Does anyone defend them? I think what happens is that people get mad at them but then still buy the games anyway hecause they’re absolute fucking idiots. I believe this is what happens.
Same goes for the people who whine about how broken COD is yet still buy it every single year. People often wonder why the game industry is the way it is, but then you realize the average person has a gold fish brain and will keep wasting their money on crap just to be disappointed over and over. Companies absolutely love that kind of customer and would rather rely on them than actually try.
I gotta thank Ubisoft for saving me money by consistently saying dumbass shit so I don’t buy their crappy games. The one Elon tweet was still pretty funny though I won’t lie.
The way of the future…VCRs went away. DVDRs went away, replaced with DVRs and membership streaming, where you can “buy” a movie on Amazon Prime, but if they lose the rights to the movie, so do you - oh well. Your Tesla will brick, if Elon gets mad at you, and your video games will stop working if “the man” unplugs the server. Oh, and dont get caught pulling out your old dusty VCR to record the Super Bowl to watch later…thats a copyright violation. The oligarchs want to make sure the plebes eventually own nothing. If the masters can take it all away, the peasants will do what they’re told, be quiet about it, and smile when in sight of the masters.
It’s because valve has always been transparent about it. They’ve also put in place a lot of protections for gamers, which is why I trust their store. Their stuff is also a license, but I have yet to see something pulled out of my inventory. Actually there was a game once, and it was a Ubisoft game now that I think of it. I believe that’s when they put in more protections.
Ubisoft wants to make everything cloud dependent and then want us to be happy that we can’t play our games anymore. They lost all of my trust. If it’s not a purchase, then it’s a rental in my eyes, and I’d never pay more than $20 for a rental.
Yeah, but it’s always been a license. I’ve never been unaware of that, it’s only now that publishers are starting to abuse that fact that they’re making it obvious. Again, I’ve never been burned by valve, so I trust them. Maybe that’ll change some day, but for now, that’s why they’re doing better.
This is why I will always have some nostalgia for physical media. I still got CDs I bought in the 90s (which I’ve copied onto my hard drives a long, long time ago) and while they need a like coaxing to work at times, they are forever mine and no one can take them from me.
I was very hesitant to go on steam specifically for their ‘you don’t own shit even if you paid and followed the rules’ garbage.
I bought Star Wars squadrons and it worked for a bit. Now it doesn’t even boot and I don’t know why. Initially it was my shitty anti-virus that was causing the problem, but even after disabling it it doesn’t load.
It’s called staying away from venture capital. It really is as simple as that. Because Valve has a lucrative business model they have no need or desire to raise capital from outside investors, therefore there is nobody to squeeze them for value at the expense of their customers.
If you watch Cory Doctorow’s talk where he coined the word “enshittification” he explains how the process works, and it starts with outside investment. Enshittification is just a catchy term for value extraction, from the perspective of the customer.
servers ain’t free. I know ubisofts are a bunch of pricks but if you run servers indefinitely without generating income you’ll eventually run out of money.
Not every game is an MMO requiring vast server farms. A game like the crew 1 that is past it’s prime is not expensive to keep a few servers running for. It’s a negligible cost.
They could also put in the time to give players the tools to host their own servers, or simply allow offline play. This used to be standard for all PC games. They chose to do neither of these things in an obvious effort to force players towards the sequel or their other games. They should not be permitted to do anti-consumer things like this.
Depends on the game for what point scaling further gets difficult. I think Factorio can do near infinite with the clusterio mod and from a server host perspective it’s very easy to setup. You just need enough servers, the mod allows cross server interaction.
that’s a good point too. however it’s very possible they’re using proprietary code that’s used in other IP. Especially the core game engine, which you’d have to open source too.
It could be but it wouldn’t take long before it’s replicated in a way thats not propriety or just stolen by devs in countries where that means nothing.
They are a giant shitty conglomerate they will find 10,000 reasons
I agree with this, however, I also don’t think they should be allowed to call it purchasing. If you don’t own something, then you didn’t purchase it. The button for games like these should be “long-term rental” or something to that effect.
I’m okay with servers being shut down eventually, my issue is we don’t know when. If they want to call it a license and that it will be revoked later, well fucking plan it out and tell people. Did the game get cheaper as the clock ran down? Did the people buying 10 years of access pay more than people that only got to play it once? I’m pissed for the people like me that sometimes take a few years to get to playing their games only to find the servers are gone and they thought they were buying something (or at least licensing something) they would get to use.
Of course they would probably find that if they told people how long they could use it, a lot of people wouldn’t pay them for it (i.e. their business would fail without intentionally deceiving their customers).
If you have to buy it, you own it. Make it free to play but have in game purchases. Everyone knows free games can shut down any time. I play lot of mobile apps until I get tired of playing it, then delete.
I avoid buying games that requires online connection. It means the game is unplayable without it.
It’s sickening what companies can get away with just because it’s legal. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.
Ubisoft cannot complain if I pirate their games, because they never actually sold them. And I’m not deceiving them with my intention of never, ever, give them a dime.
You are right you can’t steal something that is not ownable, but paying for the game is what allows you to play so playing without stealing is still breaking their rules. Instead of buy to own they made it pay to play. But that sucks so fuck them anyway
Playing devil’s advocate here: both lines are consistent with them owning the games. We just rent them for a while, and own nothing. But pirating is taking what they own without paying - i.e. stealing.
Every AAA game company’s have been for 30 years and still currently are arguing this in courts all the time.
The actual public facing employees don’t have to, but sometimes still do, though usually in an unofficial capacity these days.
AA / indie devs are more of a mixed bag. A few will openly say ‘fuck it, pirate it if you can’t afford it, idgaf’, but the majority will denounce piracy if its relevant or if prompted.
copyright infringent is commonly also referred to as IP theft, theft of intellectual property.
unauthorized use, sale, or distribution of ip is ip theft.
when it comes to software, basically , unless your software is distributed under some kind MIT or GPL or other copyleft liscense… all of the software legally is ip, and using it in an unauthorized manner is copyright infringement… which is also referred to as ip theft.
so yes, ip theft is a form of theft, and gaming companies and lawyers and other lawyers have been successfully suing other people and other companies into oblivion over this basically since the industry began.
I’ve always heard it referred to as infringement, in a legal context. I’m sure game publishers (and music, film, etc.) would like to equate it in the public mind with common theft of physical goods, but it’s all just propaganda.
We’re just playing games with words at this point. The law is pretty clear, that distributing a copyrighted work such as a copy of a video game is illegal. I don’t know why people like to repeat this line, that “if buying a game isn’t owning then piracy isn’t theft.” Maybe it is a moral/ethical argument? It’s not going to help you in court.
The entire original comment chain that lead to what I replied to … was all about playing word games with slogans, progoganda, public relations.
The law may be ‘clear’, but it is clearly bullshit.
It is absurdly deferential toward the rights of megacorps and hostile to the rights of consumers.
Laws are supposed to reflect and codify morals and ethics, arise from them… not determine them.
But, as we slip more and more into a cyberpunk dystopia of hypercapitalist megacorps being able to basically just buy legislators, judges and laws, it will become more evident that the government is just entirely a facade directed by them.
This whole article is about a lawsuit in America, you know, the land of the fee, home of the early and very expensive grave?
The place with the ongoing fascist coup that’s dismantling all the government agencies that regulate corporations, after the richest man in the world just bought an election, and more recently openly tried to buy a state judge, and though he didn’t succeed, will likely face no penalty for doing that very obviously illegal thing?
Also, as far as at least acquring a pirated game?
Its not that hard.
Now hosting them? Sharing them?
Yep, you’re right, that’s a bit more difficult… but hey, be clever enough to not get caught, and thats the same as being rich enough to write your own laws.
copyright is a type of intellectual property, an area of law distinct from that which covers robbery or theft, offenses related only to tangible property.
I mean, I can be as much of a pedant as you and post an unsourced definition of ‘ip theft’ … or maybe you could just admit you’d never heard of the term ‘ip theft’, or are unaware of its use.
Its a pretty commonly used term, especially amongst government regulatory and business organizations, as well as academics who study policy, in the US.
The term itself, its phrasing, is intentionally constructed to frame copyright infringement as a form of theft, stealing something that doesn’t belong to you.
The psychological framing of the term is meant to frame losses from someone committing copyright infringement against you as equivalent to losses from being robbed.
The entire point of the usage of this term is to mold public perception.
Here’s some examples where very prominent US institutions/organizations use some construction or variation of ‘ip theft’ as an umbrella term to refer to all kinds of copyright, trademark and/or patent infringement:
And finally, literally IPTheft.org, which basically functions as an all-in-one training/resource hub that connects business people to all kinds of resources to report when they have suffered… IP theft.
When you “buy” software, you’re buying a license that grants you permission to use it subject to the terms & conditions. The stealing as the law would see it is from using software without purchasing a license or using it in violation of the license.
It even extends to digital content people “buy” on Steam, or Google Play, or Amazon including books, music, and videos. You didn’t buy that content, even if you think you did. You bought a license to it which is why occasionally Amazon or whoever will just scrub the content from your account without your consent. That’s also why in some countries you pay VAT on e-books even though you don’t pay VAT on real books - because you actually bought a software license which is liable to VAT.
So the best advice is don’t buy digital media from online services. For games and software it is unavoidable but recognize you don’t legally own squat although most console games on disc or cartridge can still be sold second hand. But even that is being eroded. Nintendo apparently are planning to sell “physical” games in stores but you open it up and there is a redemption code inside. Sony and Microsoft have both tried to get away from physical media too.
I think there is an implication that if you buy a game which is online by nature (e.g. an MMO) that the servers can and will shut down eventually. My cupboard is filled with defunct MMOs. And people do not “own” any commercial software per se, they run it under licence.
So I don’t see that Ubisoft has any legal obligation here. But as a good will gesture they really should put the server code in escrow, or open source chunks of it so that games can continue to enjoy life after the company itself has no economic incentive to continue running it.
Although ubisoft is a shit company, don’t think it’s the only one. Every game you bought on Steam, Origin and Epic aren’t your property either. You just bought the right to play their game for as long as they allow you to.
If you truly want to own your products, buy on GoG (you will get the offline installer as a download) or pirate. Because when you pirate, you have more rights and benifits than a paying customer.
Companies don’t even care anymore, it’s just a money grab with the newest bug simulator. As soon as the first purchase bubble ended, the project is abandoned and people are stuck with a piece of junk they do not even own.
In the exceptional case a dev truly delivers, like indie studios or Larian studio, the game dev world goes mental as it shows how corrupt and fucked up they are.
Support the few proper devs, pirate the rest. I pirate everything these days and when the game is good I’ll buy it.
I have over 500 games on steam. If the platform dies, that would be a major loss for me.
Honestly, platforms like steam and Netflix made me stop pirating. But with the increasing amount of streaming services, with increasing prices and more and more limitations and loss of rights, loads money grab junk content, I dusted off me old pirate hat. I am a paying usenet user, I automated all my movie and TV show downloads, I pirate games first and only buy them when they are worth it. I use Grayjay to view YouTube, because it has more freedom than a premium user.
I’m happy to pay for stuff which is good, I refuse to pay for junk, limitations and loss of my rights.
gamesradar.com
Aktywne