money for food, shelter etc.
>a kid who would otherwise die in a field of intensive labour taking up a job that is much less intensive - isn't slavery.
Yes it is. You're arguing it's okay to underpay people because they are poor and would likely die without your unethical practice anyway. It's even worse because it incentivizes those better off to make a community poorer so they can more easily exploit them.
>bringing up the third party benefactors does not change the nature of what the child is doing: exchanging value he has no use for, like physical exertion, manual assembly, sewing shit; for value he does: money for food, shelter etc.
The practice is necessarily unethical and exploitative of a person who is not developed either physically or mentally. It is entirely irrelevant whether or not a child could possibly add some level of objective value in performing a task. A baby has some nutritional value, that doesn't automatically make it ethical to eat one.
well said anon
you cant define what underpaying means. one is paid what one is willing to work for.
and whatever we agree with the deserved development of a child, life is just what it is: that child, as young as a child, needs the work, the money because the alternative is death and he chooses life.
all of us have our own circumstances but the same choice is unaffected.
>whatever we agree
Repulsive human trafficker apologist
>you cant define what underpaying means. one is paid what one is willing to work for.
You absolutely can. You might argue that it's not a fair definition but it's much better than simply argue that anything goes like it's the Purge. Chaos is not a valid alternative to an imperfect order.
>and whatever we agree with the deserved development of a child, life is just what it is: that child, as young as a child, needs the work, the money because the alternative is death and he chooses life.
It is telling that only two scenarios you can see is "the child dies in the field" and "I enslave the child by making him work in a factory 20 hours a day." Sure anon.
you cannot fathom what work means fundamentally. you keep adding your politics into it no matter how many times i bring up what a worker actually faces. you dont comprehend it because you don't understand how someone lives, you havent lived.
commies, commies everywhere, pushing facist laws and trying to trick you into thinking you didn't get to this point because of prior laws not because the company has some kind of natural monopoly on a online game
>Because companies have to give breaks the commies won
Okay? Was this supposed to make sense in your head?
Behead Sega and Ubisoft. EA, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony too.
Sometimes governments work with corporations.
The Crew is running on an engine backed by the french government.
You amateurs should have done more research.
What does this have to do with the Crew at all?
Not that anon but sometimes when governments fund games they want more control over the product.
Making a shitload of money off of YOUR money, then locking the product away in a vault forever can piss off a government.
govermetns only do this so companies can be more dependent on them, Nintendo is in decline because they are using the goverment to subsidize them because goverment now views them as too influencial to foreign optics to fail
>bro where's my 82 Camaro!! STOP KILLING CARS *angry dobson face*
Why are gamers so fricking childish?
What even is your argument here?
My argument is that your outrage at normalcy in capitalism is childish
What normalcy? What are you talking about?
A company offering a good or service and then eventually no longer offering that good or service is completely normal. Gamers just tend to be selfish children who need endless coddling. Especially PC cultists.
Is it normal for a company to no longer offer a good and your good to stop working as a result? When they stopped making the 82 Camarro did the one I own stop being able to work?
>Is it normal for a company to no longer offer a good and your good to stop working as a result?
Yeah it's most likely covered in the user agreements that the service isn't everlasting and may expire.
>When they stopped making the 82 Camarro did the one I own stop being able to work?
No because that's a car and not an online video game.
Is it normal for singleplayer games to have to connect to a server and to stop working when the dev stops supporting it? Would you say this practice is common?
>No because that's a car and not an online video game.
Then why did you use a car in your example?
>Is it normal for singleplayer games to have to connect to a server and to stop working when the dev stops supporting it? Would you say this practice is common
Yes companies often stop offeringng goods and services, I already explained this.
>Then why did you use a car in your example?
Do you not also get worked up when something like the 3DS and Wii stores get taken down and Nintendo doesn't let you keep buying things? You seem like the kind of PC cultist that bases her entire identity on consumer rights, voting with your wallet, has an unhealthy hatred for Disney and copyright laws, and says things like "the mouse", and is also an unemployed NEET.
>aw shit, home depot turned off my shovel
No they didn't. But if they stopped selling that shovel you get just as pissy. Just like you do when eshops get taken down.
Did that actually make sense in your head? By what sort of moron logic does someone no longer selling something I already own impact me the same way as someone breaking/taking away something I already own?
Calm down. You're getting angry.
Oh, come on. Don't give up that easy.
Really? You think if Home Depot stopped selling a shovel I have that I would be angry? Why?
Because you get mad and throw fits when eshops get taken down.
Why do you think I get mad when eshops get taken down? You're bringing that up a lot in this topic
>you get mad and throw fits when eshops get taken down.
Is that really what this is about lol
You're seriously just a Tendie whose butthurt over people complaining about Nintendo however long ago
So it's true?
>shovel goes missing
>look up info online
>home depot discontinued the shovel, also recalling licenses on all active shovels
>call home depot
>get told my receipt of purchase was actually just a short term licensing agreement
>leaving store with receipt constituted a noverbal agreement to licensing terms allowing license to be revoked at any time
>"dont worry, Shovel 2 is on sale now!"
frick off
goes missing
Skill issue
the joke is that my license for my shovel was revoked and they removed my shovel from my home. thought about including that specifically but that the subtext was clear. apparently i am wrong about the average literacy here
>my shovel was revoked and they removed my shovel from my home.
Ok so why does your analogy require impossible events taking place and how was that a "joke"?
much like an 82 camaro being rendered inoperable once they stopped making it, my analogy requires you to make aconnection to real world events (buying a car, shovel shopping at home depot) and, heh, putting my sick and twisted wit to work imagining a silly scenario for anons to untangle...
Ok but then why do you get mad when Nintendo shuts down eshops?
i think you have mistaken me for someone else. im not that anon and, personally, havent owned a nintendo console since the first ds.
Not him but closing down a storefront or multiplayer modes are different from closing down entire access to games.
Splatoon multiplayer may be down but I can still play the single player campaign and local stuff.
If it's different then why are you also outraged when eshops shut down?
The last Nintendo system I bought was a Gamecube, why would I care about the eShops?
>The last Nintendo system I bought was a Gamecube
Ok then why do you get outraged when eshops shut down?
i think if i ctrl-f "eshop" (22 hits) you are ~60% of its mentions and also the first in the thread to bring this up in any way whatsoever when your car analogy was called shite
If the play works then why stop running it?
What makes you think I did?
The fact that all consumer rights obsessed vitrue signaling pirates like yourself always throw shitfits when eshops get taken down
23 hits
23 apt car analogies
Anon, when you assume you make an ass out of you and me.
You still haven’t told me how much they’re paying you.
You've been conditioned to believe anyone who bothers you is paid to do so. You must have run out of arguments.
> You've been conditioned to believe anyone who bothers you is paid to do so.
No, I’m just being generous and assuming you’re not actually as stupid as you act.
>You must have run out of arguments.
You already conceded to me.
this poster gets upset when people emulate nintendo games and also seethes at basic consumer rights
interesting
Not really. I'm in this thread on record telling people to pirate games probably at least a 23 times now.
how the frick do you lose a shovel
>dude, like, you can't just own things, corporations should be able to take them away at any time for any reason
>don't like it? what? do you base your entire identity around not getting fricked in the ass? what's wrong with you???
Must have quoted the wrong post. I didn't say these things.
no, you did since you seem to think a corporation deciding to stop offering a service means it's okay for them to take things away from you that you've already purchased
Maybe read the service agreement next time. If it wasn't plainly stated then file a class action lawsuit since you will be justified in doing so. But I'm sure the company's lawyers weren't that shortsighted so I doubt it.
EULAs are not legally binding. Maybe the publisher should put an end of service date on the packaging? Oh wait, they of course they won't because then people won't buy the fricking game.
Nah you'll still buy it and still be just as hilariously outraged when it gets pulled
>Nah you'll still buy it
I have not bought an ubisoft game in over 15 years now.
> still be just as hilariously outraged when it gets pulled
Why am I not allowed to be outraged at corpos trying to steal from people?
You're allowed to be as annoying and obnoxious as you please.
Why does people owning things annoy you so much?
It doesn't
Then why are you complaining about people wanting to own things?
I'm not
service agreements are a fricking joke if they aren't forced to be read and agreed with BEFORE payment
Fool me twice, shame on me. Maybe be better?
>Yes companies often stop offeringng goods and services, I already explained this.
The answer is no, it is not normal for singleplayer goods to have to connect to a server, and for the game to stop working once support ceases.
>Do you not also get worked up when something like the 3DS and Wii stores get taken down and Nintendo doesn't let you keep buying things?
No, because I didn't pay for the store. You are really bad at analogies.
> You seem like the kind of PC cultist that bases her entire identity on consumer rights, voting with your wallet, has an unhealthy hatred for Disney and copyright laws, and says things like "the mouse", and is also an unemployed NEET.
You sound like you are having a really rough time coming up with a cogent argument, but I don't blame you. You sound more adept at making up things in your head than explaining yourself.
No I think I did a pretty good job explaining myself. Yes you do get mad when eshops get taken down, no need to lie to yourself. Yes it's normal for companies to stop offering services.
>Yes you do get mad when eshops get taken down, no need to lie to yourself.
Why would I get mad when eshops get taken down, anon? What does this have to do with what we are discussing?
>Yes it's normal for companies to stop offering services.
I never said it is not normal for companies to stop offering services. I said that it not normal for companies to cease supporting a good and for that good to be rendered inoperable immediately as a direct result. This isn't true even for digital goods, most games that are no longer supported by developers are still perfectly playable but simply do not have access to multiplayer functions.
>Why would I get mad when eshops get taken down, anon?
I don't know but I fully expect your outrage to be found in the next WiiU/3DS eshop takedown thread
Because you're one of those annoying consumer rights advocates and this is one of the things you freaks constantly bring up.
>I don't know but I fully expect your outrage to be found in the next WiiU/3DS eshop takedown thread
Why? You keep bringing this up but you can't even offer a vague reason why you brought it up. It sounds like you're autistic and this just came into your head lol. Why would I get mad at an eShop disappearing? It doesn't do anything to the products I own, it has nothing to do with consumer rights, why do you think they're at all related? I'm genuinely confused at your thought process.
>Why? You keep bringing this up but you can't even offer a vague reason why you brought it up
You're the one that keeps asking me to defend the car analogy. If you don't want to talk about it then stop talking about it.
Anon...you switched to the eshop after I pointed out the flaws in your car analogy. That's my point. It came out of nowhere. Nothing we are discussing has anything to do with any eshops. Are you okay? Are you on drugs?
There was no flaw in the car analogy. Chevy stopped selling 82 Camaros. Nintendo stopped selling WiiU and 3DS eshop games. Completely normal stuff. Both should trigger you since you're another one of those cookie cutter consumer rights activist.
When Chevy stopped selling 82 Camaros, they didn't get taken away from everyone who bought one, you stupid homosexual.
games get shut down all the time
Ok? And? How does that change the argument?
Same argument I've been making since the start: this is normal, and you're getting outraged at normalcy.
>not owning things is normal
It isn't. I can still go back and play all my old games. This only really started in the 2010s when publishers abandoned dedicated servers because they wanted more control.
>I can still go back and play all my old games.
You actually own those games because they're offline physical copies.
No, I can still play my older digital games as well. Only post-2012 games are like this.
>You actually own those games
Actually, you don't, and that’s the problem here.
Chevy didn't require you to phone their 1-800 number to start the engine every time, and then just discontinue it one day.
Yeah how fricking stupid would consumers be to buy a product like that. Couldn't be me.
>corporation with anti-consumer practices steals from consumers
>haha you deserve it
>NOOOOOOO STOP DON'T TRY TO CHANCE CONSUMER LAWS PLEASE THINK OF THE CORPORATION
>buys an online only game
>buys a digital only game
>gets mad that she doesn't own anything after consciously making these decisions
>buy game at launch
>no or minimal drm
>major update hits
>denovo drm and always online
nothing personnel kid
name one (1) example of a game that shipped without denuvo and "always online" then added it later.
Monster Hunter Rise
Assassin's Creed Mirage
Gotham Knights
That being said, most Denuvo games aren't always online, but it often acts that way due to its terms or various bugs.
capcom added enigma to 15 year old games
>these updates that I agreed to are happening
Yes.
Yeah haha, if you get defrauded that's your problem, pal. Your demented mother swindled of her life savings? Tough luck. Child robbed of his jacket, shoes and belongings? Buy private escort.
It's digital and online. You never owned the game to begin with so you didn't lose anything.
Yup, every man for himself. Hope that car jacker isn't more nimble than you!
that carjacker doesn't have to outrun me, he has to outrun a bullet from my gun.
THERE WAS A FIREFIIIIGHT
If there aren't consumer protections, then people will just pirate or stop buying entirely and the industry will crash.
except this has never been the case, and certainly won't be the case in a market where nobody is providing a quality service with consumer protections as an alternative.
>except this has never been the case
it will be, since people like owning things
>people like owning things
Then why do you buy digital licenses expecting to own a game?
No people will continue buying and playing fun online games understanding its a limited time experience and won't throw fits on the intetnet when it inevitably gets taken down.
>moronic analogy gets BTFO
>moves goalpost
Every time.
In capitalism it's supposed to be the opposite. It's literally supposed to put power in the hands of the consumer at the expense of the corporation. If the company fricks up or does wrong its their problem, not the consumers.
>Because you're one of those annoying consumer rights advocates and this is one of the things you freaks constantly bring up.
I can smell hamburgers with a side of fries and an XL cola when I read this sentence.
Yes I am a white American. Does this also trigger you?
No such thing.
Sure.
Well, it was obvious you're trailer trash by your garbage opinion, but thanks for the confirmation
>didn't capitalize White
Nice try, israelite boy.
>No because that's a car and not an online video game.
That's fast becoming a non-destinction.
man you sound like you vacuum 80 dicks a day into your mouth
It's actually 90 per day. You still lost the argument btw.
'82 camaros are still out there, running and driving for the people who want them. your analogy is bad and half thought out
And whatever game you're crying about can be pirated and made to run on private servers.
This is untrue.
Why?
in the case central to this thread, it actually can't.
Then it's a skill issue
ah, its bait then 🙂
I am voting with my wallet to bribe EU politicians into BTFOing games as a service.
Why are americans such prostitutes for abuse?
>oh yes corporations, take my rights away HARDER! TAKE MY BREAK TIME AND DOCK MY PAY OOOOO AAAAA
You're not superior in anything but obesity you fricking mutt. Your country is infested with Black folk and your white women spread themselves open for them and openly mock you.
You have the lowest IQ and literacy rates in the entire western world.
You eat processed food like candy along with candy.
Your military is a paper tiger and folds to sandBlack folk.
You bend the knee to Israel at every turn.
Just fricking die you piece of shit.
I suppose you are confident in telling me which country you are from? If not, I’ll have to shoot you with my legally owned firearms
im from india you stupid mutt. we will pass ahead of you and no muh shitting streets propaganda will change that. and even before we do that we will infiltrate and stablish the caste system in every company of your disgusting country so its even easier to assimilate it when were done
SIRS DO NOT REDEEM
>no muh shitting streets propaganda will change that
bruh, you shit on the street, bro
jimmies status: rustled
You seem mad.
The tl;dr for Ross' crusade is that he's tech-illiterate and as a result his demands are vague and stupid.
He's trying to argue that games are a good legally distinct from all other software (it's not), that purchase of the game entitles you to permanent use (it doesn't), and that by not leaving the game in a permanently playable state after support ends (undue imposition for an entire branch of software development) or releasing the necessary tools and data for the community to build out their own version (flagrant violation of IP rights) devs are violating consumer rights.
Ross and the dipshits spamming Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work - they just want to play games for free after support ends. You can see their total lack of understanding in how they argue - point out that plenty of modern software dev relies on scalable clouds and enterprise licenses and isn't just a singular exe that runs on any windows machine and they'll just parrot "but (game from mid 2000's) has community servers!"
It's remarkably stupid and just another way to funnel anger over shitty business practices away from efforts that mighy actually work, like demanding unions or breaking up the mega-publishers.
>I definitely think this is a prime time to try and see if anything can be done
The problem is that you can't get "anything" done, you need to get a CONCRETE AND WELL-THOUGHT OUT GOAL done. Law requires great specificity.
"I want all games to work after support ends" is some dumb vague bullshit that is divorced from reality. It's a non-starter.
"All Software that requires an internet connection to run must be clearly labelled as such," now that's something reasonable that might pass muster if the committee can work out details like "what constitutes clearly labelled" (this is why laws take forever and a billion people and committees)
I think the closest thing I can think of to this general idea that has an articulable and reasonably-arguable point would be something like "Software that runs entirely on the client but requires digital rights management authorization from a home server must disable the authorization requirement within X days of the home server shutting down."
Problem is that if a company is shutting down their auth server they're probably about to not exist and thus don't really care about the potential for a civil judgement.
ubisoft shill bots have entered the thread
Wow, that's a very compelling argument. Can you explain why the Crew will no longer be able to be played and absolutely required company internet connection to function at all? Can you let us know how requiring gaming companies be incapable of developing a game such that it requires an internet connection to function regardless of whether it is a multiplayer game will impact future games development, and how disallowing this practice would hurt consumers more than help them? Because unless you can, I think you're a huge mega homosexual shill and should be fed to a woodchipper feet-first
>Can you explain why The Crew
The Crew and whether or not it in particular can run with just the disabling of auth (there is no evidence that it can) is irrelevant.
>Can you let us know how requiring gaming companies be incapable of developing a game such that it requires an internet connection to function regardless of whether it is a multiplayer game will impact future games development
Games and general software cannot be pulled apart in IP law, so any restrictions made here would impact ALL software development. It would essentially kill all distributed server architecture as a whole as the costs of compliance are prohibitive. In terms of just games, you'd see most multiplayer games simply stop development entirely because absolutely no one wants to build their own old-school server bank and no one is willing to just give out the entirety of their codebase to be mined by users.
Eat my entire butthole you dumb motherfricker
>this is true in the many parts of the EU.
It isn't. The cases Ross cites do not say what he thinks they say. In fact they explicitly say the opposite.
>Games and general software cannot be pulled apart in IP law, so any restrictions made here would impact ALL software development.
Why can games and general software not be pulled apart in IP law?
>why
because there is no distinction and figuring out where the line is would be an intensive and almost certainly futile effort that has no benefit. Software is software. The same laws govern Devil May Cry, Microsoft Excel, and Flight Sim 95.
>would you like to do my homework for me
Literally just google them.
My favorite is the EU case where the judgement literally says "These are a good only insofar as this specific law applies and not broadly"
>because there is no distinction and figuring out where the line is would be an intensive and almost certainly futile effort that has no benefit. Software is software. The same laws govern Devil May Cry, Microsoft Excel, and Flight Sim 95.
Why would that be futile? It's central to the problem. The issue is not whether or not a corporation should have to support a game into perpetuity but whether it is ethical to produce a game that requires internet access to function when it is not necessary. That should be a perfectly reasonable ask and if the laws are not capable of accommodating that then the law should obviously change.
>The issue is not whether or not a corporation should have to support a game into perpetuity
Tell that to Ross lol
You kids and your backpedaling
>It's about games requiring access when it's not necessary!
It's not, but see
>Tell that to Ross lol
>You kids and your backpedaling
Ross explicitly stated that he is against devs being forced to support a game into perpetuity and far beyond the scope of his argument. You've continued latching onto this because the mere notion that it may be possible in some way to penalize companies from requiring a service to play any game at all terrifies you. Why I don't know
Anon you change what it's about every time you're shown to be moronic
It's sad
Point out a single time that Ross ever said that companies should be forced into supporting games into perpetuity. In fact, point out the time where I myself said that in this topic. You're so adamant to be a contrarian that you've constructed strawmen to argue with. So I'll congratulate you, good job on pointing out that no company should have to support games forever. But that's not what is being argued for.
>Tell that to Ross lol
>You kids and your backpedaling
Either you don't even understand the argument being presented or you are intentionally being intellectually dishonest.
>The CJEU ruled that for the purposes of the Directive, software is a "good" regardless of the medium on which it is supplied. Consequently, computer software supplied to customers by granting a perpetual licence does constitute a "sale of goods".
you may now shit your pants and tell me to vote with my wallet now.
>for the purposes of the directive
that choice of language seems pretty fricking important, anon.
>doesn't even know what the Directives refer to
anon...
>It isn't. The cases Ross cites do not say what he thinks they say. In fact they explicitly say the opposite.
would you like to prove that to us?
Nothing you said provided a justification for why games must be allowed to be always online. You must now have a nice day.
I love people like you, so determined to be right that you twist the truth further and further.
>The Crew and whether or not it in particular can run with just the disabling of auth (there is no evidence that it can) is irrelevant.
No it isn't. Are you insane? That is like a car you bought 6 years ago not starting because the manufacturer doesn't want to upkeep a server it used to connect for GPS and social media applications at startup. I bet that you would genuinely hop to defend Ford in same case.
>"B-Buh the car would still work without the server..."
And so would The Crew.
Corporate bootlicking ape. You're worse than tankies
>(there is no evidence that it can)
https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/
>He's trying to argue that games are a good legally distinct from all other software (it's not)
this is true in the many parts of the EU.
>muh america though
cool, he already conceded the case is lost in America because one guy (no one on Ganker btw check the archives) gave a case precedent from the early 90s about it.
If a game I bought can’t be played until I die, it shouldn’t exist. Also a game that can be played single player shouldn’t require an online connection and if it does, the servers should be required to stay up indefinitely or the game patched to run offline.
>Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work - they just want to play games for free after support ends.
Yes. It's not our job to know or care. If it's impossible for them to have done otherwise they should have never made those games in the first place. If you think otherwise you're business illiterate.
>the corpo ballwashers' version of "ITS NOT MY JOB TO EDUCATE YOU"
>no we can't make cars with seatbelts
Not my problem
>for free
It’s not for free, that’s why we paid in the first place.
Amen
Genuine question about IP law. Shouldn’t it be common sense that a community should be able to host their own servers, disseminate the game, mod it , emulate it, etc. if the IP holder has purposely ended support? The counter argument for this is that if corporations don’t “defend” and claim their IP they can legally lose rights to it. So isn’t the issue with the IP laws in the first place? People should be able to play Splatoon 1 on private servers without Nintendo going after them and Nintendo shouldn’t be at risk of losing their rights to Splatoon. Seems like there can be a happy medium.
That is why shit sequels get released. Same thing for movies. They put out some random garbage with the name attached to refresh their rights.
oh so thats why we're getting a beatlejuice sequel
>media literacy
Stopped reading there
>that purchase of the game entitles you to permanent use
sure it can, the stealing of data is an abstract concept and void once you prove the hardware you own to copy information (which is inactionable) is a right granted to anyone alive who can observe the world around them and act on it
tl:dr you would download a car and it would hurt nobody
>Ganker genuinely don't understand or care how software development functions or how their games work
Release the server software. That's all they have to do you dumb frick.
>"The tl;dr"
>writes a tl;dr
tl;dr
>and isn't just a singular exe that runs on any windows machine
It actually is.
lol
oof
I think a fair setup is they either release all the server tools for the game, or they relinquish all rights to the game once they stop hosting servers for it.
Game isn't profitable to run? Oh hey then people can do whatever they want with it and you can't sue them, haha
>I HECKIN LOVE MEGACORPS WITH NO OVERSIGHT
>EXPLOIT ME HARDER DADDY
Going out on a limb here with this brave opinion:
Frick Ubisoft and their shitty "games", I mean live action services
Frick the government and their shitty regulations
this just means you support this status quo. why aren't you advocating for less government regulation for consumers btw
Yes, wanting Ubisoft to go out of business is status quo. Now let's have a 5 paragraph long semantics debate on philosophies of government in this basket weaving forum.
I think it's just wild that ubisoft has sent para-legals on here to argue a point.
In the end we all know the courts will invalidate the EULA based on the fact that everyone thought they were buying a game not renting a license to one.
>sent para-legals on here to argue a point.
not even a point. it seems to be a constant deflection from the actual point to tangents seemingly connected but not really (constant blame shift to store level issues, saying this is a demand for "infinite service", etc.)
Wait so you're saying your not some jnr law grad shill.
You're actually arguing this point because... why are you arguing this point here? It doesn't make sense.
Everyone thinks you're a c**t. Your argument is shit, you're throwing your toys out of the pram over some very simple legislative instruments that any design team can account got going forwards.
Being serious for a second all it takes for a SP game is a patch to be put in the digital copyright data vault they submit to the EUIPO and other relevant agencies.
If they chose to stop selling the title then you can issue a request to release the online requirement patch.
After the first few cases everything will be a biz process for every game made in the EU.
None of this is the issue you're making it out to be.
mate im pro-offline capabilities, im just drawing attention to the half thought out distractions being brought up in this thread
I don't care if the government fricks with companies, just don't frick with citizens, companies are not citizens
is it that hard
>I HECKIN LOVE BIG CORPORATIONS
>NICKEL AND DIME ME HARDER DADDY
That’s the current gaming industry right now.
And it fricking sucks.
>licking the boots is based when it is a corporation
multinationals own governments so being pro corp is moronic
I like the part where Ganker suddenly has pro gaas diehards and anti player hosted server hardliners the moment there's any kind media buzz about it being bad.
Ganker is full of people who think they're trolling and being contrarian, but they're really just temporarily embarrassed CEOs mad people are questioning the status quo
Defending normalcy actually isn't that hard, no need for me to get mad over it. You seem mad however.
Every major publisher has shills on Ganker and that has been the case for over a decade.
It's people who initially sided against Ross, realized they were wrong but couldn't accept it and now they keep digging that hole deeper. It's been happening on Ganker as long as I can remember, this is just an advanced case.
mold wins
The bigger issue here is that selling games as a service isn't illegal, nor is providing services for a limited amount of time. In fact, there's not a single industry where anyone is expected to provide a service indefinitely, especially without any continued compensation, making Ross' argument pretty weak.
Could the game in question (The Crew) have been made to work offline? Sure, the Forza Horizon series has the same sort of online functionality, but doesn't require an internet connection whatsoever. Is Ubishit legally or contractually obligated to make changes for that to happen, either during the initial development of future games or after the end of service announcement for the current ones? No.
Rather than delusionally hoping that the government does something about it (which it likely won't), people should simply stop being moronic and not support those practices.
>b-but voting with your wallet doesn't work
Maybe not every time, especially in regards to what those big companies do, because there's a legion of morons out there willing to pay for that shit. Supporting the developers who don't do this shit does work though, and there's no shortage of games that don't follow the GaaS model.
How much can it possibly cost a company to just keep 5% to 20% of their game's servers running? You're defending the suits, OP.
Frick, people aren't even asking for this. Just give the ability for players to host their own servers.
>imagine being so contrarian you defend big business to just take away your rights to playing videos game that you refuse government intervention
thats right, conservatives are cucks
libertarians aren't even really in the same tent with the rest of conservatism anymore.
Bug business can go OUT of business if it stops making money. Big govt’ can subsidize big business if it gets involved, and they ALWAYS subsidize all corps. And the last thing I want is VIDEO GAME corps getting tax money for stupid shit.
You want a non-compliance verdict?
Unfortunately, the technology to make dedicated servers were lost when Carmack slipped and bumped his head in the early 2010s. You can't make companies do the impossible.
No, but companies can be punished if they can't fix their frickups.
>consumer protection is le bad
kill shareholders, behead private equity, roundhouse kick a vulture capitalist into the concrete
>1924
>anon learns about black lung, child labor, disease ridden factories and people falling into vats and getting turned into lard
>WHAT ARE YOU A FRICKING COMMIE, IF WE REGULATE THAT STUFF SOCIETY WILL COLLAPSE!
False equivalency. Labor laws were bad for kids and adults back then.
Now we have actual labor safety regulations, it would be an entirely different climate.
t. willingly and happily eats his FDA approved rat shit
I accept your concession. It's clear you're not capable of debate so best to not involve yourself with politics from here on out.
>you cannot make steam refund games otherwise the service will just break because people can easily troll it
this is what you guys sound like.
The best part is even if they're correct on that insane assumption it doesn't mean anything. Just because a company can't undo their bad business practices doesn't mean they can't be punished for them.
>lmao our criminal negligence got your husband killed but what do you want us to do? Bring him back to life?
>hating the Anglo common law tradition
>NOOOO DON'T USE THE COURTS TO DETERMINE THE LAWFULNESS OF ACTIONS JUST LET ME DO WHAT I WANT
they want to overturn anti-corpo regulation and rulings and will say nothing about pro-corpo regulation and rulings
it's a real thinker
>corpoisraelite shill tries to call a pro-consumer grass roots campaign by the people "government regulation"
Many such cases!
Unironically yes. More government regulation against shitty business practices.
>it's another thread where people go about on the topics as it's all or nothing
at least it's one liner shitposting for the sake of baiting, how long till we get that one person who is going to go full reply mode
Yes, I am in favor of big government regulating away planned obsolescence of video games.
I got The Crew for free. Can I participate?
>umm ackshually it's a bad thing when the government protects your rights and interests
frick off
>Owning your game's is big government now
I hate reactionaries so fricking much holy shit
Regulate the soulless, israelite corpos? Yes please.
Reminder that any attempt to frame this as political or related to "culture war" nonsense in any way is a blatant D&C attempt by shills. Don't fall for it.
you made this thread as ironic shotpost but there's a lot of burgers that unironically think this way
Theres a very easily aggravated demogrpahic that seems to be vehemently against anything changing.
If X doesnt bother them then anyone complaining about X will just cause unnesecery trouble and might make things worse.
Any possibility of things turning out for the better doesnt exist because they dont seem to have the capacity to imagining things and only focus on the now as in "Its not so bad, shut up".
>Any possibility of things turning out for the better doesnt exist
To be fair nothing does ever get better.
This isn’t about “regulation” it’s about establishing the meaning of property and ownership in the age of digital service-products.
It's sad that everyone has ignored your post.
>Corporation makes your life worse because it profits them.
>Anon is okay with that because "muh freedom".
>Doesn't want to use elected representatives to help.
>that one anon who keeps replying to OP to try and bait (You)s
it's simple
once you are going to end service for a product, release the source code and make it FOSS. I'd recommend using a license that doesn't allow you to re sell the stuff as your own, but licenses don't mean shit
>release the source code and make it FOSS
no one is going to do that and releasing binaries for a dedicated server or just patching in an offline mode is sufficient
Libertarians and Small Government Republicans should be stoned to death.
No, that's just communists. Those people should be forced to live in their migrant neighborhoods instead
Already happening, but not enough
you just know his antifa Hispanic girlfriend was soaking herself when the crazed simian brute got in her face after killing her vegan soiboyfriend.
all this guy wants is to be able to host servers themselves after the game dies. the devs dont even allow that. effecively fricking you over. they could just shut the game down after a few months making your purchase invalid
I do love proper regulation and that's part of why I am against this moronic campaign, this is a matter the state should be dealing with more directly
Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
No, shutting off a game you were able to play for 10+ years and YOU agreed could shut down in the far future isn't "stealing"
>Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
It's Indians and Russians training for social media astroturfing before they go live on facebook for the election
What do you mean? The poster going off on America constantly is totally genuine in a thread about a French company.
Your future is South Africa
>the absolute audacity of expecting something you bought not to be taken away from you
I can see your nose from here.
>pay for admission to show
>show ends
>HOLY HEKIN MONEY STOLEN REDDIT
>actually our projector stopped working
>can I get a refund
>no
>actually our projector stopped working
>can I get a refund
"Yes it's under warranty"
>but I bought the digital online projector and not the physical one
"We are not liable for your decision making, please exit the line, this line is for people who own products"
for my entire life buying a game has meant owning it
up until recently, now buying a game is suddenly no longer owning it and it can be taken away at any time for any reason? how about no? how about put an expiration on the cover? oh no, would that hurt sales? ohhhh that's too bad 🙁
>for my entire life buying a game has meant owning it
except that's not fundamentally true. it meant you owned a license for it and it always has. it's never meant that you "owned" the game.
Don't care about your homosexual semantics. I can still go back and play those older games and they can't be taken away from me so I own them. Why are you defending not owning things so hard? Wouldn't you like to own things instead of suddenly not being able to own things?
>I'm right because I reject your arguments! ha ha I win!
I'm not talking about technicalities. All you're doing is having a reddit tier fit
You're arguing semantics over the copy of a physical game actually being a license to play it. My point is that that is irrelevant. I can play the older game today. I can't play the newer game that the publisher decides to shut down and that is the distinction that matters. My only point is that the newer game should be left in a state where I can still play it after service ends.
and my point that the legal difference here is that you own a physical copy that can't be disabled. LEGALLY the only difference. It makes no practical difference because nintendo isn't going to come revoke your physical copy of mario because it isn't practical. Learn the difference between objective truths and subjective truths and stop crying like a woman.
Not an argument, bootlicker.
>semantics
The law
>they can't be taken away from me
Legally they can, and legally you don’t actually own them. That’s why this is a big deal, but you’re too stupid to realize this.
>Legally they can, and legally you don’t actually own them
I'd like to see sega legally break into my house and take my copy of sonic adventure 2 for the sega dreamcast.
If they really wanted to they could sue your ass to kingdom come. Both Bungie and Nintendo have already done stuff like that. You literally need their permission to play legally. If you had half a brain you'd realize how stupid this is and try to do something about it.
>I play those older games
>so I own them
Not really. Someone who pirated those same games you bought is also playing them and they own nothing so there has to be more to it.
Blame Valve, the proprietor of owning nothing.
ehhhh this isnt a store issue that is having attention drawn to it here. i bought Starforge in early access in like 2013 and the devs pulled it from all store fronts. i can still download and play that game a decade later. the issue is with the published completely revoking access to a perfectly working game
Pirate it
Hurts to be called out doesn't it?
>Ever notice how these threads are just third worlder indians and africans raging about America?
Every time I see people complaining about their rights being infringed they're non americans and non white. Very curious. Do these people ever stop complaining?
I for one support kicking big corpo in the balls, even if it requires me playing tattle tale to the government.
Frick around, find out.
>oppression by government bad
>oppression by corporation good
Maybe some people dont want to get fricked up the ass by either of them. Why do you low IQ morons always have to make everything so black and white and devoid of nuance. Getting paid nothing by your corpo overlords who own all the land and housing isnt any better or worse than getting paid nothing because your government is incompetant and just left the money printer on the point where your currency is useless. Like almost anything in life, there has to be a balance, you cant let anything ever go too far in any direction.
HANK! HAAAANK! DONT CALL FOR COMPROMISE HERE! THEY'LL KILL YOU HAAAANNNK!
anon, this is the shitpost thread where where people make one liners to bait replies
it was more fun when unique posters were visible and you saw a 20 minute reply that didn't increase the post count
some people are shitposting yes, but im afraid that many people here are genuinely moronic.
Maybe, but I don't see many replies where it goes full genuine autismo that look like
>jksdgjksadfjkasdfj
3j6ijdkasdkfkfaf
tuasjdf
fdashfjhadjfafd
>38usdagasdf
werkjkdjakfas
in consecutive reply chains
barry, eric, and acgay must all be busy autismposting on another board.
>Maybe some people dont want to get fricked up the ass by either of them.
Then why did you buy digital software?
I try to buy physical media when I can but sometimes digital is just easier and so I pirate that. I rarely ever buy digital media other than steam games and ive never lost access to any of my steam games, even ones that are no longer available for sale havent dissappeared from my library.
The second that stops being true I will no longer buy games on steam. I trust them because they have never given me a reason not to trust them.
In my times people were real hackers and they just modified the game. Crying daddy government to play your ubi-slop is so lame
this whole copyright shit or whatever wasn't really a problem back then with games. I'm sure companies shut down their games so you don't just keep playing them and eventually have to buy their new stuff.
This is a better fight but ross is too moronic. Just let people freely modify their games, make emulators and reverse engineering, private servers,etc. It's much more important if you care about videogame preservation and freedom in general.
Stop posting Jacques
This whole situation shows how capitalism went wrong. Normally, it's supposed to be that running a business is a risky gamble at the best of times, so you've got to ensure you make the best product for the consumer or else you could go bankrupt any day. Now, that why dynamic has been flipped on its head. If a company does something moronic it stays in business and the consumer gets blamed. Regulation was part of the old way of capitalism, too. If your company could only stay in business via a polluting technique that was made unworkable by pollution laws the answer you got was "oh well, that's capitalism, adapt or die". Nowadays that company would just throw a temper tantrum to the government.
>I PAID A LOT OF MONEY FOR THIS CONCERT SO IT CANNOT EVER END I WANT IT FOREVER GOVERNMENT SAVE ME
>Wake up
>Corpo slaves having a meltie
Good, good
Sure.
>I HECKIN LOVE BIG GOVERNMENT
No you don't. You hecking love unlimited corporate power. With how much you're fellating them and advocating for them to be able to do whatever the frick they want, even at your own and everyone else's expense.
Consumer rights aren't communism. Why are you like this?
It's like you're deathly afraid of regulation when it's the government. But how can you be so blind to the fact that corporations have just as much if not more power than the government? They can and do regulate you too. But for some reason you appear to be fine with it when it's corporations. How come?
>dont worry bro companies will totally self regulate bro dont worry
>government reg is bad bro please dont reevaluate this we will be good for stock holders and self reg bro
big pharma has been flagrantly flauting regs for decades and its still better than life without those regs that selfsame companies say makes it expensive to operate in america
if the govt doesn't end shit like this, it will keep happening forever. what else is there to be done
Do you own stock in the company or something?
Frick I hate ancaps.
I'm going to assume your diaper shitting was directed at me. Yes I do own stocks in many companies. Learn how ETFs work.
Why are chuds so obsessed with owning things?
you vill live in ze pods and eat ze bugs. companies like blackrock are buying up all houses from banks in order to prevent people from owning them. rent is far more expensive than a mortgage. this is the future you want.
You mean the housing crisis that was caused by parasitic landlords that do everything they can to stop new housing projects just so their house go up in value? I just want cheap housing
if you want the real redpill on the housing economy then start looking up zoning laws for your city or wherever. these people literally make it illegal to make more than a certain amount of houses at any one time just so they can keep the prices hyper inflated due to low supply.
oh another thing i forgot to mention is look up how big fricking parking lots are in big cities and realize how they dont need that much space and it could be used to build more housing
>build expansive suburb hell scapes as tumorous growths outside of major cities because miles of real estateis spent paving over earth for those suburb commuter vehicles
its really an ouroboros huh
a lot of those parking lots were built back when the company that owned the building actually had customers. there's a mall in my city built in the 80s when people went to malls, and its parking lot is as big as a neighborhood. of course there's less than 10 cars there at any given time now, but it would cost a lot of money to tear it up so they just leave it there.
it's always about money/
It's genuinly baffling how so many people see being abused and raped by the elite as a virtue.
Corporations successfully made undyingly loyal brand slaves years ago DUDE.
The same "progressive" morons that cry out shit like "EAT THE RICH" will then turn around and gloat about said rich people overreaching to hell and back in your fictional media with strawmen like "LOL YOU SAID LE Black person WORD AND GOT BANNED YOU LE GET WHAT YOU DESERVE" whenever people are denied playing a game they paid for, for literally ANY reason.
Hell, in blizzard's case they were saying it a few months ago when people were getting banned for using the voice lines they themselves put into the game. They are by far and away the biggest defenders of the economic elite, and that's why consoomers are the plague killing vidya.
Homer Simpson is a good image to represent someone as simple minded as you thinking we should get the government involved in things
I agree, we should let amazon break into our houses to see if we've stolen any packages this week
They still think they live in a Christian Anglo paradise
The elite giveth, the elite taketh. I'm acknowledging both. You're getting outraged at both.
Amerimutt battered wife syndrome, basically. Yes, even the men are battered wives in America.
>ME
Are you a corporation?
So why is government bad but corporation doing the same good?
both are bad but when given the opportunity I will happily use one to frick the other when it benefits me the same way they try to use each other to frick me every chance they get
You won't be using anything to frick anyone here since nobody can mandate a corporation exist forever to service your product indefinitely.
that's not what's being asked at all and the more you try to strawman, the more disingenuous you come across
see also
I'm straw manning because I don't expect mandates of infinite existence to come down from the heavens.
If your game is based on having a large online presence you are buying a product with an expiration date.
>I'm straw manning
agreed, thank you for conceding
>you are buying a product with an expiration date.
no, I don't think so
I win. You lose. Now run along and play your single player game that was never popular because of online and only has 12 current players in its lobby.
you win what? at boasting about using logically fallacies and admitting to strawmanning after being proven wrong?
I've been proven wrong and yet you have no legal grounds for what you are saying. If you did the crew wouldn't be shutting down. Here in reality land, it is.
The crew shutting down is completely irrelevant to the point. Games are allowed to end service, that's not the issue. The issue is the game should continue to function, either with a release of dedicated servers or an offline patch.
yes this is why i brought up .hack//fragment because even though the official servers are shut down, fans had very little trouble setting up emulated servers.
That's nice, but it should not be on the onus of the consumer to fix the game broken by the publisher.
i feel like there is a distinction between broken by the publisher and simply barring access. the crew is not broken, is still playable.
Pirates aren't consumers.
obviously not and consumers is exactly what the game needs to stay alive. GASP you mean pirates don't contribute to a games health?!?!
>the reason for the thread existing is irrelevant
Mods, clean it up.
you can continue to ignore the point but it just makes you look dishonest and/or moronic
>The issue is the game should continue to function, either with a release of dedicated servers or an offline patch.
Hack it and set up your own servers.
>Hack it and set up your own servers.
Not my responsibility. I didn't intentionally break the game. The publisher did. It's their problem.
Then pound sand instead of playing the game you want to play.
People who do this often get c&ds because the company feels a need to protect its property rights. It’s a shitty unintended consequence of IP law that didn’t account for software when it was first legislated.
>creators shouldnt own their creations and starve so I can bing bing wahoo
lol
Not what I said.
>fans should get punished for trying to fix a game the IP holder refuses to
ah, I see you are a tendie
>People who do this often get c&ds
No they don't. This rarely happens only when someone is mass distributing or profiting. Nobody got C&Dd just for pirating a video game.
Pirating isn’t the question. Running private servers or creating fan made remakes is what we’re talking about, and yes, it does happen often.
It's a single player game so you're fine. See
>Hack it
>Get sent Cease and Desist letters or straight up sued for “unauthorized access” or whatever.
infinite existence is not the mandate here. you are misconstruing the topic at hand.
>game is only good because it has a large online population
>population shrinks below maintenance level
>it can't exist anymore
You could solve this right now by getting a million people to log in to The Crew but you won't. Curious.
>game is only good because it has a large online population
>only good
>only
thats a word meant to distract form the arguement at hand and is load bearing. picking into it, i probably enjoyed the online components at the time of release. however, what drew me to the game was, like american truck simulator, driving across america. would still log in every few years after i traveled somewhere to see if A) it was in the game and B) how it compared.
>let me run away from the point with word salad as I obsess over one word in a sentence
I take it youre one of the people who knows he can stop this by playing the Crew but won't?
your "one word" in a sentence implies the only reason someone would play a racing game in a "faithfully recreated" America is because of ingame twitter, leaderboards and a cash shop. rather than, you know, a racing game with a neat open world conceit. your word choice has meaning anon.
>game is only good because it has a large online population
The game in question is entirely based on having a large online population that is no longer there. You want it to keep going? Then start playing it and convince a couple million others to do so as well. It should be easy right? I mean clearly you and lots of others care a lot about this games online population staying above maintenance level right?
>The game in question is entirely based on having a large online population that is no longer there.
That is just not true. A component, sure but the game shipped with a full single-player campaign anon like come on lol.
>game can't be accessed without joining an online server
>ITS A SINGLE PLAYER GAME
This doesn't pass the smell test.
But enough about Nu-Hitman
Live service missions
I was referring to the mastery system, dummy.
Much like GT Sport (before it was updated after the servers shut down) if you try to play the single player content offline you’re unable to save your mastery progress and cannot unlock any items.
disingenuous Black folk like you deserve buckshot to the head
>no arguments
take that L and go by a happy meal with the money you didnt use to support The Crew.
watch your mother take the buckshot right in front of you before i castrate you
>Not a screenshot of him and a million of his friends currently playing
>not even currently installed
LMAO you fricking owned yourself and showed everyone why the game is being shut down.
12 gauge
head
NOW
Install the game you complain about dying NOW
Prove that its audience isn't all uninstalled.
bro, the game could have 0 players, it still needs to remain a functional product after service ends
>a product could have zero supporters but it should still exist forever
why?
because people bought it, the number of players is irrelevant. any single person who bought the game is still entitled to it being functional, even if the servers go down
>the number of players in an online only game are irrelevant
I thought people knew vidya here? that's as far from the truth as you can get. Fortnite would shut down instantly if they went an entire month with less than 100 concurrent players like The Crew did.
are you braindead? the shutdown isn't the issue, games can shut down servers. the issue is the game needs an end of life patch to continue functioning
The game in question was built on servers. You can't play the game in any capacity without logging into a server.
Then give the community the code for the servers so they can host their own.
That's the company's choice since they own the ip. You just own a copy. Buy The Crew outright and do it. Otherwise you can rely on someone else's good will like a homeless person.
What will you say when the law forces them to .
any day now I'm sure.
Your stupid ass realizes the devs have an offline version where they test their shit right?
not my problem and that's also not even true
people have already found that the game has an offline mode built in that users just can't access which makes leaving it in a non-functional state even more inexcusable because it would take minimal effort to enable it
You didnt buy the offline only version. It was never for sale.
>You didnt buy the offline only version. It was never for sale.
i see were moving goalposts, cause that wasnt your argument
because
>less than 100 concurrent players
is very arbitrary. What if the companies shut down the game with 10 millions players just to cash out and frick off forever?
The amount of consistent revenue it takes to maintain a product is arbitrary, different for every product, yes. The Crew fell below its mark and stayed there for too long. If you and a million friends all decided to start playing it then you could have saved it, but you didnt.
I agree, but why not change the status quo just for the kicks of it? I want to see Ubisoft burns.
are you could just play it whenever because it's your fricking job to care about wether Ubisoft can maintain it or not and if you can host it then it should be yours, your work and effort, the idea is arbritery and unenforceable as originating from anyone or anywhere
Or you and a couple million of your friends could play it now and give it some revenue so it can pay for its servers.
this issue at the core of this is that game shut downs are the norm. that loss of value and history is the norm for the industry at large, primarily driven by cost benefit analysis. this is hsitory being lost, sure its game history but that is still entire worlds just disappearing. the drive for this is get a clear, definitive answer to whether that is ok or not. ross scott has had problems with this going all the way back to darkspore, and it sickens him that the accepted attitude is just that new product comes, old product exits
he has a gut feeling that this doesnt sit right with a lot of people. i still play thief fan missions 25 years later and have dealt with mission hosting sites dying, insane mappers nuking their archives, hosting sites losing everything in a server flood but these maps still return because of the collective effort of the small but passionate fan base around it. the crew may have released as an always online racing game but if possible people would be hosting private servers for years and years.
>game shutdowns are the norm
Yes. Any online game you play has a lifespan. Welcome to 20 years ago, or would you care to log into halo 2 online and tell the class how many people are playing. Is it 10 million like in 2005? or is it less than a few thousand. Eventually the MCC will stop being maintained too. you may not want to hear this but I'm telling you now so you don't act surprised when it happens.
Why not frick the devs up through government regulation just to force them to maintain the servers anyway? Ignoring logistic, morality and all that. Just as a big frick you.
Because I'm not a small brain idiot who changes laws to benefit me now only to get fricked by them later, Hillary.
>only to get fricked by them
Then abolish it by protesting again you lazy bum
two wrongs don't make a right.
If the current status quo sucks, change it. If the new one sucks, change it again.
It's that simple.
The number of people playing a video game at any given time is completely irrelevant. A video game doesn't stop existing just because less people are playing it. Likewise, less people playing is not grounds to take the game away from everyone. If you don't want to host servers anymore because the popularity of the game has gone down the drain, that's completely fine. What isn't fine is leaving the game in such a state that it is impossible for anyone to play.
>The number of people playing a video game at any given time is completely irrelevant.
Never heard a less true statement in my life even if we weren't talking about online only games, which we are.
thank you for the non-argument
There's no reason to argue with someone who thinks an online games player count doesn't matter.
It certainly doesn't matter when it comes to the ownership status of a video game. Going back to the analogy from earlier in the thread, a low number of 82 camaros on the road is not grounds to take them away from their owners under any circumstance. It is completely irrelevant. It could not be more irrelevant.
>Welcome to 20 years ago
And yet there are games from 20 years ago that have bots or custom servers. Curious.
you literally can't play the fricking game anymore you subhuman street shitting pajeetgroid
now stream yourself taking 12 gauge to the head, the world demands it, make sure to kill your family too
Why didnt you and a million The Crew fans log in to prove it wasn't a ded online game?
why havent you taken that buckshot mouthwash?
>b-b-but that's not an argum-ACK
millions of people would cheer when they see you pull the trigger live on stream
That's a million more people than those who were playing the crew pre shutdown announcement
then why haven't you done it?
get to it NOW
>i-i-i don't want t-
i'm an ubisoft exec actually, i own your fricking life and i demand you take yourself offline permanently, begin to stream your suicide NOW
This man has lost his cool, the true sign of defeat. I will be gracious in my acceptance of victory.
you will be gracious when i feed you your mother's guts before sodomizing you with scorching coal
Is that what your dominatrix says to you when she's whipping your nuts?
>you literally can't play the fricking game anymore
Hack it
it is fricking not, the crew's MMO bullshit was completely insignificant, it was just an open world racing game in the style of test drive unlimited (which is 2006 game which you can still play completely offline to this day) with a fully fledged singleplayer mode, the game even has an offline mode in the files that's dummied out and locked behind the game's 3 layers of drm bullshit
Truth is that Governments and Corporations are only different in name. Lolbertarians and Autistarian are just people gaslite to fight each other while Govs and Corps work together for their own profits.
>Truth is that Governments and Corporations are only different in name.
this is something that, if you view the world a certain way feels right to say but is actually completely, categorically incorrect.
Because you can just take your business elsewhere to a different corporation, unless you know you got idiot lefties creating super corporations with no small businesses to take local market share because of excess taxation and regulation
>muh heckin lefties
So why is corporation bad but government doing the same good?
it's not. they can both frick us over however they want to, but only one of them has the power to stop the other.
Just vote with your wallet. Immoral and bad business gets replaced by moral and good business. Free market does that!
>Just vote with your wallet.
how uninformed
Corporations don't care about your money. That's why they target games/movies to tiny demographics that don't even pay for them.
I care about your money anon
>Immoral and bad business gets replaced by moral and good business.
it really doesn't anymore. a lot of shit companies are "too big to fail" like wells fargo, which just means that the government will bail them out because their services are so ingrained in society. when there's no competition, they will literally never fail if they provide a desired service, and that ;ast part applies to game companies too.
>too big to fail
the term being used now is "too big to care", specifically regarding googles worsening usecase
>Just vote with your wallet
I am glad that no game company would ever retroactively add DRM or anything like that.
Government can make corporation stop so there’s only 1 problem to deal with instead of 2
>3 instant replies to this post
>0 to this one
(and somebody one each)
yup, it's a commie thread
>(and somebody one each)
Saar, do the needful and clarify?
Funny how the “commies” are the ones defending personal ownership rights. Crazy world.
Ugh, I know. Damn commies want to regulate everything. I ate lead paint chips like everyone else, and I turned out just fine.
>buy online game
>don't understand that you are buying a product with an expiration date
a fool and his money are easily parted.
>be me
>buy jedi academy for PC in 2003
>play online with lots of people
>dedicated servers
>be me
>reinstall jedi academy for pc in 2024
>it still works online because it has dedicated servers
>jedi academy
Not a live service game.
ok anon
>be me
>emulate .hack.//fragement the mmo for PS2 in 2024 many years after the official servers are done
>can still play with people online because we can emulate servers as well
If you dare to try to tell me an mmo isnt a live service im going to laugh so fricking hard.
>names another expired product
expired how? you and i can literally still play it thanks to emulation
im a moron i meant player hosted servers and i said the exact opposite but i blame the sleeping pills
This is why I stopped playing CoD. They had hosted servers with 4, and they never have since. The last good game in the series imo. Keeps the game alive way longer and you also don’t have the company policing speech or content. If you don’t like the server you simply quit and filter it out of your searches.
>product with an expiration date
But WHY does it have an expiration date?
>uh, it just does, OK?
Not Ok.
Same reason Chevy stopped making the 82 Camaro: they wanted to.
Except when Chevy released the 83 Camaro they didn't remotely deactivate all the 82s and recall them without a refund. If you can’t understand this fundamental difference you are beyond saving.
And yet you still throw a shit fit when eshops close down. Apt comparison.
The only one bringing up eshops is you. If they want to stop selling stuff that’s one thing, if they break things that they already sold me that’s a different thing. Black person
Ok then just one small favor to ask: when an eshop closed down stop shitting your diaper
And I have favor to ask you: Tell me how much they pay you to try to derail threads.
Storefronts are not the same as online services.
I can't tell if there are people on this board actually defending the practice of arbitrarily making games online only and unplayable even though it should be easy to just release an offline version, or if it's just shitposting.
Will this lead to anything other than certain markets being ignored so companies don't have to deal with it? That always seems to be the realistic outcome
If you are a normal person and you have been tricked by billionaires into helping these massive monopolies take shits on your chest, you are absolutely pathetic.
I agree. Imagine buying a Ubisoft game.
I sincerely hope a movement like this takes off. I'm just concerned that people on the Internet will do what they do best and completely forget about this once the next big thing catches everyone's attention.
If that happens, it'll more than likely be another decade before something like this happens again and we'll all be worse off for it. Here's to hoping people here will know what's good for them and not let this go.
All anyone has to do in this thread to stop big bad Ubisoft is get a couple million people to start playing the Crew.
Should be easy right?
you already have regulation its called IP and its why you have to fight this shit in the first place
Honestly, idpol shitposting aside. It would be great for there to be means of which people can host the private servers or have publicly available source codes for games that the companies themselves don't want to run anymore. Games like private servers of dead MMOs would benefit greatly from this by actually making shit easier to do by reducing grind or whatever.
If people are willing to go as far as to make mods for all sorts of currently active games, I'm sure the playerbase would be willing to keep old games alive, and even continuing to support them in their own way by making events. It would be like community servers but better.
There is a means. You pay up.
its the 'ip' of the game that is not being sold, is the problem. no clue what all those dead mmo companies did with their game assets.
i miss s4league
you fricked around for too long
now you get regulated
should've put the brakes on earlier
you ever notice how we still have lootboxes even in belgium where the practice of gambling for kids is supposed to be banned?
If you frickers don't like America, leave!
We've always been a country defined by Winners. Might makes right. If you don't like it, you're free to try and complete against the strong companies and see if you survive.
Shouldn't you leave then?
>turd worlder is so desperate to be seen as american that he pushes his tongue as deep as possible into the anus of corpos
when big companies start buying out their competition, there's a fundamentally moronic problem with this logic. activision got to where it was because they were pretty much the only company in their market in the united states, not because they were producing quality.
Do gamers really need to find something meaningless to be upset about every single week?
This type of complaining reminds me of homosexuals complaining when geocities shut down. There isn't enough customers to keep it going. Period.
TSMT
>M-muh preservation
Bulldoze all historical pre Amerigod buildings and replace them with mcdonalds and walmarts America won Anglobalism won KYS lostmediatroons
Statues fall under infrasctrure and their incredibly small maintenance cost is gladly covered by the tax payer who appreciates not living in a town where everything is falling apart.
Pay for the Crew's life. Or don't.
No, I don't want old shit sucking up tax money that could goto walkable cities and public transport and railways either
Good thing you are the massive minority and most people will gladly pay to maintain roads, bridges and statues. Unlike The Crew.
>maintain roads, bridges and statues.
are those statues and historical monuments moron?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runyon_v._McCrary
Theres no freedom of association law in the US, if seen to be racially motivated white flight is illegal
>is that statue really a statue?
People pay for bridges and roads if there was an option to pay less taxes if it meant not preserving statues and historical BS guess what? Nobody would pay for gay bullshit comemorating Baron Chudcel of the Autism empire
>source: my ass
You'd pay extra taxes to keep around the slums where the italian mafia and Irish mob used to lynch eachother 100 years ago?
>so heckin historic and must be preserved!
>tax money that could goto walkable cities and public transport
who's money are you planning to steal when all the white people leave your third world immigrant and crime-filled "walkable cities"?
>walkable cities and public transport and railways
good job you responded to the bell
>t. auto company shill
Good gou
it'd be nice if you morons knew that cars are what destroyed the white community.
Ok walker
What mental gymnastics caused you to come to that conclusion?
>Kinoethnic divisions/racewar byrthnic neighborhoods keeping to eachother catholic neighbourhoods vs anglo-jew-prot areas etc, inter ethnic tension between wops and micks in poorgay areas, jooz and WASPS in richgay areas
>Now:Sóyburbs make everything generic bland cultureless nonviolent "whites"
D-Death to all Corpos!...
without goverment all these companie would no longer have safety nets and either improve or go bankrupt
>the company controlled governments won't let companies fail
no shit anturd
>companies
>controlling goverments
lMAo
I don't live in China, Chang
damn I guess China somehow operates on different laws of reality, as history has shown goverment doesn't always lead to the same phenemena happening every single time regardless of society or culture in some weird pattern that seems forever locked to human nature
only counter to goverment historically is the mafia/cartel/organized crime which is just a more overt display of rule by violence and gets overtaken by goverment everytime as the latter is able to more discretly rule by violence and trick everyone to choosing them over the obvious violence with feminized violence, which immediatly wins over large portions of society who will align with any side who shows obvious feminine social cues on a large scale
because woman are naturally attuned to feminine collective rule over masculine ones, the exception being their lover (who if they don't fit the criteria they'll just abandon eventually), and men out of fear of getting rejected by woman will follow women rules, these are the weaker men in society but their numbers are enough to frick things over
Being physically weaker doesn't matter anymore when israelites go out of their way to give these men a voice and take away the voices of others. We used to just solve problems with violence but now only brown countries do that
What's the point having a government when it doesn't govern jackshit?
organization (irrelevant in modern day)
>being this moronic
Summer came early this year.
To everyone arguing against this: I can play Phantasy Star Online: Blue Burst right now, and Sega hasn't gone bankrupt. They also didn't lose the IP rights to Phantasy Star. So tell me again how users running their own servers is a horrible crime that would destroy the world.
TF2 launched with no official Valve servers. Somehow that survived as well.
i can boot up the orange box on ps3 and host tf2 servers for an extremely small community of people still interested in vanilla tf2. they never even added hats to it
PS3 TF2 was dead since last year you moron.
damn really? i guess i finally have a reason to shuffle my ps3 to the attic
Reminder this is pushed by shitskins and liberal Eurotards, most who got The Crew for free as 90% of the playerbase did.
If this passes it will only give just cause to AAA publishers to become worse, raise prices and accelerate other games shutting down their services before the bill passes.
Anyone who supports this is unironically moronic and cannot reply with any other insult than "corpo bootlicker" because it is the only insult allowed on reddit. Ross is a fricking pseudo intellectual caveman who is getting a free handjob from social media merely for his e-celebrity status, he is nothing more than a sperg who occasionally makes videos.
>to AAA publishers to become worse,
seems like a huge bonus to me. let the AAA companies get even worse so they continue to lose money and implode under all of their greed and bad practices. The AAA video game industry deserves to crash almost as much as the housing market does.
Indies and AA games will keep video gaming alive and well, just as they have done for almost 2 decades now.
>Reminder this is pushed by shitskins and liberal Eurotards, most who got The Crew for free as 90% of the playerbase did.
>If this passes it will only give just cause to AAA publishers to become worse, raise prices and accelerate other games shutting down their services before the bill passes.
Okay, and then after that bill passes they're going to have to code their games such that when shut off people can continue to play them. They can go ahead and raise prices, they were going to anyway.
>Anyone who supports this is unironically moronic and cannot reply with any other insult than "corpo bootlicker" because it is the only insult allowed on reddit. Ross is a fricking pseudo intellectual caveman who is getting a free handjob from social media merely for his e-celebrity status, he is nothing more than a sperg who occasionally makes videos.
Ross actually cares about what he's discussing and is actively working to try and make the industry better. The industry is not getting better without governmental interference because the entire industry is not practicing ethically.
You're either part of the wealthy who doesn't need government to protect your rights and pay any price for your comfort and needs or you're a person who needs protection.
>litertarian cucks like op when copyright laws are used by corpos to rape consumers in the ass
>zzzzz
>litertarian cucks like op when consumer protection laws are made to protect people from the abuse of big corpos
>"NO YOU CANT INTERFERE IN THE FREE MARKET. STOP THIS, STOP THIS, STOP THIS"
Real libertarians oppose copyright laws
>Real libertarians are soviets
KEK
literally everyone except for you israelites opposes copyright laws.
So if you made something that sold gangbusters you shouldn't own it or make any money off it and pajeets should get rich making ai elsagate slop of your work?
Copyright laws and IP rights are the only thing keeping corporations and the highest bidders from gobbling up indies and grass roots devs. Removing copyright is the most pro corporation move you could make.
>highest bidders from gobbling up indies and grass roots devs.
im sorry what, what does copyright and ip rights, have to do with either of these two?
If there were no copyright laws, there's nothing to stop Activision from making their own undertale or whatever indie games. There's no incentive for anybody to make new IPs. Nothing new will ever created. Are you an actual moron?
>there's nothing to stop Activision from making their own undertale or whatever indie games.
And why would they do that, if I'm just gonna pirate it anyway? A big company won't take an IP if it's not profitable.
Based literal moron
So that goes to my other point. Nothing new would ever get made. There'd be nothing to pirate.
Only if your'e a soulless golem who needs money to enjoy something.
Nothing NEW would be made everything would just be inbred fanfictions.
Maybe art should only be allowed to exist for the sake of passion, since clearly profit has not done anything for us. All it does is guarantee inbred disney fanfiction and endless rehashed sequels.
Consoles and PCs wouldn't exist if all software was free outside of maybe command line software.
People aren't going to work for free if society still requires money to survive. That's a whole other fundamental problem though.
You're too stupid to be reasoned with. I'm actually laughing to my self that I'm not going to help you understand.
so? let them be eaten, if a company can take a indie game and make it better that's a good thing, the indie should adapt, work with the company to keep faith with the community good or just fail if he can't think of a solution
There's no reason for the company to bring the indie on board though. They'd have to pay them. They can just steal the property with no consequence.
I disagree.
these aren't libertarians, they're new wave communists who always go to bat for corporations and hate the idea of da chuds owning things. same people who love the say word, money stolen shit
>communist
>loving corporations
Is new wave supposed to mean opposite?
Most leftards call themselves communist but they don't understand that there's no difference between a company that sells entertainment media products and one that sells services
they do though
It's americanized maoism. The method doesn't matter to these people and they believe the ends justify the means. They think that corporations stifling people they disagree with is a great thing.
Why don't you just say americanized Maoism
Pirates aren't consumers. Already covered this. Also intellectual property is real. And no, owning IPs isn't a monopoly. Just figured I would cover all the bases before cracking open this can.
So as a paying customer, explain to me the mortal sin of making a backup copy of a game I bought, so I can enjoy it long after the disk has broken, or long after the hardware has stopped.
Explain to me the horrible destruction being wrought when a user makes their own dedicated servers to play an MMO with his friends, long after it shut down.
Making a backup is fine. Stealing it from the internet even if you own it is still stealing. The Pokémon red rom I have on my computer isn't a backup of the copy I owned as a kid. Yes, I stole the rom.
Tendies are so fricking stupid. You cant steal something by making a copy of it. Im not steal a jpeg i save off of Ganker from the person who posted it.
forgery/counterfeiting is a crime
>wtf I didnt steal any money I just made a copy!
Then making a backup copy would be a crime too, since you're making a copy. Why did you say otherwise?
tendies are actually fricking moronic. forgeries are only illegal if you try to sell them. it is not illegal for someone to make a perfect replica of something else, its only illegal to sell it.
youre right but its less moronic rather than incorrectly making laws off of minor moral disputes. theres a tangible difference between a guy pointing a gun to your head to take your only shovel than a sneaky guy who used binoculars to see your secret recipe
I stole your memes. You don't even remember you posted them anymore.
At no point were you ever obligated to pay for the jpeg unless your name is Saucy
And you're a moron because you don't understand what a license agreement. I bought my car, so if it gets stolen it's okay for me to go steal another one. That's what you literally believe.
>I bought my car, so if it gets stolen it's okay for me to go steal another one. That's what you literally believe.
Stealing would imply that I have removed it from someone else's possession. This does not happen with digital property. And since we've already established that I've paid them their legal tender, the exact amount they asked for, then you cannot cry about lost sales either.
Thank you for at least acknowledging that you don't know or don't understand what a license agreement is.
And what obligation do I have to abide by a license agreement that doesn't benefit me in the slightest? You got paid for your game, stop being greedy and demanding that I pay more, especially when it's a singleplayer game that doesn't need an online connection.
Ah so now it makes sense that you don't understand a license agreement. You're literally a petulant child who just wants everything for free and doesn't understand that there's a world that exists outside of your personal experience.
A few things wrong with your post.
>petulant child
I'm an adult who doesn't like being screwed over by corporations.
>everything for free
I already paid them for their work. What obligation do I have to them afterward?
>doesn't understand that there's a world that exists outside of your personal experience.
I don't care what happens outside of my personal preference. Not gonna be your martyr, not gonna be your slave. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some Zelda romhacks to enjoy, like Indigo and that nice MM/OOT randomizer.
I think what he is saying is that he doesn't value the current state of license agreements. Which is fair. I do not either, and I seek to undermine them at every turn. Unless and until I can purchase a game and own it into perpetuity then I will not give my money for it, period. If you want to make some vague reference to EULA's and digital rights being bunk, that's all fine. I'm simply not going to subsidize unethical behavior from a company and support any movement that gets closer to giving me the ability to own goods I pay for.
>Stealing it from the internet even if you own it is still stealing
I hope you understand that this makes zero sense. It is the exact same game. The company has been given their money. They cannot cry about theft in any capacity.
>Making a backup is fine
LOL
Ask Nintendo if ripping your own legal copy is fine. They will shit on you with the fury of a thousand rising suns. They'll go on about how all games have copy protection in them, and circumventing that is theft.
Strange how you pick and choose when breaking the law is okay. 🙂
There is none. Do it. Nobody will stop you unless you draw attention to yourself.
Without regulations billionaires would have already literally enslaved everyone and wouldn't have to keep up the appearances with wageslavery.
basically you just have less laws and you can fork online games without having to make more laws like an idiot
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMAF037uQwKb92TBxs9H95fEbMVj2hG4W
It just came to my mind that most likely this bill will pass on Europe so an alt solution would be to exclude the EU from online play and Steam begins restricting the sales of online games on Europe similar to how you could not get Wolf 3D in Germany.
Imagine a world where you never have to play with muslims (french), aussies, muslims (spaniards), hindus, muslims (germany), blacks (italy).
UK bros the Brexit is finally justified.
New one piss
twitchtv/xrdmain
You can easily get multiple bingos just with this thread.
>don't buy Ubisoft games
>YOU ARE A UBISOFT SHILL
This goes beyond Ubisoft. Not realizing this means you are either a shill or a total idiot.
so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11, I should be able to sue the game dev? Why not microsoft for halting production of Windows 95 machines?
>if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11, I should be able to sue the game dev?
Did the devs force you to update to Windows 10?
>so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11
no, because the game was made to run on windows 95, not later platforms. the game's last patch should still function on windows 95 though
>what is a virtual machine
>so if a game is made for Windows 95 and is unplayable on Windows 10 or 11
Hindsight is 20/20. You couldn't design a game in 1996 with 2015 OS in mind. So it's perfectly fine.
No. I think what most sane people are arguing for itt is the exact opposite. The company should have no recourse to punish you legally for making their software run on modern systems, whether that’s through private servers, cracking it, or remaking it using their original software. The company has admitted it has intentionally left it dilapidated and has voluntarily bowed out of a 2-way software agreement. If they were still selling and supporting the game on modern systems then they would still be engaged with the contract entered with the consumer, allowing them to go after people doing those things described. I know this isn’t how the law is now, but it would be better if it was.
>too many people have linked this on twitter (and subsequently, linked these links to discord) so i now must hate it to keep equilibrium
I just want to play MMOs in peace. Why is this gap-toothed moron trying to make them illegal?
>Games shouldn’t always be online and provide means to play multiplayer without official servers
>WHAT!?!??! YOU CAN’T ASK FOR THAT THINK OF THE INDIE DEVS WHO DON’T MAKE ALWAYS ONLINE GAME!!! IT’S UBISOFT’S-I MEAN SMALL INDIE DEV’S RIGHT TO MAKE PRODUCTS YOU PAID FOR NON-FUNCTIONAL AFTER SOME TIME!!!
Why are shills like this? I get you’re defending always online crap because you’re paid to do so or are bots, but at least try to not sound like broken records or sound like real people
Reply directly to posts in this thread if you want attention. I'm not going to address grandstanding homosexuals.
I like how morons and shills keep regurgitating shit that was already explained in the videos. It's almost like they're specifically baiting with these fake talking points to deceive people.
the removal of the ip counter is the best thing that happened to this site, i can actually have fun false flagging and acting like different anons without having to autistically time my posts
Ip counter is redundant since I jump through 20 different ip just by posting on my phone anyway.
I mean the legal system is literally designed to just makes things inaccesible and locked away, tax breaks for failed movies have put countless IPs into terrirtory where you'll be breaking the law by even acknowledging them, it only gets fixed by getting rid of bullshit laws and abolishing copyright
>abolishing copyright
Without copyright there's no obligation to pay for anything. Video games and movies would fly cease to exist except for free ones made by indies who just love games
there's no obligation to pay for anything, and people will still make video games and movies anyway, people will just shift what they use money on, instead of the product they'll spend money on things like CEMU's patreon, or spend money on smaller teams doing fork projects on things that used to be maintained by larger companies, pretty soon AI will do away with the majority of jobs anyway so saying people won't be motivated without a job isn't an argument in a post AI world
very true of the consequences. doesnt make it less right to do. im leaning to the idea that the vast majority of these consumable products only exist at the level they do because of being protected.
was there ever truly a reason for one person to be able to tell one story for his life + some arbitrary extra years?
now that the dust has settled, let's see how often the french was reference in a thread about a company in france
>5 hits, 2 are me
now let's see america's count
>26
impressive, very nice
why do americans hate consumer protections so much
they've been groomed and gaslight their entire lives to worship corpos who rape them for every penny
Video games wouldn't even exist in your socialist utopia. We wouldn't be having this conversation because this board wouldn't exist
>wanting to own things makes you a commie
Wanting everything to be free does. You wouldn't pay for anything if you didn't have to.
>if you dont like hyper consumerism you might be a socialist or communist
Typical amerimutt low IQ logic. You dont even know what the word nuance means do you, you only see things in extremes because you have been groomed to do so by your media. What a perfect example of a good little goy you are.
To elaborate, think about one of the biggest pillars of american culture, which is hyper consumerism. Hyper consumerism is the perfect example of companies grooming entire generations of people to just mindlessly consumer product and never ask any questions. Americans might try to deny it, but the rest of the world is keenly aware of the hyper consumerism because it infects every aspect of their society, including the media they produce for the world to see. It is so heavily ingrained into their psyche that they barely even notice it, almost like a frog slowly boiling in a pot of water. Most of them have never lived in a place where pharmaceutical companies who have been sued dozens of times for extremely shady shit will still be advertising on every major network television.
Feel free to reply to any post and hop into the debate instead of shyly mumbling insults to yourself
you socialists here trample and belittle the circumstances of the living all so you can parade your political virtue signal: taking the cigar off of some fat cat will not better the conditions that a starving third-worlder faces when the assembly shuts down.
Globalist interference in their politics doesn't help them either. The most repulsive part of your shtick is you imagine yourself an altruist
Yes, anon, I am sure you were thinking only of that third-worlder. Which is why when I next say that we should definitely help those people and lift them out of poverty your argument will be...?
>eurogays still bringing up america
How come every commie frames arguments in that way where everything is all or nothing?