This is sort of a "does anyone or anybody else?" type question, but I think it can create some interesting discussion.
We have become accustomed to having many things for free online. Search, social media, news, videos, games etc. The price of course is ads and our personal data. But spending money on these kinds of services that exists for free sometimes feels like a hurdle to overcome. I recently gave Steam a try, and I spent way too much time pondering whether it was worth the $30. Yet I can spend ten times as much on random physical purchases or a round drinks with only a few seconds of decision making.
Even though we have lived with digital products for decades now, having something tangible and physical between your fingers still feels better. With some exceptions, because most people are paying for streaming services but renting movies in the video store have always cost money, so we are used to that - unlike stuff like search and email which many of us have gotten used to being available for free.
Can this ever change outside very tech-minded people? Because services that rely on subscriptions rather than dataharvesting and ads do exist, but with the exceptions of maybe the big streaming services, few get wider appeal and the masses flock to the so-called free services instead. I find it almost depressing that we have all these brilliant and innovative tech companies around the world doing amazing things, but a good deal of it all ends up with the goal of showing more ads. It is hard to compete with free, but is it possible to challenge the current most successful business model of "paying" with ads and data?
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Hide on the ceiling and drop a grenade into the guy's collar, breaking his neck instantly upon exploding.
Didnt care about your wall of text so i didnt read, this is now a rl BOSS battle thread.
Stay on topic, please.
>Off topic thread
>Stay on topic
Based, keep derailing the thread
Alright hot shot. Lets see how you beat THIS
african technology is kino, we need a cod in modern day africa
I like how they're all wearing lab coats.
>Black mesa
You only know a scientist is reliable if he is wearing a lab coat
how much is 500mill in shillings to usd?
They said 15 millions and it's worth $4k
they also said they needed 500million to complete it.
125k then I guess
Reminds me of the guy that build his own helicopter and the tail fan broke, causing the main top blade to bend until it cut thru the heli and slit the guy's throat.
does it count as technology if it doesn't work?
this is just cargo cult shit
Well no they can't into technology, they can only try to mimic it. Which is why they make something that looks like what a child would think an helicopter is.
It's like ork in wh40k but without the psychic ppowers
the KKKopter
Do they just think if they build something just by coping its appearance it will just magically work?
nta, but in their defense a lot of technology and knowledge stems from observing things.
The vehicle may not work but their methods of trying to recreate and understand something through observation is a very solid start.
Observation yes, but you must also couple that with an understanding of mechanics, physics, basic engineering principles. Otherwise you just end up with what was in that webm, a poor facsimile.
Let me be clear, this isn't the age of the Wright Brothers where these principles of flight where poorly understood, we've had Man Walk on the Moon, there are tens of thousands of Jets and helicopters that fly daily with all knowledge easily accessible on the internet, and failing that you can buy used books for next to nothing that are donated by Universities and Schools that would teach the principles of Flight.
There truly is nothing impressive in those videos other than the sheer ignorance on display, which makes it for a humours video.
Where do you think knowledge came from?
>No manuals
>No guides
>No tutorials
Think anonymous think
Yes, that's how 40k orks work
This is just 40k Orks without the meme magic to make it work
>Helicopter
>Using hand wrenches
Jesus christ at least use a socket wrench if you arent going to spring the $10 for an electric one to actually get that shit tight.
A fricking death trap
In Africaland basic tools are nonexistent.
We are all starving
FOR ACTION
>plastic and scrap metal
They've got a promising future with Oceangate
EDF!!! EDF!!!
>Launches rocket
>Burns his legs
>Possibly breaks his spine
It’s not like he’ll be standing straight up when he fires them. He would bend down and aim the rockets toward whatever he wants to fire at.
It's cute that you think they can make rockets.
Form over function.
>africa is gonna be a superpower by 2024 guys
The Green Fuse is equipped with the latest dual-wielding technology, don't let yourself be found in the open. His grade A nanoglass will protect him from stun grenades, his rockets can be disrupted however. Try to attack his battery from behind. good luck Snake.
who ask
Just tackle him from behind, anon. That's not power armor, he's a turtle meant for slow bomb disarming.
>Dropping a nade on the guy who's armor is built for explosives
it will break your neck regardless if you have gigahomie armor or not
fricking christ anon, people die in slow speed car accidents while wearing their seatbelts
Or just have narrow anti fat people hallways
For me it is hiding behind the door before kicking his gun upwards and then doing a spin kick for him to lose his balance then I use my heat action to stomp his face in as I remove his remaining HP letting me win the battle
Or you could just shoot him. He's wearing an EOD suit which offers absolutely abysmal protection from gunfire and is mostly designed to protect the wearer from the concussive force of gunfire.
This guy is so vulnerable to traps. He's a large slow moving object with frick all visibility.
Bear traps, rope traps, a hole covered in leaves, one of those Rambo-style tree branch traps...
Up against heavily armored combatants? Use chemical weapons. I recommend Sarin gas.
this post it too high effort for this board, go find somewhere else for it
I just want to shitpost about vidya
That's a sad looking Nemo
Infinite supply= 0 value
is that easy
>Who is the distributor?
but software costs money to make
and that software devaluates every time you copy it
it costs energy for me to wake up every day but that doesn't mean I contribute anything by being alive
You contribute because you occupy that space.
What is contributed?
The occupation of space.
Therefore any given thing in existence that has a physical form is a "contribution."
Indeed.
And when people use the word "contribution," this is what you think they mean?
It could mean a lot of things.
It could. But generally a person with half a brain can pick up on context. For example, you replied to
and for some reason seemed to think that by "contribution" he meant "taking up space," when he very obviously did not.
What you are doing is pretending not to understand what is plainly obvious, acting stupid so you can argue semantics for the sake of having an argument.
There's a word for people like you, it's "homosexual." Which could mean a lot of things! Let's see if you can figure out what.
troony
You still contribute in a literal sense not humanly.
Can we both agree with this definition.
The literal sense wasn't being used.
And you did not follow the thread correctly.
it's cool that you used me as an example for whatever this is but I just want to let you know that my analogy was in fact a shitpost for funnies and not to be taken seriously, thank you anons
Oh I'm not ragging on you or anything, I'm just calling out this weasel for using weasely semantics.
What say stuff when you do not know what that even means.
It could mean a lot of things.
And us should define an agreement to its constructs then.
That could mean a lot of things.
And us should define an agreement to its constructs then.
Is English not your first language? This sentence does not make sense in English.
my oxygen depletion
The food you consume to create that energy has value. Just because you squander it rather than invest it doesn't mean it isn't there
>The food you consume to create that energy has value. Just because you squander it rather than invest it doesn't mean it isn't there
This guy just BTFO'd this fat moron
Value is subjective, any energy spent by a body only has value if people give any to it.
Not my problem.
>Drawn child obscene child pornography
MODS
i just like free stuff
if videogames weren't free, i would play less videogames and pirate more anime and manga
CIA doesn’t enforce copyright laws you fricking idiots.
There's like one moron actually answering OP's moronic question in this thread.
>Copyright Inforcement Authority doesn't inforce copyright laws
???
Damn, I thought the CIA was going to send their armored intern to seek and destroy me for breaking copyright law for reals.
its not about piracy you dunce its a digital services or consumables take for example a paid search engine a paid forum or a paid feature like a dunno like Ganker pass
TLDR
Nor TLDR
I don't spend money on digital products because data is inherently worthless. The only reason people pay money for digital services is their own ineptitude, my parents are quite happy to ask me for the latest goyslop on some streaming service they don't pay for, and I put it on the network for them to watch in 2 minutes.
Hell, I use a Japanese IPTV nearly every single day, from chinks who want to charge me 30 bucks a month to use it, but I abuse free trials from a dozen email accounts instead.
To who says that information is inherently worthless?
Me. Anything that can be infinitely copied without degradation is worthless.
The reason nobody allows digital resales is they would show this simple fact. A game would launch, it'd be 60 bucks. A week later, it'd be under 30. Give it a month, no game would be worth more than 10 dollars.
Storage devices are finite though.
Wrong. I have the new RAID XZ02.B series T. I have unlimited space. Literally unlimited.
While storage is finite, the price per TB and the ability for that storage to be reused many thousands of times over makes it a non-issue in the modern day.
Value is subjective, but given the option between paying for data and not paying for data, which would you pick? Exact same data, only one copy has a price tag attached to it on a digital storefront. This is the problem with assigning value to data, it makes no logical sense.
It could be use for a thousand of times and a thousand of times its quality would degrade.
Not a sustainable option for archives.
The costs of storages is still expensive when taken account of dollar versus non dollar currencies and logistics.
You still pay for that data though just indirectly.
>>You still pay for that data though just indirectly.
If you're arguing that the price you pay for an ISP connection is "paying for data", you're a moron. You're paying for a service and the upkeep of that service. The reason your ISP might have a data cap isn't because they're running out of bits, it's because they're israelites.
>mudslime logic
how else would profit woe upon its product then
>Monetary value is worthless
>Intrinsic value is worthless
>All is worthless
Cynical Nihilism is not good for you.
Physical products have a cost of manufacture and take up limited physical space. Digital "products" cost absolutely nothing to manufacture and take up infinitesimal amounts of space.
If you want to argue that technically digital products have a value on the order of millionths of a cent due to electricity costs and upkeep, then fine. Personally I just round that shit down to zero, though.
It must and will cost something to it to produce.
A paper costs something but a written text is not?
Every heard of "manpower"? Especially in a creative field value is not really determined by materials invested.
Also distributing those digital goods costs money as well. You need servers, server racks, and proper facilities to house those servers.
That can be argued for any given transaction ever made. At some point in the money cycle, the money you paid for anything will be spent on some other thing. This is the logical equivalent of saying all transactions are subscriptions.
Analog media and hardware specific wares are finite forms of data.
Let us try for example barter. Barter is a specific type of commerce that requires both parties to come into terms. It is rational to say that value is subjective not objective.
>t. pajeet
Give it back jamal le tyrone.
it may be infinitely replicable but if no one pays for it it will never be created in the first place
bro there's people who spent money on First Soldier
Holy shit, the new Payday 3 bulldozer design looks great!
Listening to homosexual screech about inequality is not a service, frick off corposhill.
dumb troony
Yes I AM trans and proud. What’s it to you, bigot? I am proud of who I am now, you disgraced incel
You do realize inequity and optional products are antagonistic to one another?
I won't pay for anything I can get for free, that's why I refuse to see prostitutes
If it wasn’t prostitution your mom would never have had enough money to buy your tendies, Champ.
child molestation is not cool
You should have told your stepdad and his friends that when you had the chance.. maybe you wouldn’t be transitioning now.
I simply have no incentive to pay for those subscription-based services.
An amusement service like a cinema is a subscription.
>a one-time purchase for a single product is a subscription
unless you only intend to watch a single movie in the cinema during your entire life yes, going back there is the same as being subscribed to it
By that logic, groceries are a subscription.
yes? everyone knows that
Because it is.
You could pay in advance and much like subscriptions you could cancel the transaction.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/subscription
So then if I go to, say, wal-mart, and buy a video game, that's paying for a subscription. I pay in advance, and I can cancel the transaction. As such, all purchases are subscriptions.
At least you're consistent.
Correct.
Wrong, dumbass
Duly noted. Still not paying for Netflix or Game Pass. Still no incentive.
Could you give me an example of a purchase that isn't a subscription?
When you first realized you loved the feel of wieners in your mouth, did you tell anyone? How long did you want to to let the world know?
A purchase that binds both buyer and the seller into a contract with no advancement in mind.
Define "advancement."
Such as?
IOU
the problem is that even in paid services you dont get a static product. They change the rules overnight, they remove certain things and they still harvest your data so why would I pay for that? You dont even get a product whatsoever, you get a license that comes with a EULA saying that they can take it away for any reason at any time. Despite all this, people will pay money for social media. Twitter checkmarks now cost money, I'm quite sure Reddit must have some premium subscription and so on. In 10 years people will pay for social media with money on top their data. People who dont pay will just get a shitty experience
Already was and is a thing though.
https://www.Ganker.org/pass
>and they still harvest your data so why would I pay for that
What data specifically?
Is Peer to Peer data consider as data farms?
>why are you against paying for things you can't touch?
take a guess fricking scammer
Can you touch sound?
>paying for music
Can you buy sound?
Yes.
Yes
Yes
are you comparing sound to a house?
No?
Do not put words into my mouth.
Ask stupid questions, get stupid answers.
dumb ass
then dont ask moronic things moron
Sound is vibration. You touch it as you perceive it.
Lol no it’s not. Stop making shit. Sound is just noise.
>m-muh vibrations
Lmao
>sound is just noise
Brainlets holy shit. What's noise
This is the intelligence of the average Gankeredditor, this is why the board is shit.
no... but music can touch you.
Awww snap. Aw snap. Come to our macaroni party then we’ll take a nap.
because many of these services don't feel like they are doing that much or add that much major value to our lives in a single moment so they don't feel worth it
imagine if u had to pay for google, it would be extremely worthwhile to have a subscription or something, but if thought about having to pay for random google searches you do, such as looking up some inane bullshit, you would think its not worth it for that individual purchase, because its not, its a tool you use a lot more because its freely available and if it wasn't you would use it far less
this is the same way f2p games get people, even if you would spend less money on a buy to play version of a game with no microtransactions you still find it harder to justify making that purchase because you are unsure if you actually want to stick with it, even if you definitely will afterwards
its the same reason why when you are out somewhere and u buy a drink because you know you will be there to drink it and be doing this and its fine but considering to spend $5 on a game you might like feels bad because you are unsure if you will actually like it or not, its not about the price, its about the uncertainty and if you will actually play the game or not, while when you are out you are out you will be sure you drink the drink, its also why you are far more likely to finish watching a movie at a theatre than the same one at home, because you already in your mind blocked out this time and it would have to be much worse for you to walk out than just change the movie at home on your couch as there are so many others things competing compared to at the theatre
>words words words words
ain't reading all that shite.
im not gonna read all that
here's my reply
>fragile man child
>the picture
probably a turd worlder too
>words words words
The left truly can't meme. If you're going to make a "look how moronic the right is" falseflag meme at least don't make it obvious.
The most fragile snow-flake
IT'S A MOTHERFRICKIN BULLDOZER
AUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH
because it feels like you get air in return
you pay full price to "rent" it, you don't own anything
Do we own our life?
Do we own time as an object?
Are you tool for your overlord? yes
You did not answer my question in fact you made a rhetorical one.
Seeing a box gives your purchase more weight. It makes it feel like you own more of it even if the box is an empty case with a Steam code in it.
But for games in particular it's because so many games are f2p and they're often games that will give you much more value than the ones you pay $70 for. So paying $70 for something you will discard after a week or 2 is a bad proposition. The only reason to buy a game is if you want to play multiplayer, which goes hand in hand with it being a title that you will most likely play for a longer period of time. But the issue of there being f2p offerings that could be way better experiences is still a thing. Gaming is reaching a very weird point, it needs a reset of some sort.
>aaa games have a massive budget
>refuse to innovate because of it
>people will buy into them less and less over time because they're so samey
>but a f2p game with less budget can take risks
>ends up becoming a huge success and makes billions
>aaa game devs try to copy it
>they get in too late and no one wants to swap from the original game they've already invested their time and money into
>f2p games continue to take over the market by offering new and different experiences
>aaa games become less and less viable
The shift in monetization models will probably end up leading to a market crash, which is objectively a good thing. More companies need to be doing what Nintendo is doing and putting out AA games and seeing what sticks, Splatoon being a great example of a success story for putting out an experimental game and having it take off and mogging a lot of AAA offerings. It's just a very stupid prospect to spend $250 million making 1 game trying to appeal to everyone instead of $25 million on 10 different games that target more niche audiences that will love the frick out of them and build a base for the series. Targeting a niche audience and making something they love is what led Demon's Souls to become what it is today.
OP asks about non common digital goods.
OP asks "Why are we often hesitant to spend money on digital services?" Now put two and two together.
But you saw that transaction and you even own a physical receipt to it?
Out of sight, out of mind and all that. There is a physiologically appealing aspect to owning tangible goods and that's why hoarders exist. Something something hunter gather instincts.
>physiologically
Psychologically*
>buy service
>service goes down
>now you've lost your money for nothing
>buy real thing
>you own thing
And that nothing is time and time is objective as time is real.
you shills are getting more moronic every day
Then define time please go ahead.
>anon is reduced to semantics to defend live-service games
There is no defence just room for discourse really.
An extremely low level of discourse, sure. We all know what kind of digital services OP is talking about. Anon is just being a b***h.
>assumes out of nothing
what a moron
You're right, it was silly of me to think you had half a brain to understand what OP was talking about.
>Gankertardation
>projection
wow
Because spending $200/mo on random subscriptions has become normalised in a time/economy that's basically 1936 pre-ww2
On WW1 days above average people buy subscriptions to magazines and newspapers.
You mean back when information wasn't freely and easily available to anyone with internet access? Wow!
All information is not free though.
A library still costs to upkeep much like servers.
It's free to me. I'm not paying for your subscription service.
Free as in what?
As in I'm not paying for it. Free to me.
>b-b-but someone else has to pay-
And that someone is not me. I'm not paying for your subscription service. Understand?
Not buying it, sorry.
Why can not you understand that the concept of payment is not only monetary.
We're not discussing any form of payment that isn't monetary.
The way I look at it is what is more convenient for me? To pirate or to buy on steam? If buying on steam is more convenient, what is their record? Are they fair to the customer? These are the questions I ask.
I was a strict defender of physical media but the truth of the matter is that every new game released today comes out with day 1 patches and is barely playable without updating anyway. God of War Ragnarok had 20GB day 1 patch and was installing+updating for 1 hour before it was playable.
maybe play less garbage games like god of war and you will have less of this issue
And what games do you play?
A portion of a contractually due sum that is paid in advance with the remainder due upon receipt of the counterpart in goods or services.
meant for
So like a subscription service.
>with no advancement in mind
Indeed. So buying a gallon of milk is not a subscription service.
Yes much like the example here which is the complete opposite of it.
Looks exactly the same to me.
I pay in advance for the gallon of milk, and I can cancel the transaction. Therefore it's a subscription, right? Or is that not the case?
It is a subscription because you declare and advancement whenas a single acquisition is done directly.
*declare as an advancement
>a single acquisition is done directly.
Still waiting for an example of this.
A done transaction is one of it.
The transaction happens without any form of advancement whatsoever.
So me buying a gallon of milk.
This situation does not give context.
I buy a chocolate milk with no explicit statement to the buyer of any advance payment. The transaction was done directly without any cancellation.
These are the same situation. You're splitting hairs.
The former sentence give ambiguity to it while the latter shows a specific chain of events.
>The former sentence give ambiguity to it
It didn't. You know how buying a gallon of milk works. The example you're using is identical to the wal-mart example that was given earlier, which you said was a subscription. This is inconsistent.
Read it again.
It clearly says I pay in advance and I cancel the transaction.
That constitutes as a subscription.
If you buy a gallon of chocolate milk, you are paying in advance and can cancel the transaction. It's the same thing. You're not drinking the milk before you buy it. It's the same thing. You ARE buying with an explicit statement to the buyer of an advance payment.
You can drink the milk before you buy it and with the action on mind you are now bind to pay it no matter what and for this reason is why this is not a subscription at all.
>You can drink the milk before you buy it
This premise was never on the table.
Was?
That's not an example. I'm noticing you continue to avoid providing an actual example of this kind of transaction. I wonder why?
If someone makes a product, and you like it and want it, then you could argue that they deserve money for it. Even if there's nothing compelling you pay them, at the very least you could show some level of support for the game. It just boils down to personal ethics, and whether you believe copyright law is just or not.
On the other hand, are you obliged to obey copyright down to the letter? Say you bought a game legally, and the game stops being sold, and your console breaks. You want to enjoy the game on your PC, so you rip a copy of it and enjoy it on an emulator of choice, except oh no! you just circumvented copy protection to do so, so a scummy lawyer will argue that you violated the verbal contract that you agreed to, so you've now stolen money from the company. Who is in the wrong here?
>buy game because i like it and want more of the same
>sequel is completely different and only shares name
>changes characters/gameplay
>changes characters but pretend they are the same despite being completely different on design and/or personality
frick supporting vidya
>buy game that was good
>refuse to buy game that turned out bad
Seems simple enough. You don't even need to pirate the latter, because it being bad is self-evident. Do you want to give them the impression that you want to play their trash?
How are they going to get that impression without seeing the sale?
You do what you need to do. I was just explaining how I saw the situation.
And I was just asking how they're going to get the impression that people want their game if the game isn't bought.
Piracy is as big an endorsement as buying the game, hence why these "piracy kills games" articles are full of crap. You know how much free marketing you get from a pirate who talks about the game to his friends?
And how are they going to measure that to determine that people want their game?
They see people talking about it, and assume that means people like it and want the game. Key word: assume. They don't actually know, and are just throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Don't ask for logic from the higher-ups.
>The game [Mind game]
woah so deep and rad i wonder which online personality gave you that opinion
i already do that
problem? million others not because well its called "insert favorite game from childhood here"
>WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>me hate change
baby duck syndrome
this post is completely new did you get scare from it
How about I fricking kill you, how about that?
>NO PLEASE I DON'T WANT TO DIE
Nahhh you just hate change. Don't be a baby, let me kill you.
An 18-34 person who is majorily attended or currently enrolled in college made this post
Fricking yikes
I accept your concession.
Yabba dabba doo.
Its your fault since the game was meant to consume on a specific device or platform.
I ask you this: who cares? You got paid for your product, and in many cases you're not even making it available anymore. Without shoddy legal threats, explain why I should wait for you to re-release a shoddy remake 20 years later.
However this is my property and I own it fair and square.
And I paid you for the right to access the product. Mind you, this was before EULAs and TOS's, so I didn't sign anything that stated that my purchase was limited to one platform or one method of recreation. What I am doing is simply accessing the product that I paid for.
>B-BUT I DIDN'T AUTHORIZE YOU TO DO IT THAT WAY
Then you'll have to argue why it's wrong to modify products that I own, like painting my car, or painting my house, or putting lawn gnomes in my garden. Tell me why you are against the right to repair, which entails the freedom for me to modify my product for personal use.
I'M SORRY
I'M SORRY
I PROMISE I WILL NEVER PIRATE SKYRIM AGAIN!!!!
need to chance it to actually say video games instead of movies or music
It's because you NEVER own digital content, even when you pay for it. So you're either a chump goy wasting time on entertainment or a slightly less chump goy wasting time on entertainment. If you wondered why ~~*they*~~ don't pursue pirates with any real vigor, that's your answer.
I didn't ask moron.
>This is sort of a "does anyone or anybody else?" type question, but I think it can create some interesting discussion.
this thread will reach the bump limit.
>Why are we often hesitant to spend money on digital services?
Because I rent them, I don't own them. And one day, they can just update and become objectively worse, like what happened when Grand Theft Auto San Andreas didn't get it's music licenses renewed, or how LISA The Painful recently got an update that broke a lot of shit unless you revert back to an older version in steam betas. My faith in specifically DRM infested digital purchases has dwindled heavily over the years, thus I'm a lot more cagey about spending money on said digital services.
I go out of my way to buy games on GOG just because I can make local DRM free backups. Most of the stuff I'm interested in these days is open source if not outright free and open source. Other stuff very evidently has no future, judging by the fact that 87% of games aren't preserved legally, as a result of these companies making no effort to make any long term plans.
https://gamehistory.org/87percent/
You're gonna have to do better than this if you want me to spend more money. It's a simple as that.
Because these are consumables and were not meant for preservation.
Guess my money is "not meant" for these companies whining that I'm not spending money on digital services then.
Even these so call physical games were never design or built for archival purposes.
This is the reason why proprietary is a thing.
And yet people have archived them.
You're not getting around this one, you either let me preserve games the way films from as far back as the 1930s are preserved, or you frick off, this is not a debate, this is a demand, if you have a problem with this, then you don't get my money.
I know this is really hard for a soulless person like you to understand, but one day, something you want will be impossible to acquire, and then you'll know how it feels. It's just unfortunate that we can't stop this cancer here because of your ignorance, you have to find it out the hard way before you understand.
Those are not preservations those are services. Services that have a long lifespan to it.
All forms of media are made for consumption not preservation.
And therefore media should never be preserved, got it.
Absolutely since any human traces will never be preserve indefinitely.
Your existence is not indefinite and therefore you should not make any attempt to preserve your health.
If death comes at my door then I shall embrace it.
Why not start early if you are so confident in your philosophy? Ignoramus.
Not my problem.
You either let me play games from my childhood, or I will pirate the games I bought back. Unless you want more money from me of course, to which you'll offer a means that's actually good to keep them.
Enjoy your final (You) from me, I sincerely hope you're being paid to be a lobbyist because frankly if you're doing it for free that's really, really embarassing.
I'm pretty sure this dude's a microsoft shill, not just because he's defending live service shit but also because he's clearly ESL.
Why the discord amongst us?
A good healthy discussion should be practice normally.
>I bought back
This is very vague since it gives the impression of no monetary origin
>I bought the game back ago
>Trust me I swear
That's not what vague means, Pajeet.
>no u
Dumbass, just because you INSIST doesnt make you correct.
I dont agree to your definition or the shitty "groceries are a subscription" bs I've been reading itt, bunch of broke-ass neets whove never written a contract talking about contract law and shit.
You are wrong, I dont care how long youve argued or if you started the thread, just flat out WRONG.
Because physical purchases mean you own it and to lose your physical copy would mean an act of God, someone physically cutting up the disk with a boxcutter, someone smashing the cartridge with a hammer, a house fire, or you misplacing it. You also gain the massive benefit of being able to lend your games out to friends (Something that effectively locks your account on Steam until they stop playing), you can sell the game if you're done with it or don't like it, and most importantly you can install and play the game without an internet connection.
When you pay for digital content you are paying for what is essentially air that is locked exclusively to one account. If that account at any point gets banned for any reason (Bank issues, you're an idiot, hacking your system, mass reports, etc) you are now out your entire library. All of it. All that money you dumped into the account is gone into the ether and you as a customer have no rights to play them anymore.
The best part is that physical copies are nearly always cheaper than their digital counterparts for months if not years, and they always drop faster in price because stores can't stock games indefinitely. PC digital stores drop prices a bit faster, but they still hover around full price and like $40 much longer than console physical copies. Then there's the console digital stores which are beyond unfair in their pricing and take forever to drop anything, especially DLC. Dear lord, if you want DLC on sale you better send a prayer for that one.
GOG is the only good form of digital I've seen, but you effectively need to become a digital hoarder of your library in the chance they go down if you want to keep your PC games.
I begrudgingly get digital games but will always go out of my way to buy LRG or equivalent releases, and import Asian or Japanese copies just to have a physical copy of a game. I cannot stand digital.
Money is mostly digital.
Gold standard is dead.
Get over it.
>bootlicker
makes you wonder if adblockers will soon be considered digital piracy for "robbing" devs of the chance to make money.
that's why digital distribution is illegal by the way, not because you are literally stealing but because sharing copies prevents the IP owner from making hypothetical money from selling it to your friend as well.
Those adblockers rely on donations or their software repository contains advertisements which is why in some cases its consider as theft.
They already criminalized sharing a netflix password with your friend, Microsoft is trying the kinect thing again where it charges you more money if it sees more people in the room with you. Adblockers are gonna be next on the chopping block. And it's only gonna get worse when y
TO CONTINUE VIEWING THIS POST, PLEASE SHOUT "MCDONALDS" AT YOUR MONITOR
>pirates the rest of your post without saying the name of an american company
>nothin personell kiddo
Luckily I live in a country where pirating copyrighted material is legal for personal use.
Gaben's quote always comes back in topics like this for a reason:
>One thing that we have learned is that piracy is not a pricing issue. It’s a service issue
Which hurts companies because it's true and not just for the sake of piracy itself but for almost any online service.
If the service is inadequate, more people will resort to piracy. Books, movies, games, music, it doesn't matter. Netflix introduces anti-consumer ideas then more people will flock to piracy. I don't know wether it's a number of people who leaves a service if significant enough to hurt the company but there will be definitely people who leaves the service.
>pateron
No. I pay for complete products with a one-time transaction, not financing the livelihood of a group of people so that they MAYBE create or finish a content that I want.
(you can also pirate a large chunk of patreon posts and uploads if you know where to look so I consider this an "early access" of their services)
>boosty
what the frick is boosty?
>All of it are optional
Sure it is, and I choose no.
>if you are actually frugal then you would not need to splurge it from the first place
Just because you have money to spare on luxury like movies and vidya doesn't mean one has to be lavish (or even careless) with their spendings. A cheaper option for the same product remains a prudent choice even if you have more money.
>I could buy official discs and that would cost me four digits since I want to hoard many discs.
In which case you get the security of the products being available at a moments notice. Maybe on an even higher resolution (such as home cinema quality).
I personally prefer stability over quantity.
>what the frick is boosty
Russian scam site
Cheap options does not guarantee any form of stability.
Purchasable digital goods offer the ease in accessibility which is something physical cannot offer at an electronic form.
All of these are optional and it is nice that we get the privilege of choice.
This is some thing that we have taken for grant.
Piracy is the sense of entitlement over nothing.
You just want free stuff just admit it.
>Cheap options does not guarantee any form of stability.
Neither does a more expensive option guarantee a better quality or product stability.
>Purchasable digital goods offer the ease in accessibility which is something physical cannot offer at an electronic form.
Although you could digitalize your media if you wanted to, this is a fair point.
>All of these are optional and it is nice that we get the privilege of choice.
Yes and I respect the choice of others even if I don't agree with it.
>This is some thing that we have taken for grant.
I'd argue that people have forgotten the values of owning something and thinking about movies instead of immediately moving on to the next product.
>Piracy is the sense of entitlement over nothing.
Piracy is a choice just like someone choosing to buy into subscription services. The option to pay for a product after trying it out is still up to the individual after piracy.
>You just want free stuff just admit it.
Yeah, why wouldn't you? I want cheaper products in general and it doesn't get any cheaper than essentially free.
Much like cinema and radio you do not own the product at all.
And you want free products then those free products are still paid by default since you are the product.
>Much like cinema and radio you do not own the product at all.
Yes, but it fits into my one-time payment way of life. Although a cinema monthly subscription would be something I'd actually consider.
>And you want free products then those free products are still paid by default since you are the product.
Honestly, I want quality products (that fits my personal expectations). I don't care if it costs 0 or 100 dollars I'd probably pay for it provided that it's a one-time transaction type of business model (ie. no gacha, subsequent monetization with the exception of large expansions).
Unless the product matches a large number of criteria I have in video game design, I just won't buy it. I might still play it, but I won't buy it.
>you are the product
I pirate a game and I don't encourage others to buy the game. I isolate said product so it can't connect to the internet with all it's modern game analytics bullshit for example.
How am I the product in this instance?
With your logic I could argue that all subscriptions are one time payments but the option to continue it indefinitely.
I'm not sure what your argument is based on and while it's an interesting idea I couldn't agree.
If you are paying for the same thing multiple times as opposed to paying for it in a single instance then I fail to see how anyone could argue that subscriptions are "one time payments".
You are given the option to not pay for it again.
Sure but wouldn't you lose access to your content if you don't pay subsequent fees to the service? In most occasions you get to keep the product after a single transaction.
Don't get me wrong I am not against the ability to choose you anyone want's to get their entertainment as this has been a topic of debate ever since you could just rent books from a library instead of buying them.
Both has their fair share of arguments. If you lack the space and you are likely to not open up the book after you're done reading it then sure, go use the library. However if you have ample storage space and you might want to read the book multiple times, I'd argue it's better to just buy the book.
You have gone through hoops and loops just to validate your nonsense.
You are the product for you consume it regardless of its nature.
Its like when you go to a library and copy all of its contents.
And stretch my analogy further then sell it to others much like these piracy hosts or distributors with their ads or sponsors.
I don't need to jump hoops other than saying that piracy is legal in my country. It is my right.
>You are the product for you consume it regardless of its nature.
What is the basis of your claim? How do I become the product if I buy a book?
>Its like when you go to a library and copy all of its contents.
Care to elaborate on what is this supposed to connect to exactly?
>piracy hosts or distributors with their ads or sponsors
Some undoubtedly do, yes. However this is not definite proof that there are no piracy sites without advertisements.
Additionally if one were to block ads so that he can't see any on a specific site, couldn't he accquire content without becomming the product?
I can't really understand your proposition that you become the product in every form of consuming anything, other than some phisiological sense that actually consuming something becomes part of you in a literal sense. Do you mean that by watching a movie, you become a carrier of its messages subconsciously? Like seeing a car in a movie pushes you towards owning a car like you've seen in a movie? I could accept that, but that would also be true to everything and not just consuming content made for entertainment.
I'll hazard a guess that your questions are genuine so I'll treat them seriously.
>Why are we often hesitant to spend money on digital services?
For me, it's a fairly simple answer. The one-time purchase method is actually cheaper for the consumer in the long run, which is something the corporations don't want.
>[thing] costs $60, you buy it and then it's yours forever (mileage may vary on current vidya/series/movies and their platforms)
vs.
>[thing] is part of a subscription service that's $15 a month, which means that if you want to use the thing you bought after 4 months, you are paying increasingly more every month.
Sure this may SEEM to pale in comparison to the "vast catalogue" of choices, but what if you want to experience a show you have already seen again at a later date? What if you want to think about the meaning of a movie, or just simply play a game again for the sake of nostalgia? Then that piece of entertainment just costed you exceedingly more than if you were to just buy it outright on a disk.
On a more sinister side, one could theorize that it's intentional to incentivise users to consume as many content as possible without reflecting on it and returning to said titles (either because of the vastness of the catalogue or that because you pay for it monthly it becomes a "waste of money" to watch a movie again which you have already seen since you could watch a new movie).
In which case subscription based services are not only trying to drain wallets but also reduce the amount of thoughts of the average user to a "don't think, just cosume and get excited for next product" state which is something I abhor.
The obvious answer to this is unironically piracy. The old addage of "vote with your wallet" may not be as valid now as it was before with the whales who spend more than 80% of a userbase but that shouldn't stop you from using a product or service. Just properly research if you can get into trouble by pirating copyrighted media.
where is patreon and boosty?
All of it are optional and if you are actually frugal then you would not need to splurge it from the first place.
I could buy official discs and that would cost me four digits since I want to hoard many discs.
>muh whales
cope of the century
no way loyal customers are a thing
crazy
>CIA
Not your jurisdiction, gays. Go back to selling rifles to and buying opium from Arab rebels, and wake me up when you plan on sending a Marshal to my door.
Hey Ganker moderators go ban this american traitor over here.
The US Constitution only allows for the existence of the US Marshals Service, and that is the only federal agency I acknowledge the existence of. The CIA are a shitty copy of the British MI6, and the FBI are publicly funded Pinkertons.
And don't get me started on the ATF, NSA, DEA, and all the other three letter homosexuals
non american cope
My biggest obstacle to buying any kind of media and technology now is the ideology behind these companies. I'm not giving my money to any company that is or has ever pandered to left wing fads. I was going to buy a ton of games on Steam and the first thing I did was check the Twitter for all of the devs and publishers. If I saw a Ukraine flag, any kind of BLM, troony flags, or anything about vaccines, I put it on the pirate list. I will only pirate those games.
How to spot a south american gamer 101
I'm white with blue eyes, my own house, car, and job, but you are not a woman
Sure oh definitely pendejo.
wow quite the hypocrisy innit
Transexuals seething that someone pirated their game
moronic newhomosexual is a moronic c**t shocker really
Why are tourists like this?
>Why are we often hesitant to spend money on digital services?
Because digital things don't exist and neither does fiat money so none of it matters.
Fiat money exists.
Go ahead transfer those physical commodities 247 365.
Digital things exists because of its physical components i.e. hardware.
Bank notes backed by physical commodities are not fiat money, moron. Non-fiat money is something that used to exist.
And those are coins.
Coins that are uses materials that could be use for other better purposes.
>And those are coins.
Nope, doesn't have to be. Once upon a time in the US, paper money was backed by gold. Your idea that fiat money is the only way to engage in modern banking is moronic.
Fiat has value because you trust in it.
I don't, though.
I didn't ask.
You made a claim about whether I trust something and I have the right to dispute such accusations.
For me it's simply that I don't want OnlyFans to appear on my bank and mastercard statements for a bank manager or family member to snoop upon.
I didn't ask loser.
Your bank does not care about the contents it only cares about its profitability as a bank operator.
>BUUUUUUUUUUULLDOOOOOZEEEEEEEEEEEER
>Why are we often hesitant to spend money on digital services?
No real ownership.
Do you own your birth?
I do.
Do you?
Then go unbirth yourself.
I sleep in a race car bed.
Do you?
no i am not a manchild
I sleep in a bed with my wife.
ESL
>YOU'RE UP AGAINST THE WALL AND I AM THE FRICKING WALL
I bought Seireiki Rayblade as a download from the Playstation Store.
When Winky Soft folded Sony took the download away from me. They didn't just take away the option to buy the game, they made it so that I can never download the game ever again.
Even if I had downloaded the game and stored it, they updated the PS3 and PSP firmware so that you need to authenticate downloads and games that have been removed from the store cannot be authenticated.
I bought lots of stuff from the 3DS store too and none of them can ever be downloaded again.