And it's written in pretty much the same way as the UK anti-porn thing, where age ratings alone won't cut it, so if you want to make smut games in Brazil you need to have some sort of "effective" age gating on top of parental controls to allow parents to close it off to their kids.
Art. 12. Os provedores de lojas de aplicações de internet e de sistemas operacionais de terminais deverão:
I – tomar medidas proporcionais, auditáveis e tecnicamente seguras para aferir a idade ou a faixa etária dos usuários, observados os princípios previstos no art. 6º da Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018 (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais);
II – permitir que os pais ou responsáveis legais configurem mecanismos de supervisão parental voluntários e supervisionem, de forma ativa, o acesso de crianças e de adolescentes a aplicativos e conteúdos; e
III – possibilitar, por meio de Interface de Programação de Aplicações (Application Programming Interface – API) segura e pautada pela proteção da privacidade desde o padrão, o fornecimento de sinal de idade aos provedores de aplicações de internet, exclusivamente para o cumprimento das finalidades desta Lei e com salvaguardas técnicas adequadas.
So where are we on this one? We gonna be the "fuck free speech, I hate loot boxes" or "fuck thinking of the children, we like our smutty stuff"?
How are they different? They're both activities we allow for adults but not for children. For, arguably, good reasons.
I mean, you can be into one more than into another, and you can argue whether or not loot boxes should qualify as gambling, but for practical purposes when it comes to regulation they are fairly interchangeable.
Not that it matters, because regardless of what you and I think, they are listed together in the law. I'm not mixing diffferent issues, the law is specifically, explicitly applying the exact same regulation to porn and loot boxes. Doesn't matter how you feel about it, the Brazilian regulators think they're the same here.
They are the same in the law. They will be treated the same way.
Also, what is your point anyway? That porn should be accessible to children but loot boxes shouldn't? Are you not OK with porn being for adults? The question here isn't whether the content is adults-only, we probably should all agree that's the case. The question is how that's enforced.
I mean, if you want to tell me what you actually think about that I'm happy to listen, but going "these two things feel different to me" doesn't bring anything to this conversation.
My point was pointing out your logical mistake. These two things are separate things which should be discussed separately. Just because they are grouped together in one piece of official document, doesn’t make it the UNIVERSAL truth.
or are you telling me the Braziling government doesn’t discriminate between gambling and porn in other settings?
(Also maybe I missed it: Where did I cast any judgement about it being accessible to children?)
No, see, there is no logical mistake because at no point was there an argument about universal truths anywhere. There was a note that, despite the headline and article not flagging it, the same regulation covers porn and has some of the issues that anti-porn age verification has had in the past.
You're just doing the thing where you read something on the Internet and it made you angry by not immediately reinforcing your preferences so you nitpicked a random bit you thought didn't check out regardless of whether it was part of the argument or not.
The point is that, despite being in the same bill, they shouldn’t be. One is already covered in existing law, related to adult exclusive activities recognized as such the world over (porn for clarity). The other is defining a new phenomenon that has yet to be defined as being exclusive to adults and currently exists within spaces for children to the point of predation and is akin to existing child targeted products (loot boxes again for clarity).
Lumping even seemingly similar things is a bad practice that is more meant to poison pill bills (among other things) than actually execute legislative duties.
Whose point is that? Because I don't think it's the previous guy's point, and it certainly isn't mine.
I mean, the law (not a bill, this isn't the US and it has been approved, as per the text) outright bans loot boxes in games "targeted at children or teenagers". No qualifiers. Doesn't even say "paid loot boxes", so technically all videogames are now illegal if they have a loot table anywhere. I'm going to assume cooler heads will prevail and a categorization will come from courts or specific regulatory development, but it's certainly not in the law.
So if you don't like this for doing both at once... well, that's weird, that's why laws have multiple articles. If you're worried that the inclusion is meant to stall the bill that's irrelevant, this has been published and comes in force in six months. If you think they're overreaching by outright banning loot boxes... well, I agree, but I don't think that's the point as the rest of the thread is defining it.
EDIT: Someone in a different thread pointed out that despite referencing slightly differently there IS a definition of lootbox in the law and it does include a requirement for them to be paid, so I'm correcting the record here:
IV – caixa de recompensa: funcionalidade disponível em certos jogos eletrônicos que permite a aquisição, mediante pagamento, pelo jogador, de itens virtuais consumíveis ou de vantagens aleatórias, resgatáveis pelo jogador ou usuário, sem conhecimento prévio de seu conteúdo ou garantia de sua efetiva utilidade;
The high seas for a PlayStation 6 exclusive release? First, might be a while before piracy on a new console is a viable option, second, an emulator won’t be able to run it for years.
You won’t be able to pirate the PS6. Not unless technology gets really fucking gnarly by the time it releases so you can download hardware. You’d have to rely on real theft.
There’s a massive difference between a Switch and a Playstation. We’re nowhere near emulation of a PS5, and knowing Sony they would have FromSoftware make a launch title for the PS6.
I had fun with Go when it launched, but haven’t played in years. What I love about it though is how many"non- traditional" gamers play it. I’ve had more than one 50+ coworker I’ve known tell me they play it often, and do no other gaming besides it. Two of my sisters also play, and they don’t play any other games. I think that’s awesome.
And while it’s a good thing that this asshat is gone, I’m sure he’ll be running another company soon enough and spreading his cancer and bad practices elsewhere very soon as a CEO at some other company.
Plus you know that he’s not the only cause of this at the company and his underlings that are just as cancerous with their bullshit are still there.
The game came out in 2021. There are far older games from other publishers still up and getting updates. Stop giving these pump-and-dump games your money.
When did it become the expected norm to receive endless updates for a one time purchase? How is that a “pump-and-dump”? Unless the game is a buggy, broken mess (and maybe it is, I’m not familiar with FC6), once the purchase is made, any additional content or service should be considered a bonus, not a mandate.
If the game requires online features by design, then the company does have the responsibility to keep that online.
If you don’t want to support a game for 5-10 years with online services, don’t make a game that relies on online services. It ilreally is that simple.
Don’t put always online DRM (if hitman servers go down, nobody can play the fully single-player game. Absolutely 0 reason to connect to the internet).
Don’t put online DLC verification. Use a damn code/binary file that steam can distribute theough the store.
if you have a multiplayer game, put an option for self-hosted game servers and LAN. Battefront 2 original is literally still going for 18 years because they were not dumbasses and made a good game with good features and custom server capability
It really is extremely simple to not be a corrupt, money-grubbing piece of shit corpo.
Except this isn’t about DRM, or even online game servers. They literally said all of that will continue. They’re just not making DLC anymore and people are calling it a “pump-and-dump”.
Seriously. I realize people have Feelings about DRM and always-online stuff, but this is an article about a game that was never especially popular or active entering maintenance mode after a couple of years.
They aren’t shutting it down, they aren’t making it unplayable (though of course either of those things could happen at any time etc etc) - they just are no longer producing content for a game almost no one is playing anymore anyway.
I cannot trust any publication that “reviews” a product like this without taking at least a little time to go over the legitimately harmful business practices against the customer.
The real threat is Godot. It’s getting better and better. Why pay for a commercial game engine, when you can use one that comes with a literally no strings attached FOSS license? And you have full access to the source code, so you can fiddle with any line of code, if need be.
I looked through the announcement post and all I can say is that this is beyond absurd. Can they even legally apply these changes retroactively? All these relatively large indie games used Unity. They can’t exactly tear everything down and use another engine. They didn’t even accept such terms at the time, so how can they suddenly be expected to pay for every download they get?
And I was so excited to finally start learning Unity too… damn. I probably should have seen something like this coming way back when they announced their IPO. I was going to learn Unreal at some point as well but I guess I’ll just uninstall Unity and skip right to UE5.
There’s definitely going to be huge action taken from every studio that used Unity in their games. I have a hard time believing that they’ll get away with the retroactive part at least.
It isn’t going into effect until January 2024, and it isn’t retroactive. And I don’t think you need to worry too much about breaking 200k paid installs if you haven’t even learned the language yet, but I admire your drive if you do.
It isn’t retroactive in the sense that it applies to installs before that date, but rather in the sense that it applies to games made with Unity before the announcement.
American test audiences literally said that for I Am Legend which combined with studios unopinionated cowardice caused them to ruin the ending, amongst many, many, many other times that test audiences have given bad artistic feedback.
His anger should probably be focused at the showrunner / studio, but I’m guessing he’s not risking burning those bridges so is instead blaming the only other party in the decision making process, the test audiences.
You do have a 20% illiteracy rate, and the response is that American test audiences have ruined very obviously good plots with their stupidity many times before.
Dark Souls is kind of a lonely game, I wonder if they'll recruit some ally npc characters like the Solaire, Siegmeyer and that funny little guy named Patches. Or will they go the Samurai Jack style and revel in the loneliness of the journey.
Yeah I hate this trend of you have to subscribe in order to not be tracked. I just agree to the cookies and then block them at the OS level. Get to have my cake and eat it too.
eurogamer.net
Ważne