I am absolutely on the voice actors’ side here, but isn’t this a less than ideal argument? It seems to presume a right to be employed. If epic don’t want to use voice actors, why would they have to? I’m genuinely asking because isn’t this just a form of automation? Again, on the side of real voice actors, anti gen AI, I’m trying to understand.
This is the point of collective bargaining contracts. A union negotiates the rules by which their members and companies interact, sign a contract, and then both are bound by that contract for the term.
The union is claiming the contract they have in place prevents the automation of voice by the bound company unless they get agreement from the union first.
Oh I know how unions work, they’re quite important and do mostly very good work where I live. I just always assume any unions that manage to even exist in the US are little more than begrudgingly tolerated by employers. I didn’t realise they were referring to actual contractual obligations, I see. Thank you for clarifying.
There is no evidence that Guillemot or Deraine were directly involved in sexual harassment or bullying at the company, they are being accused of complicity.
Which has been said from the very beginning. They didn’t do it themselves, but they knew of it and didn’t do jack to stop it.
Do you enjoy having every good, innovative US or EU product die immediately due to China/India making a 1:1 copy and flooding the markets with it?
Enjoy innovative products that startups create? How about not having any of that because as soon as a startup makes something, a big corp comes in with their money, steals the idea, and floods the market?
EDIT: no arguments, just downvotes? Damn, I thought this place was supposed to be better than Reddit…
Chinese companies famously ignore patent law and do make copies and try to flood the western market with them.
Most startups don’t have the time and/or money to patent their ideas and big corps do squash them/steal their ideas routinely once they become noticeable.
If anything, startups can’t develop their ideas because some company will hold a generic patent like “clicking a button does something” (or “glide with a pet”) from 30 years ago.
Chinese companies famously ignore patent law and do make copies and try to flood the western market with them.
But western companies at least have a tool to fight back or limit the flood.
Most startups don’t have the time and/or money to patent their ideas and big corps do squash them/steal their ideas routinely once they become noticeable.
Ah, the usual “if the solution is not absolutely 100% perfect, let’s throw out the solution”. Come on…
If anything, startups can’t develop their ideas because some company will hold a generic patent like “clicking a button does something” (or “glide with a pet”) from 30 years ago.
Yeah, this happens all of once every billion times. Clearly the system is stupid and needs to be killed so that nobody who isn’t extremely rich can actually develop anything new without being immediately put out to pasture.
I just wanna know which amazing video game innovations We are protecting here in America. Are we talking about the failing franchises that have been milking their customers for 15 years? Have we done anything really innovative recently? Remakes delayed games and flops.
I just wanna know which amazing video game innovations We are protecting here in America
First, I’m not talking specifically about America. Second, I’m not talking about “amazing innovations”. Copyright is also for trademarks, very characteristic gameplay mechanics, etc. For example, Playrix made “Fishdom” which was copy-paste Worms. Team17 won the case and protected their IP.
Are we talking about the failing franchises that have been milking their customers for 15 years?
Umm… No? What does that have to do with copyright or IP protection…?
Have we done anything really innovative recently?
Have you tried looking at titles from other publishers than Ubisoft, EA or Activition?
Eh it’s all just stolen and borrowed code. Whens the next Dawn of war or command and conquer coming out? Oh never. locked behind IP laws and timid corpos.
Yes, US companies have a lot of IP conflicts with China and we do tend to hear about them through media. But that paints a skewed picture of what’s actually happening.
If you were to research it more carefully, you would find out that the vast majority of these claims (>90%) are not pursued by US companies. As a deliberate, strategic decision. They don’t want to.
I don’t care where the company making the claim is from, as long as it acquired the IP legally and has a valid claim for protecting it.
The way the patent system works is bad in many, many, MANY ways, but saying “copyright and patent laws need to die” is just idiotic. As it is, we at least have a semblance of rules. Without it, it’s just “whoever can reproduce and mass produce a promising product faster”. And that means: China because they already make everything.
I’m talking about 70$ games man. Im talking about IP being locked away for decades. Genres of games dying off to push profitability of bigger projects. Strangling out smaller studios any way possible. I’m talking about Gamers. They came for GAMERS.
You’re talking nonsense, is what you’re talking about.
What does a genre drying up have to do with IP or copyright? Like, are you even reading your own words?
Strangling out smaller studios any way possible
Supergiant Games, CDPR, Larian, Sandfall Interactive and every single indie creator out there clearly haven’t been informed of how horrible their situation is. Maybe you should contact them and let them know that the 10/10 games they’ve been making are impossible to make due to copyright and IP protection laws?
Also was loosly talking about my increased business costs associated with china tariffs. Let the chinese steal shit and make it cheap for me thats what im talking abou.
That’s the US law system, not the IP system in general.
There are examples of smaller companies managing to protect their IP (Finjan vs Symantec, Unwired Planet vs. Huawei, Neo Wireless vs. Sony, etc., etc - that’s just from a quick search).
I’m not saying that the copyright system in place is perfect, but saying “copyright and patent laws need to die” is just delusional.
Patents have an expiry for a reason and the expiry date is pretty generous IMO. It’s thought as “Startup x can invent and make money off it but after it the market should take over so further improvements can be made.” Imagine if they patented CRISPR Cas9 or the first DNA sequencing method. It would limit science for the entire time of the expiry but not after.
Claiming invention patent for the pokeballs more than 20 years after the game came out is absurd. They can keep the brand, trademark and IP for their weirdly long time but innovations should become public so the market can continue innovating.
I don’t think patents and copyright “need to die”, but they are currently both overly broad and last far too long. Copyright protection especially has no justifiable reason to be even 1/4 as long as it is.
every good, innovative US or EU product die immediately due to China/India making a 1:1 copy and flooding the markets with it?
If it’s a perfect 1:1 copy why does it matter? Can you explain how this isn’t just a stance rooted in xenophobia?
Enjoy innovative products that startups create? How about not having any of that because as soon as a startup makes something, a big corp comes in with their money, steals the idea, and floods the market?
You just described the dream of most startups. The goal of the vast majority is to be acquired by a big corp so that their idea/product can continue growing, because without acquisition growth is severely limited.
If it’s a perfect 1:1 copy why does it matter? Can you explain how this isn’t just a stance rooted in xenophobia?
First of all: very often it’s literally a 1:1 copy.
Secondly: imagine you make an innovative product. I don’t know, automatic fence painter, whatever. It sells well, but you don’t have the money to start a large-scale production, you’re doing OK with sales and are looking for investors, but things are fairly slow. In comes a Chinese dude, buys one auto-painter from you, brings it home, dismantles the thing, copies everything (potentially making some changes), and starts a massive-scale production in his factory. Due to the mass-production, worse materials, and lower labour costs, he sells the product at 20% the price of yours. The market is saturated with his knock-off, you’re left with zero money.
Is this xenophobia to you? Or someone stealing your product and killing your business?
The goal of the vast majority is to be acquired
Yeah, I’m not talking about them being acquired. What gave you that idea? I specifically used the words “steals their idea”.
imagine you make an innovative product. I don’t know, automatic fence painter
Do you know why there doesn’t exist automated fencepost painters? As bad as this sort of stuff is in software world it’s soooo much worse in hardware world. The licensing fees for every single little piece of IP that go into it would nickel and dime even large businesses out of building anything like that. Sure there’s also technical difficulties with building one, but those are surmountable. However, a business model that could survive the constant threats of litigation, licensing fees and turn even a mild profit does not exist.
Is this xenophobia to you?
Yes, because you just described what businesses throughout the Western world do to your mythical small business and projected it onto some mythical far east.
someone stealing your product and killing your business?
You do realize that is the point of IP right? To allow legalized theft in this exact manner? In the exact article this comment chain is discussing palworld did their due diligence to verify they weren’t violating any of Nintendo’s IP and then Nintendo modified their patent filing so that they were with the express goal of stealing their product.
Do you know why there doesn’t exist automated fencepost painters?
I’m just impressed that you managed to miss the point by so much.
Yes, because you just described what businesses throughout the Western world do to your mythical small business and projected it onto some mythical far east.
Correct. Which is precisely why copyright law was established in the first place and why companies like Facebook, Google or Amazon were able to become what they were without Microsoft or Apple just copy-pasting what they did.
The copyright laws are not perfect, far from it. But they give smaller companies SOME form of defence against the corps.
You do realize that is the point of IP right? To allow legalized theft in this exact manner?
Do you also believe that OSHA was created to control the poor employee into submission by their great corporate overlord?
In the exact article this comment chain is discussing palworld did their due diligence to verify they weren’t violating any of Nintendo’s IP and then Nintendo modified their patent filing so that they were with the express goal of stealing their product.
Yes, like I said: the copyright laws are not perfect. But saying that it would better WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT LAWS is insanity.
Microsoft did copy and paste though: Yammer, Bing and Azure respectively. Apple tried with Ping/eWorld, Safari/Spotlight but didn’t really get into the web host space. Also worth mentioning the duopoly nature of those 2 specifically.
they give smaller companies SOME form of defence against the corps.
Rather telling that all your examples are Fortune 500 companies?
Do you also believe that OSHA was created to control the poor employee into submission by their great corporate overlord?
That’s a rather impressive hay golem you’ve built there.
WITHOUT ANY COPYRIGHT LAWS
We’re not talking copyright laws, we’re talking patent laws and you have yet to explain why it would be insane without changing scope or inventing fanciful scenarios.
Microsoft did copy and paste though: Yammer, Bing and Azure respectively
So, you fully and honestly believe that Microsoft has stolen Google’s and Amazon’s code? As in: you’re 100% certain that’s the case here?
Also worth mentioning the duopoly nature of those 2 specifically.
No. It’s not worth mentioning in a topic that has nothing to do with that fact…
Rather telling that all your examples are Fortune 500 companies?
It amazes me how you see a company NOW being a Fortune 500, and going “waagh, IP protection only serves the massive corpos!!!” without realising how many of those companies became Fortune 500 thanks to those protections.
It equally amazes me how you see the law being used by said companies most of the time (because, you know, they’re larger) and go “we can do without these laws” without blinking an eye, or a single neuron firing towards the thought that… these laws ALSO serve the smaller companies.
We’re not talking copyright laws, we’re talking patent laws
So, you fully and honestly believe that Microsoft has stolen Google’s and Amazon’s code?
Does a patent protect the concept or the specific code? You seemed pretty adamant that reverse engineering was theft previously, and assuming you haven’t changed your definition of theft then yes, according to your definition of theft I’m 100% certain that’s the case.
became Fortune 500 thanks to those protections
Thanks to those, or in spite of? You are focusing on outliers and expecting that to be a convincing argument to describe the typical.
these laws ALSO serve the smaller companies.
Just because they can, doesn’t mean it’s something to expect. There are orders of magnitude between how often they protect, and how often the destroy. You a big lottery fan or something?
This is what my reply was to
Fair, I was attempting to limit scope with only discussing patents and not getting into the rest of the weeds and didn’t properly communicate that. I had assumed there would be more than a single neuron between the two of us, but that was clearly presumptive of me.
Does a patent protect the concept or the specific code?
Depends on the patent.
according to your definition of theft I’m 100% certain that’s the case
It’s not “my definition of theft”, it’s “theft”. If you’re 100% certain, hit Amazon lawyers up, I’m sure they’ll love to talk to you about it - it’s literally free money for them and maybe a big payout for you, right?
Thanks to those, or in spite of? You are focusing on outliers and expecting that to be a convincing argument to describe the typical.
The hilarious thing is that you’re like so many other “revolutionaries” who come in and go: “oh no, the X rules are stifling the market/competition/free exchange of information/whatever” while being completely ignorant on how these rules came to be.
It’s like these capitalists of today saying that OSHA needs to go because they’re losing profits to it, completely oblivious to the fact that it was the capitalists of the XIX century who created them to increase profits (because having to replace skilled labourers became a high cost factor).
You strike me as someone who thinks that copyright and other IP protection laws are something that was set up in XX (maybe XIX) century as a means to protect the wealthy. Am I wrong?
Fair, I was attempting to limit scope with only discussing patents
Right. So when I refused to change the scope, you decided to call me an idiot. How very gentlemanly of you.
If he thinks any studio is going to pick up his ridiculous ideas for a game without having Hideo can-do-no-wrong Kojima at the helm of the studio, then he’s as self-absorbed as I think he is.
Depending on how detailed the material he leaves behind is (or how detailed they want to pretend it is) they could likely still get some mileage out of it. We might end up with a Tom Clancy situation.
Maybe, but I really doubt it. The only reason his ideas even remotely work is because he has a history of wackjob narratives inside otherwise (metal gear) solid games + complete authorial control over the entire product. Give one of his games to someone else to produce and they need to be exceptionally strong and resilient in the face of a team and investors that will naturally - as a part of development - be asking “what about this, people won’t like it, or it doesn’t play test well.”
The “why” for every little part of the game concept needs to exist or whoever is left in control will have a very difficult time explaining what the value is when that question is raised.
All this is perhaps superseded if Kojima names an heir in addition to passing along a bunch of ideas.
Apple had its steering rules overturned. Nothing in the new ruling changes the initial ruling that Epic violated App Store rules and was justifiably removed.
Cuz it’s egomaniacal behavior. He thinks he’s so cool and unique and innovative that his ideas are worth something even after he perishes, sometime in the next TWENTY or so years. It’s not like he’s bedridden right now.
makes sense. Epic immediately started offering in-app store software, so other companies could implement Fortnite-like stores into their own apps in a way that bypasses Apple’s payment system. It’s plain to see that Apple will do everything they can to stop that from happening. Services are about 25% of Apple’s revenue, which means that if they lose most of that revenue stream, their profit margin is almost cut in half. Combine that with how much tariffs are going to cut into iPhone revenue, and now this is more like an existential fight for Apple.
System based exclusives meaning you might not be able to play a game you want to in the future, expensive subscriptiona needed to play online, push to digital DRM controlled games… it’s almost like consoles killed themselves?
Well the alternative is PC gaming, and building a competitive PC aint cheap. I remember on launch people were building computers with similar performance to the xbone/ps4. But now that entry level dGPUs aren’t a thing, and even mid range GPUs are expensive you get fucked either way.
The PS5 is at least powerful on launch. The 4 was on par with like a regular APU.
I think more and more people have done the math on what your break-even is with a PC up front compared to noncompetitive digital console storefronts, needless forced obsolescence, and subscription fees.
It used to be easy to build a PC that was double the performance of a console for the same price. And it was even easier if you sourced slightly used current hardware. Now you’re lucky to get last gen hardware for a decent price used. The market is garbage.
Back in 2014 you could get brand new motherboards for ~$50, where it’s difficult to find any under $150 that provide decent features. I think the most expensive thing at the time was NAND due to flooded factories but everything else was super cheap.
A certified refurbished ps5 can be had right at this moment for $399, $450 new. I game on PC for many other reasons but the performance for value is pretty amazing on the ps5
You’re equivocating. In that instance I am responding directly to your claim that it’s far fetched to find a used one around the $300 point.
You’ll notice when you quoted me you also excluded the word “dips”. It’s dishonest for you frame my position as misrepresentative of the market by presenting my numbers without the couching I presented them with.
And why do you want to quibble over $50 when it doesn’t affect the discussion at all? Let’s just work with the higher prices, or even the brand new prices for that matter
This right here is the main idea, yeah, even when looking at the used market for PC components. Glad we found our way back, and even ended up in complete agreement at the end
As for the help you requested sifting through listings, used and refurbished are different things, you should know. Refurbished direct from Sony is $400, looks like gamestop will do it for $370. This sets a hard cap on used prices, so you’ll notice all the used listings (that actually sell) are below that.
You should also know they have websites for you to track what actually sells, and not just the listings that are left standing for a while because the price is mediocre. Worth checking that out so you know where to watch, and have a good chance of getting a good price when it appears. Best of luck to you
I’m not sure why you’re so resistant to it but I’ll just move on.
Oh, sorry yeah I can clear that up.
The reason I don’t feel like dancing for you is because you’re dishonest, aggressively self righteous, and obviously just want to fight about something meaningless for no reason.
Spend the extra forty bucks for something official if you don’t trust used, and don’t start dumb semantic arguments with people if you’re gonna want their help after. Not that I think you really do, mind. Just pointing out how ridiculous that whole pretense is.
Same, yeah I mean once you’re established the actual cost of games on steam is ludicrously small depending on your habits. I’m pretty much locked-in to pc gaming simply for the love of indie titles that more often than not do not get published to consoles. Lots of those games are just straight up free
We also have to consider the value the computer itself serves beyond just gaming. If you’re gonna get a $500 ps5 and you’re already going for an $800-$1200 computer, well hey. You could really get the best of both worlds without affecting the budget. Probably could even save money
But I think there’s also a big group that isn’t in that situation. I know plenty of people who rock like a chromebook and the cheapest xbox. Or people who only play like NBA 2k or something. Or people who play 1-2 big titles a year when they get caught in the hype train, and can enjoy them at 4k60fps for the much lower upfront cost
Personal anecdote. My PC cost me £900 in 2017. I haven’t upgraded it since. I have saved a significant amount of money in that time that would otherwise have been spent on PlayStation Plus for the benefit of playing multiplayer and the general higher price of games.
Even if you accept the argument that consoles are significantly cheaper in the first place, the point that PC ownership saves money in the long run is often overlooked.
I’ve never owned as many games for as little cost as I do now.
And the games that really demand the high-end hardware tend to be pretty rare in the grand scheme of things, not to mention less likely to be as good as the low spec games. I always joke with my friends that I might buy a killer new PC in the next year or so, but my most-played game will still be a 2D game from 2012 that absolutely doesn’t need it.
Why are people going for Bazzite for desktops? I’ve got it on a mini PC, and it’s great for the living room and travel, but even then the updater still keeps trying to apply an update from April 28th over and over again. Is it a good choice for desktop too? I’m on Kubuntu now but will probably shop around for a new distro with my next PC.
I’ve been using it on a desktop for more than a year now.
Never experienced that bug you mention but once the power went out during an update and it didn’t want to boot, so I just chose the second option at boot and it’s never failed again. Maybe something strange happened in your case, you should try it again.
Entry can exceed the cost of the console but if you upgrade your existing one, especially using used gpus it is dirt cheap.
Now factor in:
pc games online stores are cheaper, there are more opportunities for good deals. Usually 5-10 eur off a game.
you are not an idiot who pays for the internet twice, 80 eur a year. -pc game stores have better deals as console ones usually refuse to let the price down for a looong time since they have no competition
you are sonys bitch by owning a ps5 and you are not elegible for any refunds. Saving you tons of money since every pc game store lets you refund for any reason within a time window.
and even a pc double the cost of a ps5 will be cheaper very quickly.
After Nintendo saw how much the Wii succeeded while effectively being a gamecube with motion controls and a DVD drive vs. two “top tier titans”, they never bothered again with being at the forefront of tech, which possibly felt like a homecoming, considering the Famicom was kinda underpowered at release, but cheap to produce.
The best time to buy a console is just after its sequel is released, lots of people upgrading and selling their old one with all the games and controllers
videogameschronicle.com
Aktywne