thats where you are sadly wrong. games arent a product anymore. what they do is essentially kicking you out of a restaurant. piracy is ethical, but still a crime. but that doesnt stop anyone nor me from doing it
A copy of software isn't really a product, or I could become the richest man in the world by just copy/pasting and deducting tax. Photocopying a book isn't a physical product taken either, but it is still illegal.
@@lordchaos3819 windows 95... 98.... windows xp.... windows 7.... do they still work? of course they do because it was a product that you Purchased. The only thing they stopped is updating, which is extremely reasonable. Watch the entire video next time.
plus it can be used as a form of propaganda to show off to their competitors how well then games done when it all could be just an overeaction to the games sells.
3:35 Well, that happened recently with Korean NCSoft. For City of Heroes, a game they have discontinued, not only they decided not to chase private servers, they are endorsing at least one of them, giving them the official license for it. Yes, it's 12 years too late, perhaps, but it's a massive step in the right direction
Wait seriously? Man I was so pissed at NCSoft for shutting down City of Heroes back in the day. They basically have been my least favorite gaming company since then. For anyone who's not aware of the story. NCSoft bought the IP Rights to City of Heroes in 2007, and then shut it down a few years later.
@@Deadsnake989 Yeah, the server is called Homecoming. They are now legal licensees of the IP, and I read in one article that they are even allowed to continue development, but I'm not sure of that, so don't take my word for it
@@Hullbreachdetected Blizzard might have. The old Blizzard. When it was a bunch of people who loved gaming. Activision Blizzard definitely not, and much less Microsoft Activision Blizzard
I’ve been saying this for years now. The moment I first saw games shift to “live services” I knew this type of rent-to-play thing would happen. We haven’t owned any game that requires a live connection… ever. If you can’t load it to play it completely offline, you don’t own it.
I really like live service games. They have vastly improved my life simply by existing and you can't deny that sir I assure you. For example, I recently learned a lot about computers and technology because them. Thanks to the wonder that is live service games I now can build computers using Raspberry Pi's and emulate games flawlessly and play whatever I want. Because of Live service games I finally have time to play the many games I have that I never had time to finish because new stuff was coming out all the time. Now I finally can beat all the games I never could as a child. Yes, what a wonderful time it is to be alive as a gamer XD
Remember that one lady who said she wanted to "purge" gamers? Imagine making a joke or troll post on 4chan or Reddit and not being able to access your Steam library until you make a grovelling apology to some unelected board and have to go through a struggle session. All for products you paid for.
You can only imagine. Lord GabeN will never allow that crap. The man is an advocate for free speech, gamer and businessman, and he would hate to lose customers like that.
@@SmittyWJManJensen What's alarming though is what comes after him. No one lives forever, and it's all too common that once the old guard or founders step down or pass away that their beloved work and efforts come crashing down by these people somehow getting their greedy palms onto what we cherish and ruining it.
@@FreqstyleRedux that's my biggest fear too. We can only hope for the best, cuz the power he has woth pc games is scary if in anyone else's hands. It's not even "if", cuz as you yourself said. It's WHEN and that's the terrifying factor.
@@FreqstyleReduxKathleen Kennedy after George Lucas. Kevin Feige after Stan Lee. Bob Iger with Disney now. I am concerned, people like that will take over Steam 😕
@@leonnunhofer3453I'm not concerned at all, not because I don't think it'll happen, but because I know it's going to. The solution is to create another space for gamers that doesn't cater to the new ideology.
You need to explain what this is to a 65 year old government official with examples of music purchased on casettes, CDs or LPs. Every single one of them have at some point bought a music album. Explain it being something along the lines of you going and purchasing a casette tape with the all new album from your favorite artist, ABBA, and then at any point in time, the record company can come take that casette back, with you no longer being able to listen to the music you purchased anymore, or they come and ruin parts of the album so you can only listen to a small portion of what you purchased without reimbursing you. You can then elaborate a bit and explain how music too has largely been digitalized for consumption with subscriptions for access to a huge library of music which this isn't really all about but it's important to separate a subscription from a purchase, and continue more importantly with info like there being online stores from companies like Apple that has purchases for specific albums or even individual songs from an album, and then you can even use examples like Google previously having a music service called Google Play Music, which was eventually shut down in 2020, but upon doing so, at the very least they provided their paying customers with options to download what they had purchased from their online store and service, so that you would be able to listen to your purchased music even after their service ended. This is something these gaming companies do not do. They do not make sure you can still enjoy what you paid for. There's ways to make it understandable for those older officials too. Quite honestly, I think there needs to be laws looked into that mandates the ability to at the very least resell digital purchases on the digital store front you purchased it from with a marketplace where users of the service can sell a copy they purchased out of their own account and into another users account. The digitalization of things has completely butchered the First Sale Doctrine in Copyright law that reserves the right of the buyer to in example resell their copy or borrow it to someone.
It's literally fraud they're not allowed to steal an item that they've sold to you if every business did this that would be like the supermarket just walking in your home to raid your fridge and then tell you you have to buy your food again (and then they steal it again)
Good post but piracy is always justified since you already paid for it once. If you pirate a product you owned there is no theft. Don't bother trying to defend corpos. The rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer. We don't need more government involvement. They side with the too-big-to-fail businesses in the 2008 global financial crisis (corporate welfare for the establishment and the tax payers foot the bill for it) so you cannot trust them.
the physical games enthusiasts have been warning gamers for over a decade its nice to see people waking up but its incredibly sad to see that people needed to lose their digital content to finally realize
Physical or not isn't the issue. Both are the same EULA. Anything you do with physical that you cant no longer do with digital. Would be considered piracy under the EULA.
speak for yourself, I hate physical games. having to store these disks somewhere is pain in the ass. I love digital games, I can just buy the damn game, play through it and then throw it away. Odds are I don't want to to play that shit again in my life once I experienced it.
Well, it's not like it's been the fans of the digital games that have been complaining, for them it's all about convenience. Think y'all are missing the point though
@@_aPaladin Wym? It's the entire reason the Indie scene is bigger than ever, because AAA industry has gone to shit and lost their minds. There are more choices than ever before, it just coincides with there also being more scumbag big studio approaches than ever before.
DRG (Deep Cock Galactose): >Paid AA game (costs 30 bucks or something) >Can be played solo offline >The multiplayer is peer2peer (meaning you can virtually play forever since every server is fan hosted) >The battlepass is free (the boosts are free events too) >No virtual paid currency bullshit >95% of the cosmetics are acquired through gameplay only >The remaining paid ones are DLC packs that occasionally go on sale for less than 5 buckos. >Solid playerbase of 15k - 20k concurrent gamers daily. AA >>>>>>>> AAA bros
Would be nice if the upper echelons of big corporate game studios would stop pretending they know what the consumer wants while they don't even consume the product they sell.
Are you arguing that a game that THE PLAYERS pay millions of dollars to play and get all the lootboxes doesn't convey what (the paying) players want? To them a game that makes 100 mil and causes a lot of gamers to whine about how bad the game is, vs a one that makes 50 mil, but is considered good is clearly a better choice
@@Sennken The problem is they could have both, they could make a good game and still milk it dry, they'd make even more. I'd still be paying for a WOW sub if blizz just put out better content, same with DLC for console games like Halo. I'd pay a few £ for some armour, but not the price of a full game. They're tripping over their own greed and losing potential money in the process.
@@Sennkenon top of what the other guy said. We're seeing that not working out anymore. Helldivers is a good product with microtransactions. It wouldn't have existed or survived w/o both price and good game. The big game industry is hurting more and more because no matter what the biggest reason people used to buy as quickly as before was good will. People used to just buy Blizzard quality, that's no longer the case (obviously to some, but it's not the "defacto" anymore). I used to buy Bioware games until I saw the decline many years ago. If they aren't willing to make more affordable and memorable games to rebuild that? It just won't matter how expensive they make a game if no one is willing. Too many exist already to choose from now
Reminds me of Right to Repair. Voters and politicians have so little direct experience it’s difficult to successfully make the case with major corporations on the other side.
The digital version of Dragons Dogma 2 requires internet access to "verify licence', if you don't have internet access then you can't play the game. Not quite the same thing but it is similar.
@SrNerd I'm not buying it because of mtx. Honestly the way the handled dg2 makes me not want to play dg1 anymore either. It leaves such a sour taste when a game company views you as a cow with infinite milk
@@CaptainTreeJay thats exactly why i am buying the game: you can bypass any microtransactions with mods :D and still leave a negative review due to MTX :)
On your point about not being able to access content that we pay for, Bungie has a big problem with this with Destiny 2. They remove complete story lines and expansions to keep the games file size manageable but at the end of the day, it just feels like stealing.
That was a wild one. Sunsetting was one of those unfathomably idiotic and creatively bankrupt choices Bungie made just before/during the Beyond Light era. When the game was so bereft of content they just legit deleted whole expantion packs and your old weapons just to make you grind the same weapons again just with a new logo in the corner. Also rotating in old D1 content for some zero effort slop.
I find this to be a harder discussion cuz they had reavhed out to us (I was a player b4 beyond light) and got votes. Either make Destiny 3 or do this. The votes were sunsetting. I no longer see that as them trying their best, at least not with current management decisions in act. But at least at the time it made SOME sense.
Also it’s terrible that they add in cross progression for players wanting to play on different platforms just for them to repurchase the SAME “dlc’s” for those other platforms and that itself is a scam
Take a look at what NeoCore is doing with Warhammer 40K: Inquisitor Martyr. It is an ARPG just like D3/4 and PoE. Since they realize they can't keep the servers up forever, they are creating an offline/co-op mode where you can actually choose your own season to play at your leisure. Show NeoCore games some love for this move, and also get an extremely underrated ARPG.
It's like saying ' Hey, we have this awesome game for you to play, do you want it? ' and then you play for the game only for them later say ' Great, now we have your money, we're gonna take the game back! ' When it comes to purchasing at item in a game, it reminds me of a court case from quite a few tears ago now that the gamer won. He/she had bought a sword or something within the game, using real money, for it to have then been stolen by another gamer while playing. The gamer went to court and argued that they had paid real money for the sword, and yet it was taken away from them in the game. It was discussed that the sword wasn't real yet later determined that neither is digital music when you buy it, yet you still pay full price for something. They won the case because they could see that we did the same for music and movies and pay real money for them, so you own that object. It doesn't matter if it's digital or not. I'm sure if it was taken to court, people could still win based on this court case. Although some often say, when you buy a game now, you're not paying to own a copy of it, you're simply paying to have access to it for a period of time. If that is so, then it should be specified. I remember the days when you could buy a game, pop it in the console and off you go. You had the full game to enjoy, and there no need to worry about things such as micro transactions or the game being taken away. It's all about taking as much from the customer as they can and giving them less.
The think laws on ownership are crystal clear here in Germany. If you own something, you can do whatever the fuck you want to do with that product as long as it doesn't violate any other law, the maker/publisher/sales-person has no say in what you do with the product you payed for. That includes mods, cheats (there is no law against cheating in games), private servers etc. But getting banned for cheating on official servers is also totally valid on the publishers side. It shouldn't disable private and single player though.
Depends on the case for cheating. If its a cash prize event and someone cheats or hacks in a way to help them win, then that is seen as theft by fraudulent action plain as day and could land the cheater with a fine, suspension or worse. This is why the COD scene is haywire at the minute with cheaters/Hackers - Particularly in big lan events etc
I often think that online games should have the same rules that a lot of companies do with business software, simply that if the company stops selling and licensing the software they are required by contract to provide the source code so the users can continue using it if they want.
Lmao who's out here providing source code when they shut down? I work in software development and rarely see a closed source project being released after it shuts down. There's no rules about that and it's not common.
29:58 Nobody _signs_ terms of service. These are not signed contracts. These are coerced agreements which generally don't hold up well in court whenever a term in the "contract" is remotely unconscionable. Clicking past an "agreement" does not constitute a signed contract.
well they do, companies have the money and the army of lawyers....we have diddly squat in a court...... justice is not impartial nor blind as they make it seem to be... it leans to who ever has the money...... also a lot of the player base are to blame for this... ever gotten a " they dont have to give you anything, dont be entitled" as a response to a post about issues with games? well those ass kissers are the ones that defend companies to do more shit like this" the only ways to make it change is to stop paying for this shit , no more digital crap that has to have a shit ton of day 1 patches, no more "always online" just buy physical games physical, and ask for refunds if it asks for a day 1 patch (that you could not access later in time) before they did not have updates, they can do it again stop buying microtransaction shit, etc etc
This may come out as being weird and random, but I've mentioned these things to Meta AI, and asked about these possibilities, and it's response was that it's all to flabbergast and gaslight a situation that's been exaggerated. Just like how the WEF don't actually want people to own nothing. That was snowballed out of context by the Media.
@@victormanx That's what people should be: Sensible in what they do, even in what they support and what they purchase. Good luck convincing enough people to be that way though, they're too busy "living life" to notice or care how we're all in the same sinking boat, losing our sense of responsibility and ownership as consumers.
@@NoedigJK471Our sense of ownership was always present from day one, although it doesn't seem like it with digital software, ya know? I own my house, my furniture, and vice versa.
Actually, it's quite easy to explain such a situation to seniors. For example: Imagine you bought a vinyl record or cassette tape of The Beatles. Years go by. The record company that sold and produced these cassettes or vinyls announces that they can no longer support your vinyl records and tapes, and from next year, they will no longer play on your record players and devices. But I paid for it? Sorry, dear old Betsy, but it's not profitable for us. The end.
Real life case: one author sues another. Publisher desides to withdraw the e-book of sued author. The issue is withdraw of unsold and SOLD e-book from private library of a SOLD e-book of their customers. Look it up, there are channels that talked about case and followups. For example in our world and not internet: the publisher finds names and adresses of their buyers, enters homes withouth permission, and takes the book you paid for withouth your permission. How would you feel? Would you dare to buy another e-book of that pulisher? Or any other?
Yes, if you imagine the vinyl player functions through some digital means -and that digital capability is then revoked out of the blue even though you paid for it and can maintain it yourself just fine.
Or even worse: that record player is now owned by another company and the new management wants you to accept their EULA (you have no other choice and you couldn't predict that happening). Also it turns out that the new EULA enables your vinyl player to also play ads before and after songs. "B-But I already paid for the vinyl record!" You say. "Oh, sorry dear old Betsy, we have to profit from the last company acquisition. Also you already accepted our EULA. Bye, bye."
But thats the point. You cannot pirate The Crew. How do you all still not unterstand this. If I pirate a game, I remove in some way the need for the game to check if it is actually a normal purchased copy. I trick the game into thinking it is a valid copy and that I can play it. Ubisoft is shutting down their servers for The Crew. Now I pirate The Crew. Okay, you can probably start the game and it will work maybe all the way up to the Main Menu. And then you get a error message along the lines of "Can't contact ubisoft servers" or some other crap. And that is it. So you can now stare at your main menu screen as long as you like because you pirated the game. BUT YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GAME!!
I don't know why refunding isn't a thing. Look at what Google Stadia did with all its flaws. The service closed down and google refunded all the games you bought in your library.
I feel they knew woth the way people have been burned by the industry that if they didn't that would have been a class action on them. It's Google after all, not some middling company that couldn't make it.
Because no one would ever make another live service game ever again unless planning to keep it alive forever, With that thought Imagine WoW or any other MMO dying completely like alot of MMOs do and they have to refund 100% of purchases made, Company/studio would go bankrupt instantly since they would have to pay back every single person that ever bought anything from them. Now not saying that is Wrong or anything and for Consumers would be Huge win, but realistically would kill any game like that cause no publisher/studio would see that as a risk worth taking, Especially small/mid sized ones.
that’s a terrible idea. Stadia refunded because it died QUICKLY. most of these games that shut down are games that have been in existence for years that barely have a constant player base. if there weren’t articles and vids about it, most people would never know that the things shut down cuz they’re not playing them. plus, if you could refund indefinitely, no one would ever make any money ever and the entire industry would collapse.
@@kirerunte1046so do you never pay for anything in life that isn’t a physical product you can hold? never paid for a service, like a car wash, maybe a massage, a gym membership? it’s not like you can take those things home with you… if you think about it like that, a one time fee of $60-$70 for something that entertains your for years isn’t really a bad deal. people just need to be savvier and understand what they’re paying for when they buy online only games. now, if you want to say that they shouldn’t be able to take legal action against people who set up their own servers after they shut down the official ones, i’m right there with you, but if you play ANY game that’s online only… yeah, but the official servers shutting down is just an inevitability. nothing, i mean NOTHING will ever be supported forever, nor is it reasonable for anyone to expect it to be, and legally forcing companies to support games, or even make them try and predict how long a game will be economically viable for is NOT ethical. it’s just the consumer being greedy at that point. but i guess greed only matters when the big company does it, right? in the end, it is your money. spend it how you want. that IS really what this comes down to. we don’t “need a law,” honestly, any regulatory “solutions” will just introduce more unintended consequences and probably solve little in the long run, as is the case with almost ALL “pro consumer” laws. it’s up to the customers to actually understand what they are paying for. it’s really that simple, and in the end, you are paying for a license. and it has ALWAYS been like that, really. it’s just that the hardware was different in the past. but even with old NES, they won’t last forever. the metal will rust, the save battery will die, and the plastic might even get moldy…. huh, you know, i never see anyone complaining about how Xbox live Arcade no longer works. people are acting like this is some new problem all of the sudden and i don’t know why… its weird.
2:57 Game companies can shut down old game servers in order to move the player base to new games. I think it will be difficult to regulate shutting down private servers whether they shut down an old games service or not when a publisher can have a new game “in the works”. Some of these games take years to come out. Maybe they have a different franchise they want to move players to. GTA to Red Dead Redemption, something like that.
The first step is that game companies need to be forced to clearly label what you're doing with your money when you get a game. Are you subscribing to a live service? Are you renting a limited period license? Are you buying/purchasing a personal copy that is yours to do with as you please indefinitely within the confinement of general law? This should be clear with no room for misunderstanding, right where you click to part ways with your money. Not after you pay, not on page 27 in an EULA. Upfront, in plain sight. If you go into a video store, you expect to say right on the case if it's for purchase or for rental. When you go to a media entertainment site, you must in equal degree see clearly if you are buying a product, or subscribing to a service. It's that simple.
This. That way consumers can make an informed decision. Unfortunately the fossils that make the laws, don't even know this is a problem to begin with . 🤷♂️
@@its.araragi Fair comment... but at some point in time, those "fossils" won't be around to blame anymore. Then what? You think it'll just magically get better? If not, then maybe the fossils aren't the problem.
@@treytonsams3637 Yes, by nature you are renting a license, not buying a game. So obviously they'd need to change. It's scam to call it anything else even if it's been normalized to think of it as a purchase.
Every game and service say it in the same way though. To read the full rights for video store is also a long one, but it is understood that is how it is. Steam is also very transparant that you only have access to the game on the service, as long as they/the publicer allow it, this is as well-known as video store rentals/purchases. But on the other hand physical media breaks, lacks patches, etc. and then you permanently lose access to the media unless you buy a new one. You still aren't allowed to pirate it.
"Any digital product sold by a publisher that requires services provided by the publisher to facilitate the intended and/or advertised (or any other reasonable means of expression or communication facilitated by a employee of the seller or their subsidiaries) functionality of the product are required by law to either 1. Provided a version of the product that allows the buyer to continue to use or own the digital product as originally intended or advertised that does not require services provided by the publisher 2. Offer a refund for any digital product and subsequent, related products intended and designed to only be used for the purchased product, that can no longer function or be available as originally intended or advertised." TLDR: If you buy a game and cannot play it after the publisher discontinued a service or purposefully disabled your ability to use it, then they either need to provide a stand alone version or give you a refund.
@@ryanh7167 No, this is an example of what a law could look like that I came up with. This is not an actual law or code. I liked the idea and I wanted to see if I could write it out in a short, concise way that would make sense and be enforceable. When I was writing this out, it occurred to me that this would also impact software subscriptions like Adobe's or Microsoft 365's suite of apps which have a similar problem at the moment. On one hand, this is good because they are also getting away with something I think is very unfair. On the other hand, it makes me feel like something like this will not happen since those companies and others like them have enough influence to make sure it doesn't happen.
I'm sure a lot of game developers already have ways to circumvent this in their T&Cs that you read for most games that have a live service embedded into them. I.E.: You paid for the privilege to play the game, not for the ownership of any product. If your game does NOT currently have an offline mode, it is NOT a product you are paying for. It's a digital amusement park you have a pass for.
4:35 I think it's salient to mention that as a phone's storage fills up, which is usually middling NAND flash connected to the chip via eMMC (aka the shittiest data bus known to man), you will see severely degraded performance. Try deleting lots of data from your phone and maybe a few background apps. You may see a giant performance spike. Storage controllers, especially on phones, struggle when the storage is near capacity.
Digital items should be treated exactly the same as physical ones. Any purchase should be yours forever and transferrable. As long as you have a digital copy stored you should be able to do whatever you want with it.
Fun fact: the highest court in South Korea ruled almost ten years ago that digital goods were subject to the same regulatory processes as physical goods.
In my country Software is treated as an "object" and if you buy it, you are the legal owner of this and can do whatever you want. Thats why we can sell games from our steam library. We even have a seperate legal text that regulats this matter. And the consumer is always in a better position in comparison to companys. Its the same when EA said, that they will delete your account if you don't use it for 3 years. A high Court decided that this is illegal. Lets say, the law in a lot of countrys is way more advanced as in the US. way way more tbh
@@TheSilverShadow17 I'm German actual 💀 so I don't think the was speaking about Germany, as a 10 year German pc gamer I never heard a single sentence about being able to resell
Even IF signing a contract would be able to revoke your user protection, companies start to change the contracts after the purchase and either indirectly, if you want to keep using it, or directly, by not giving you an option to reject, forcing customers to sign.
For an easier to digest example. Imagine you bought a car, the company lost money on that model of car, so they disable any online service that came with the car and cut their maintenance for parts. Makes sense so far. But then the car manufacturer decided, that they also need to remove the engine from your car and every other one they sold, because they're just not selling that model anymore. And that's what's happening to these games. It's not that they're losing support, its that the company is crippling them so that they are unplayable after the point from which they lose said support.
Exactly. And also you can't just substitute it with another engine, because every fitting model was stolen from EVERYONE and nobody has the knowledge to make another one that would work.
@@TheSilverShadow17 Oh, and I forgot to add that there's no available blueprints and the whole engine is kind of a black box where no one knows what exactly is it inside. And any attempt of simulating what goes inside makes the engine explode. That's the analogy for server encryption, to break through which there needs to be the kind of people like the ones that cracked the WW2 military codes, and I'm only slightly exaggerating.
We need a sacrificial lamb indie dev-- release a game, revoke access to it quickly, launch a class-action suit. If you go after big publishers, they have big legal departments that will try to win; whereas an indie-dev wont be able to afford it, or, they could be a willing sacrificial lamb and lose on purpose to get the precedent for future lawsuits to have a far stronger chance to win
The fact that if I get an account banned when that account has cosmetic dlc purchased that I lose that entirely. If the account gets banned a refund MUST happen since I no longer can play.
@@PokerKing1993 no, if you buy into an online service and you lose access through cheating you dont get anything back, bc it was your fault and not theirs
@@l.3626 well, not really, RIOT had to give back all the skins a player had purchased to a new acc when the old one was banned. It happend 3 or 4 times in BR. The laws here are pretty strict, and most companies cant get away with this kind of BS
I used to think that, whenever PS3 first came out, the disk was expensive, so I would save money for as much as I could so that whenever a new game that looked interesting came out, I could grab it and play it on the weekend. I still have a bunch of PSX, PS2, and PS3 Disks at my parent's house, neatly in the basement where me and my brother would play, and sometimes invite friends over for some tabletop sessions, it was a great memory. Then PC gaming gained popularity, and we got to play CS and Garry's Mod, I remember the talk with my friends about how in Steam, you can own a game, but at the same time feels like you're not owning it, now, years later, lo and behold, some publisher making it the norms that you have to feel comfortable to not 'owning' a digital product copy of the game you purchased, mind you, BOUGHT, not rental. To hell with "live service" gaming, to hell with digital ownership, gaming is not about having fun anymore, people are too sweaty and obsessed with meta, publishers only care about the sales numbers, dev putting 3D live render cutscene that cost tons of money but never care about worldbuilding and the gameplay itself, I'm sick of watching 30 minutes cutscene tearjerker and another 1 hour of tutorial before playing the game, only for the game to tell me what to do every 15 steps. fuck, fuck, fuck it all.
This is generally a problem with AAA gaming publishers. You wont really see this kind of malpractice with AA and indie studios. Switch your focus there and you'll appreciate gaming all over again. I definitely have.
That actually made me think of a scenario. If you bought a year subscription to *game* and a month later they update the TOS in a way that you don't agree with are you eligible for a refund since they wont let you play what you payed for?
What's with this trend of games either not having demos at all or demos being time-limited? I mean, what is the point of this? Do a game suddenly stops needing a promotion after the release? Bc that's what the demos do by simply existing and being available. I remember like 20 years ago i bought some game magazine that came with disc with demos, patches etc. So i installed the demo of F.E.A.R., and it was just the game but you cannot progress past the act one. So i played it and immediately walked to a store to buy a disc with a full version. Imagine if i tried to install the demo but got an error "sorry buddy, you are late, the demo was time-limited". Yeah, okay, then I wouldn't have known that I needed the full version and would not have bought it, what is the point of that?
They're pretty much exclusively used to drive hype before launch now, not the "try-before-you-buy" like they used to be. It's especially relevant for new live service games because these games launch with scarce content to begin with, and often don't have enough content planned out to span a solid 6-12 months after launch, so they can't afford to "waste" content on a 1-2 hour demo for their 10-hour content cycle. At some point, boardroom execs decided that it was more profitable to just let people buy the games they wanted to try, since they can't refund them after the fact. It's BS, but boardroom execs make their salaries based on BS.
This happened to me with the demo for Amnesia: The Bunker. I downloaded it when it came out and didn't play it right away, and when I got the time I couldn't launch the damn thing anymore. Maybe if I close Steam and click the EXE directly and... no, nothing. DRM on demos is insane.
@@kveller555 Nah, DRM on demos makes sense because iirc there were some cases when demo version was used to create a pirated version of a full game. So if the full game has DRM it's kinda reasonable to add it in a demo too. The time limited demos are still stupid though, with or without DRM. :)
@@supersonic443 Yeah well boardroom execs missed a great opportunity lauching physical media with demo's like FRESH used to do, Where we pay money for demos!
As an OG gamer, I remember how fun LAN games were, especially RTS, or even split-screen games, but what you want (making private servers always an option) is impossible in todays environment technologically and practically. Most of the new games don't even support LAN or direct IP connections anymore, so it has to be running on dedicated server and not just that, nowdays it often runs through a 3rd party provider or a cloud server, which means you can't share anything inside of that infrastructure. If it's running on kubernetes, which is now the case for larger multiplayer games and MMOs, it will be an infrastructure that costs about 100x the game itself (sales + development cost), because these are billions of dollars investments with thousands of people and decades of work usually. But these larger companies usually have in their portfolio at least 10 big games, which means they only need to build their infrastructure once and then make some customization for the others. It is invaluable and so I don't think any company would ever share that as open-source, which would be needed for "private" server to be possible. And even that would be problematic, because it would need to run on cloud anyway, so it would never really be completely "private" as dedicated servers can be. So all of these larger companies would rather let some of their games die and stop all servers for that game, than ever releasing their server-side code. Basically tech has advanced and it doesn't work as it used to.. back then server files were often even included in the client of the game itself, so it was really easy to setup a custom dedicated server. The only solution to all of this that I can see is whenever the company decides that it no longer profits from some game or actually starts losing money, the gamers should have some right to "donate for their service to run" as long as they donate the money, it should be running and company won't lose any private data or infrastructure.
Very well said, the one thing i see about your proposed solution - The donations would have to be often and substantial enough for the company to make a return on the resources they spend to keep those servers running. Plus that would require the company to buy more infrastructure for each server they dedicate to "dead" games.
@RAM_845 yup I wonder if BF1 has the same thing becuase I think they still have some servers up. At least they did a while ago when I played. Probably been over a year since though.
The companies will try to defend themselves entirely on one argument. That everyone who bought the game agreed to a contract in the terms of service BEFORE the game booted or the players got access to the game per-se. That's the real scummy part. Have you guys ever stopped to READ the terms of service you're agreeing to before you play or install a game? On steam you sometimes get a notice detailing all that crap before you install a game AFTER you purchase it.
@@vespertellino Yes it is. A DVD/CD is just a storage medium. The hard drive you store your data on is physical, thus digital copies stored on a hard drive are physical. Companies could easily sell physical copies on flash drives or hard drives that get plugged into a device but they don't because consumers already have that physical hardware. Laws just haven't been adjusted to account for that fact.
You are legally permitted a back up rom of any digital media you own...this includes dvds, cds, etc...the issue is now you are no longer 'owning' your games, you are purchasing a 'license' to access it.
yea owning the game files mean nothing when they aren't being locally authenticated but instead have to go through a game company monitored online authenticator that can be shut down any time they please.
@@TheSilverShadow17 always has been licensed, not owned. Physical or not. Maybe it's legal to back up, but against eula. Which may only mean the service provider just stops providing a service to you. There are laws in Japan meaning no modifying of hardware or software. Usually only enforced if people take it commercially. People selling modified save games being fined is a good example. Sure it may not be a law where you are but you know certain major gaming companies are from there so that mindset leaks over to other countries.
@@zedamex Then what happens if I backup my games onto an HDD/SSD? Will they send a legion of cops after me or something all because I chose to secure the things that are in my possession?
@@TheSilverShadow17 that's why I said when sales gets involved. Because that situation is potentially large scale, it's also more obvious where it is coming from. If Joe Smith copies games at home it's likely impossible to know it even occurred. However the tools required to copy in Japan basically can't exist basically due to an anti competitive law. Fun activity, go to Nintendo search game manuals, they have some Gameboy advance ones there, check like the last page of the final fantasy one and it says it's illegal to copy, even for backup or archival, and those that do will be prosecuted. Don't think that actually exists in the US though. I'm no expert on law, only had to do licensing on a business level so read too many eulas out of interest.
If you buy a game and you can't play it two years from now because the company has somehow shut it down, you have to be a really bug sucker to ever buy another game from that company again. No one should ever fund further theft like this, and yes, it is theft. You paid for a product which was then taken from you. That's theft.
They also need to patch out any errors the game throws related to unavailable online features. E.g., PS3 Tetris throws stupid online error every time you play in non online mode.
I disagree with Asmon's comparison at 1:22 because vinyl records contain the total media you'll ever need to enjoy that album. In the days of physical game cartridges, companies knew that they had one chance to get it right and tested their games a lot more prior to release, and then what they released was the final game. Of course some nasty bugs still made it through and were then permanent, but that was the way of things. Now most companies intend to support their game through patches, so the release product is never the final product and typically quite buggy. Even if you have the vanilla game on disc, it's no longer the final product after a month or two at best, so if the company decides to quit offering patch downloads or blacklist you, you're either just screwed or have to rely on "pirating" patches that are no longer officially available. Either way what's on the physical medium isn't all you need.
4:36 Regarding phones maybe I'm an outlier but my phones are lasting way longer than that and I don't really see a performance difference. The main thing I'm mad regarding smartphones is how manufacturers stop releasing OS updates way too early even when the device itself is still perfectly fine thus contributing to e-waste.
I think it's like Netflix and movie. If they give something like gamepass with a reasonable monthly subscription fees and you can play all the title in the list, it's acceptable. But if you pay crazy amount for AAA title like "Diablo 4" (just an example), you should have the right to own it and can play it anytime in the future as long as you have the game requirement met.
The difference is, you can save the netflix content. With games as a service it won't work, because the vital components that are needed for the game to launch are allways on the company's side, on a server that will eventually be shut down.
@@konstantin3001 downloaded content from Netflix has limited time of viewing as well. It will have the same effect as not owning it forever. So what's your point?
No. Nor was there a first crash. This was more correctly the american console crash; nobody outside the US even noticed. What we saw was a smooth transition from console to much more capable home computers like the C64. This time its some AAA thing which doesn’t affect me noticably either. Good AAA games have been an oxymoron for 20 years; what do I care? Gaming hasn’t been in a better place since the 90’s.
@@soylentgreenb Of course there was a first crash and it _is_ going to happen, again.. it _is_ happening right now. There is an abundance of low quality games over saturating the market, 3x as many as there were in 1983..
*Chevie drivers paying hundreds of dollars on new rotors every time they replace their breaks*: "heh, owning a Ford is like paying for a live service." 🤣
The best is when the publishers put games about to be shut down on sale a couple weeks before they're to notify players of the games servers being shut down just so a few dollars more can be made off of a soon to be dead product.
Here's a fun fact about the WEF: Not once did they say that they have any true intent on making people own nothing. That single essay quote from Ida Auken snowballed out of context and proportion. It's really a scenario of what COULD happen not what will happen.
Another clear distinction that needs to be mentioned is that purchasing something in a digital store implies ownership of what’s purchased. What people should be fighting for is forcing these companies to change the language they use to force transparency. Instead of having the apparent option of “buying” something, it should be labeled as “renting”. That would give companies reason to pause and give more agency to consumers.
Legal strong arming based on the pricing model might be the best solution for consumers. Large lump payment ($70): If a company sells the product with a large lump sum up front, the consumer owns the item/game until they sell it (like any other item in the world) or until it breaks AND it’s labeled as an item in stores. Subs: VS subscription based (or f2p) pricing models where if the business shuts down, you loose access to the product (gym memberships and Netflix works this way). These could be force-labeled as Subscriptions, not items. Over time, consumers would see subscriptions (games) for what they are (this might not last forever), like a gamepass subscriptions. And lump-sum games would then be treated like anything else in the word you buy, upfront, and outright. Doesn’t mean the items lasts “forever” (what does?), but it’s treated like a real-world purchase of a DVD movie.
@@RobotronSage it’s forced labeling of digital and physical gaming products. They already do it with game age ratings and if there are in-game purchases. Defining and forcing terminology of what is an “item” verses what is a “service” is the end goal.
99% of the time government regulations just end up protecting monopolies by gatekeeping the competition. And in order to enforce them you must give the government full control over your industry. Do you think a fully regulated video game industry wouldn’t 100% require some Sweet Baby type nonsense? Be careful what you wish for?
I have heard that ph@rma or GM0 giants can even lobby for unbearable regulations for their own industry, because they will suffer but survive, but any smaller competitors will outright die or just will not be born in the first place. This probably works the same in the every field. Btw, on a totally unrelated note, any ideas why very reach people are often so vocal about "tax the rich" thing?
"If you could get a refund after they cancel the game, things would be fine" -- This "refund" idea is a non-starter, a blood-from-a-stone pipe dream. If they cancel the game because it's not breaking even anymore, where will the refund money come from? The money they already collected already went to dev salaries and paying off the loans they used to pay the dev salaries before they saw a cent of customer revenue. I think that the only plausible solution here is to have _licensed_ private servers, where the license fee is enough to cover the costs of making sure anyone playing on the private server, legit bought the game in the first place.
There needs to be something in the terms of sale that live services games need to stay online for x months/years after the final digital item is purchased; whether that's the game itself or items in the game.
Imagine the monopoly man barging through your front door yelling "I'VE HAD ENOUGH!! IT'S OVER! MONOPOLY IS NO MORE, EVERYONE GIVE ME MY BOARD BACK! IT'S MINE!" ... but mr monopoly, its offline and we paid for it! "I DON'T CARE, GIVE IT BACK, IT'S MINE!"
This is a very important topic! It is now growing in our attention, because the necessity of "clearing up obsolete games" becomes more real every single year. Once naively thought: if games went "out of service" one day... there would be a small modification, which enables to run the game completely offline. But obviously, this is not the case. So, maybe all of this will shift quite a bunch of players back to the days with cracked offline versions of games? btw... as long as I remember, there was never such thing as a "real bought software" in the past. Although it SHOULD be in terms of a COPY of this software! => Companies always give (or sell) you the right to use it, nothing more. --- But I just want to use it as long as I want during my lifetime, once I bought it (!). So, if the actual use time is truely limited, it should have to be called "rented" or "rented without specified runtime". The same relates to "bought" movies on streaming platforms.... 😞 Cheers,
Easy, explain it like music. 'Oh that album you brought, you can only use it for a few years and then after that the company that controls it will restrict your access to it. A refund? No, they keep the money.' Ez.
For Games as a Service, piracy would do nothing, sadly. The essential code to run the game, inner logic, networking and stuff like that is located on a central server, and only heavy stuff like models, textures, sounds, music, animations, text and other stuff is located on the user's machine. The analogy is that there's body (assets) and there's brain (logic). When you are connected, the game is alive, and when you are not - the game is decapitated. Then what are you gonna do, pirate a bunch on assets you wouldn't be able to launch? Pfftyeah, no.
@@konstantin3001 Private server is a things. I remember back in the day, the mmo that available locally in my country was too pricy. Because of that someone pirate that sh*t and make his own server to play with, of course with his own customization to make the game content more accessible
@@TheUmbraSol Well, it's not impossible, but the problem is that the "missing brain" part of the game has to be either reverse-engineered or written from scratch. If that's not enough, the server software is encrypted, too. So, in order to make GaaS playable again, it has to have a large community with a bunch of programming and encryption geniuses in order for them to have a chance of making the game work. Only about 2% of GaaS live through that experience after the server shutdown.
I absolutely refuse to spend a dime on in-game purchases specifically for this reason. I’m at the point where I’m incredibly scrupulous about the games I buy in the first place, even on consoles and Steam. As far as signing contracts: there are contracts which are void by nature based on the specifications of consumer protections. Examples can be found in tenant vs landlord disputes.
Had this problem with City of Heroes and Star Wars Galaxies. I was in to both games and both were snatched and it was years before they became privately available. If a company stops supporting and selling a game, it should immediately become public domain.
some of the issues arise because studios want people playing the latest and greatest. So if 200 people are still playing a game from 2017 they want to be able to "shut it down" and get those 200 people over to the newest title they have. May not seem like a lot but 200/300 people at 70-80$ game is still money to them. In some ways I get the idea and why studios wanna do it but what happens a game reaches EOL and no new titles are out. What if the studio reaches EOL and no one buys the IP....its a slippery slope. Games that are sold as live service need to go both ways. If you want us to invest time and money into the game then we will, but only if we get an "offline" or private server option when a title reaches EOL. This way people can continue playing if they want.
Someone from Amazon game studios responded to someone asking "you're planning a new Lord of the Rings MMO, are you worried about competition with the one that already exists?" with "obviously everyone will migrate to ours because it will be newer and have better graphics etc."
I still remember the exact moment in 2005 when I realized we were going to be fighting a war to take back our hobby. 19 years later, we are still fighting that war... welcome to the future of gaming, soldier!
Do NOT preorder games. Do NOT support games as a service. Do NOT support modern gaming. Buy classic, physical, copies of complete games. Graphics are not a selling point in a game, only gameplay matters.
Games should be on the disc that you buy. I shouldn't have to connect to a server to play a game. Online only games should be the only ones that require the connection. Not all games should be made online only. Games as a service should end also.
One issue though is even if you have a physical copy with an actual disk that game still has DRM on it that requires you to connect before you can play unless the dev was "nice enough" to give you an offline mode. So in the end new games even if you have a physical copy wont be playable in 5 years, or 10 years, or 40 years or whenever; even if you have working hardware that can play said game. Where at least with movies and music if you buy a physical copy there is no DRM that I am aware of that would make them un usable.
if it comes to a point where we are paying only for access to a service, the price should be a lot cheaper compared to paying for ownership of a product.
Same for the PS2 I got the year they came out. That thing still runs like a clock. Even got a couple games that still run. It's the discs that usually cause me problems
In my opinion to the point of the older representatives in our country not having understanding video games. They 100% understand music. So we could explain to them that “now that we have music on our mobile devices. Imagine if your purchased and enjoyed it. Then the owner of the music decided they no longer wanted it to be put to the public and now you can’t listen to your music”. It’s not a perfect argument but I think it would get them in the ballpark of what’s going on.
the argument that guy was making about being comfortable not owning music and movies doesn't really hold weight, theres no kill switch sitting over ur music and movies, if spotify goes down or netflix goes bankrupt, there will be a ton of other ways to get what you want, either legally or illegally, because they can be PRESERVED, this is the fundamental difference between always online games and other media
Cars are a good tangent, or atleast getting there. There are some that drop most power if GPS isn't available etc. Imagine if car is inoperable after 5 years, especially with all the money you have put into upkeep and what not for it. Also gives a tangent to microtransactions with purchased gps maps or other possible upgrades that are not easily transferable
Thats the problem even when you buy a physical disc if that said game has access to the internet at anypoint they can remove the content look at Bungie, i have Destiny 2 on disc but cannot access or play any of the content that was sold at the time off release discs are just a key nowadays
This is part of the WEF's famous, "You will own nothing and be happy". The future plan were everything is licensed and to own something is only a privilege for the rich. Games, homes, cars, and whatever else that can be "licensed", welcome to our dystopian futures.
if they're on your hard drive and the game doesn't use any online authenticator or server to play, then you're fine. It's true offline mode, where all data needed to access and play the game is stored locally -that they can't touch. But if anything is authenticated through online servers whatsoever, then they have 100% power over your product.
@@Real_MisterSir I'm not sure if you heard about what Sony did with GT Sport but that game received an official offline patch that forever preserves the game and people can play it literally whenever they want to. That's a bold yet good move on them to do that since they aren't updating it anymore.
The issue is, at least from what I have heard, is that some disc games do not have the entire game on the disc so you are forced to have internet to download a portion (usually a bigger amount than on the disc) from the servers of say Xbox or PS. Pretty much means even though you own that copy of the game, you won’t be able to play it forever if the servers of those companies go down, which seems impossible, but Xbox or PS servers have gone down before and who knows if they are willing to keep those servers 30-40 years from now.
@@Saigaiii Well GT Sport is now the exception because it got an offline patch that forever puts it in preservation. I can play it whenever I want now after that happened.
@asmongold @8:25 the current online refund policies set by credit card companies (visa, mastercard, etc) is sitting at 120 days. Any transaction made before that, technically can be refunded, however doing so is rendering said action open to arbitration by the companies selling the services.
Not to mention you are forced to sign it AFTER you purchase the game. It's not like you agree to sign something and then purchase the game under full awareness of the terms you are agreeing to. You buy the game and then they say oh yeah you have to agree to this or you don't get to use the product we sold you.
Its the same concept with sports, my favorite team isnt playing im not buying stadium tickets. My favorite team isnt playing in my state im not buying flight tickets. Now we go to games, they ruined my favorite franchise? Im not playing it anymore. The game has shitty mechanics? Im refunding it
I am really doubtful about the cloud gaming thing, mainly due to: 1. The Internet speed around the world still isn't good enough nor do I see it being fast enough in the future. We have hit a bottleneck in the development of the internet. While 5G is becoming a thing, they cover too short range. And Starlink will stay ridiculously expensive as it's owned by Yee lon ma. 2. Cloud streaming could have the same issue as streaming services now. They become too expensive to afford. Also, how is the pay model going to be? Do you need to pay for each game? Paying stupid amount for the streaming sercive and the games separately just rubs me the wrong way. 3. It has failed every time it has been tried. There's no guarantee it'll be any different in the future. People still dislike the whole concept. 4. Mobile gaming will be the future, no doubt. Phones in the future will be so powerful there's no need for cloud computing
Imagine buying a Tuxedo and wearing it years later at a wedding, when suddenly the manufacturer of the Tux decides to shut down access to that particular model. They press a button and your Tux unravels and falls to the floor, leaving you standing there in your undergarments. Sounds ridiculous, but this is exactly the power gaming companies are using, just on a different purchased product.
I completely agree witht the old times hardware breaking beeing on you. I still have my playstation 2 and all the games still work. I almost yearly play atleast one 15 year old game. I probably played ratchet and clank 1-3 20 times xD ohhh and jak and dexter
@@TheUmbraSolman Legend of Dragoon is so fucking good, one of the goats on ps1, need to get ne another copy. Loved the combat sequences and the story/atmosphere was great, good times.
I actually really liked the concept of The Cycle Frontier. My only issue was the predatory pvp aspect due to higher level players and/or players who bought their gear stomping on you while you're dealing with the game's wildlife during your mission.
17:35 So basically, Gamers and Weebs need to start a Political Party? Sounds like a Good Idea. 😈 Reminds me of "The Pirate Party", a political party that's actually real and wants to make copyright non existent. "You will own nothing and you'll be happy" - Them "Im not giving you my money or time then." - Us Problem solved. 😊 Also, Piracy will never end. 🤣
If you're talking about the Swedish Pirate Party (since they were the first one), they don't want to make copyright nonexistent - they want to reform it.
Amazon does this with their videos already. My dad bought a series that no one had available and one day it just dissappeared. Also to note, a surprisingly large number of Americans don't have good internet. We literally switched to using mobile internet cause our isp had max 3Mb/s and 70% uptime . Sure we lose cell signal sometimes, but we at least get 90% and 20Mb/s. Meanwhile the next neighborhood over has fiber access and gets 1000Mb/s on their bottom plan for half the price.
bro...I feel you i get 1.3 Mb/s download on a good night(usually in the kB) for almost $200 a month and 50 feet down the road has fiber access for $60-70. My only other options is satellite dish.
Well, at least people can record the videos. You can't just record an online-only game. Pirating the files, storing your downloaded copy and even keeping a physical disc would not matter once the server shuts down, because the server stores vital code needed for a gane to function. It's more like them selling you a car and then stealing it's engine in the middle of the night. Except you can't even substitute it with another engine, because the same engine was stolen from EVERYONE and nobody else can possibly make them.
Bring in the millions of ebook readers on this. They are also on the cusp of having their ebooks removed on the whims of some activist publishers. Their situation mimics some of the area that gamers have, but will dumb it down in explaining what the problem is. Everyone knows that one of Dr. Seuss’ books was deemed racist because it was using stereotypes for characters. Well they stopped selling that book. Now what happens if the company who was selling that book went and removed all already paid for ebooks for that title? People would lose money on it. Now what happens if in 6 months, they decide it wasn’t so bad and reverse their stance on selling that book. Now you have a company who sold a product, took it back, didn’t refund those people for losing that digital content, than said a few months later that you can now buy that product again, and than not resend that content back to the people who previously bought a copy. There is no consumer protection from companies that literally could screw the customer by doing this over and over again. Let’s hope they stay ignorantly unaware of this possibility.
Cloud gaming may hit triple A as a fad,but everything else like 20% of "AA" and 99% below "AA" like indies will still be single player as the 2 audiences separate(the 'dei that doesnt buy games and nondei which is the actual existing customers) And im still playing command and conquers and duke nukems from many years ago cause i absolutely love em
That would be fantastic if there were a law that made getting a refund for any digital goods purchased, possible within a certain period. Dragon Quest of the Stars (a mobile game) did their fans really dirty by having a HUGE sale (everything 50-75% off if I remember right) on their packs, passes, and other digitals, and then literally after the sale ended they announced that they would be closing the servers down permanently in a month or so (I don't remember how soon it would take effect but it was sudden). I was on the Discord server for the game and there was pandemonium along with a mass exodus, including myself. Every comment I found said that they felt betrayed. It was pretty dirty.
I saw one comment a while back that summed it up perfectly: "If a digital product isnt ownership, then pirating it isnt a crime"
Stealing pressuposes something physical
@@kirerunte1046 Identity Theft. Intellectual Property Theft. No, stealing does not presuppose physical property.
Piracy is ethical
thats where you are sadly wrong. games arent a product anymore. what they do is essentially kicking you out of a restaurant. piracy is ethical, but still a crime. but that doesnt stop anyone nor me from doing it
a while back? someone copies that comment on literally every video like this 😂.
"12 million copies sold".... "copies" implies a product not a service, they need to be sued and this shit has to stop.
"12 million revokable licenses issued" just doesn't have the same ring to it.
A copy of software isn't really a product, or I could become the richest man in the world by just copy/pasting and deducting tax.
Photocopying a book isn't a physical product taken either, but it is still illegal.
@@lordchaos3819 windows 95... 98.... windows xp.... windows 7.... do they still work? of course they do because it was a product that you Purchased. The only thing they stopped is updating, which is extremely reasonable. Watch the entire video next time.
You can photocopy a book, pretty sure you just cant sell that photocopy afterwards.
plus it can be used as a form of propaganda to show off to their competitors how well then games done when it all could be just an overeaction to the games sells.
3:35 Well, that happened recently with Korean NCSoft. For City of Heroes, a game they have discontinued, not only they decided not to chase private servers, they are endorsing at least one of them, giving them the official license for it. Yes, it's 12 years too late, perhaps, but it's a massive step in the right direction
Wait seriously? Man I was so pissed at NCSoft for shutting down City of Heroes back in the day. They basically have been my least favorite gaming company since then.
For anyone who's not aware of the story. NCSoft bought the IP Rights to City of Heroes in 2007, and then shut it down a few years later.
@@Deadsnake989 Yeah, the server is called Homecoming. They are now legal licensees of the IP, and I read in one article that they are even allowed to continue development, but I'm not sure of that, so don't take my word for it
Blizzard will never do that tho
@@Hullbreachdetected Blizzard might have. The old Blizzard. When it was a bunch of people who loved gaming. Activision Blizzard definitely not, and much less Microsoft Activision Blizzard
Wtf I live in a universe where NCSoft did something good for a change?
I’ve been saying this for years now. The moment I first saw games shift to “live services” I knew this type of rent-to-play thing would happen. We haven’t owned any game that requires a live connection… ever. If you can’t load it to play it completely offline, you don’t own it.
Yeeuuuup.
you mean since 2001? this has been a thing since forever, and we can cry about it all we want, but the truth is the majority of people do not care.
I really like live service games. They have vastly improved my life simply by existing and you can't deny that sir I assure you. For example, I recently learned a lot about computers and technology because them. Thanks to the wonder that is live service games I now can build computers using Raspberry Pi's and emulate games flawlessly and play whatever I want.
Because of Live service games I finally have time to play the many games I have that I never had time to finish because new stuff was coming out all the time. Now I finally can beat all the games I never could as a child. Yes, what a wonderful time it is to be alive as a gamer XD
@@Topbeehler Can't tell if that was sarcasm or not
PREACH !! 🙏🙌 Spread the message !
Been saying thís for yeeaars aswell
Remember that one lady who said she wanted to "purge" gamers?
Imagine making a joke or troll post on 4chan or Reddit and not being able to access your Steam library until you make a grovelling apology to some unelected board and have to go through a struggle session.
All for products you paid for.
You can only imagine. Lord GabeN will never allow that crap. The man is an advocate for free speech, gamer and businessman, and he would hate to lose customers like that.
@@SmittyWJManJensen What's alarming though is what comes after him. No one lives forever, and it's all too common that once the old guard or founders step down or pass away that their beloved work and efforts come crashing down by these people somehow getting their greedy palms onto what we cherish and ruining it.
@@FreqstyleRedux that's my biggest fear too. We can only hope for the best, cuz the power he has woth pc games is scary if in anyone else's hands.
It's not even "if", cuz as you yourself said. It's WHEN and that's the terrifying factor.
@@FreqstyleReduxKathleen Kennedy after George Lucas. Kevin Feige after Stan Lee. Bob Iger with Disney now. I am concerned, people like that will take over Steam 😕
@@leonnunhofer3453I'm not concerned at all, not because I don't think it'll happen, but because I know it's going to.
The solution is to create another space for gamers that doesn't cater to the new ideology.
You need to explain what this is to a 65 year old government official with examples of music purchased on casettes, CDs or LPs. Every single one of them have at some point bought a music album. Explain it being something along the lines of you going and purchasing a casette tape with the all new album from your favorite artist, ABBA, and then at any point in time, the record company can come take that casette back, with you no longer being able to listen to the music you purchased anymore, or they come and ruin parts of the album so you can only listen to a small portion of what you purchased without reimbursing you. You can then elaborate a bit and explain how music too has largely been digitalized for consumption with subscriptions for access to a huge library of music which this isn't really all about but it's important to separate a subscription from a purchase, and continue more importantly with info like there being online stores from companies like Apple that has purchases for specific albums or even individual songs from an album, and then you can even use examples like Google previously having a music service called Google Play Music, which was eventually shut down in 2020, but upon doing so, at the very least they provided their paying customers with options to download what they had purchased from their online store and service, so that you would be able to listen to your purchased music even after their service ended. This is something these gaming companies do not do. They do not make sure you can still enjoy what you paid for. There's ways to make it understandable for those older officials too.
Quite honestly, I think there needs to be laws looked into that mandates the ability to at the very least resell digital purchases on the digital store front you purchased it from with a marketplace where users of the service can sell a copy they purchased out of their own account and into another users account. The digitalization of things has completely butchered the First Sale Doctrine in Copyright law that reserves the right of the buyer to in example resell their copy or borrow it to someone.
It's literally fraud they're not allowed to steal an item that they've sold to you if every business did this that would be like the supermarket just walking in your home to raid your fridge and then tell you you have to buy your food again (and then they steal it again)
Good post but piracy is always justified since you already paid for it once. If you pirate a product you owned there is no theft. Don't bother trying to defend corpos. The rich are getting richer and poor getting poorer. We don't need more government involvement. They side with the too-big-to-fail businesses in the 2008 global financial crisis (corporate welfare for the establishment and the tax payers foot the bill for it) so you cannot trust them.
+1
+1
All you have to do is send this explanation to the better business bureau
the physical games enthusiasts have been warning gamers for over a decade
its nice to see people waking up but its incredibly sad to see that people needed to lose their digital content to finally realize
Physical or not isn't the issue. Both are the same EULA. Anything you do with physical that you cant no longer do with digital. Would be considered piracy under the EULA.
speak for yourself, I hate physical games. having to store these disks somewhere is pain in the ass. I love digital games, I can just buy the damn game, play through it and then throw it away. Odds are I don't want to to play that shit again in my life once I experienced it.
You can't play the game with the disk if it's a live service, it's the same thing if it is digital or physical , you can't play.
Well, it's not like it's been the fans of the digital games that have been complaining, for them it's all about convenience. Think y'all are missing the point though
@@sten260 Thanks for your opinion CONSOOMER.
The funny thing is...
They have to first make a game that's worth -buying- renting/leasing in the first place.
you won't have a choice, unless you make your own.
@@_aPaladin Wym? It's the entire reason the Indie scene is bigger than ever, because AAA industry has gone to shit and lost their minds. There are more choices than ever before, it just coincides with there also being more scumbag big studio approaches than ever before.
The thing is that I can choose to become a game developer myself but that takes massive coding skills, a tech degree, etc.
Renting/subscription is just battle pass or something
DRG (Deep Cock Galactose):
>Paid AA game (costs 30 bucks or something)
>Can be played solo offline
>The multiplayer is peer2peer (meaning you can virtually play forever since every server is fan hosted)
>The battlepass is free (the boosts are free events too)
>No virtual paid currency bullshit
>95% of the cosmetics are acquired through gameplay only
>The remaining paid ones are DLC packs that occasionally go on sale for less than 5 buckos.
>Solid playerbase of 15k - 20k concurrent gamers daily.
AA >>>>>>>> AAA bros
Please don't let this die out, The whole gaming community should unite here, not matter what game you paid for they shut down
Would be nice if the upper echelons of big corporate game studios would stop pretending they know what the consumer wants while they don't even consume the product they sell.
Are you arguing that a game that THE PLAYERS pay millions of dollars to play and get all the lootboxes doesn't convey what (the paying) players want? To them a game that makes 100 mil and causes a lot of gamers to whine about how bad the game is, vs a one that makes 50 mil, but is considered good is clearly a better choice
Yeah games were better when the developers made the decisions, not board members
@@Sennken The problem is they could have both, they could make a good game and still milk it dry, they'd make even more. I'd still be paying for a WOW sub if blizz just put out better content, same with DLC for console games like Halo.
I'd pay a few £ for some armour, but not the price of a full game.
They're tripping over their own greed and losing potential money in the process.
Ofcourse large game devs and hardware devs know what gamers want, they have tons of information on you.
@@Sennkenon top of what the other guy said. We're seeing that not working out anymore. Helldivers is a good product with microtransactions. It wouldn't have existed or survived w/o both price and good game. The big game industry is hurting more and more because no matter what the biggest reason people used to buy as quickly as before was good will.
People used to just buy Blizzard quality, that's no longer the case (obviously to some, but it's not the "defacto" anymore). I used to buy Bioware games until I saw the decline many years ago. If they aren't willing to make more affordable and memorable games to rebuild that? It just won't matter how expensive they make a game if no one is willing. Too many exist already to choose from now
Reminds me of Right to Repair. Voters and politicians have so little direct experience it’s difficult to successfully make the case with major corporations on the other side.
Even if they know what's going on, most are old and don't care as long as the lobby groups hand em big sacks of cash. It's so frustrating.
The digital version of Dragons Dogma 2 requires internet access to "verify licence', if you don't have internet access then you can't play the game. Not quite the same thing but it is similar.
That's why we use Steamless
@@SrNerdI just didn't buy dragons dogma 2
@@CaptainTreeJay I didn't buy it yet. But i will, I really liked the game. Any problems related to performance i will fix myself
@SrNerd I'm not buying it because of mtx. Honestly the way the handled dg2 makes me not want to play dg1 anymore either. It leaves such a sour taste when a game company views you as a cow with infinite milk
@@CaptainTreeJay thats exactly why i am buying the game: you can bypass any microtransactions with mods :D and still leave a negative review due to MTX :)
On your point about not being able to access content that we pay for, Bungie has a big problem with this with Destiny 2. They remove complete story lines and expansions to keep the games file size manageable but at the end of the day, it just feels like stealing.
That was a wild one. Sunsetting was one of those unfathomably idiotic and creatively bankrupt choices Bungie made just before/during the Beyond Light era. When the game was so bereft of content they just legit deleted whole expantion packs and your old weapons just to make you grind the same weapons again just with a new logo in the corner. Also rotating in old D1 content for some zero effort slop.
Yeah they can just ask what part of the game you want to download. But I don't think they care
I find this to be a harder discussion cuz they had reavhed out to us (I was a player b4 beyond light) and got votes. Either make Destiny 3 or do this. The votes were sunsetting.
I no longer see that as them trying their best, at least not with current management decisions in act. But at least at the time it made SOME sense.
Also it’s terrible that they add in cross progression for players wanting to play on different platforms just for them to repurchase the SAME “dlc’s” for those other platforms and that itself is a scam
Y'all know what you've been playing for years yet you still stick to it; it's what you want, clearly.
Take a look at what NeoCore is doing with Warhammer 40K: Inquisitor Martyr. It is an ARPG just like D3/4 and PoE. Since they realize they can't keep the servers up forever, they are creating an offline/co-op mode where you can actually choose your own season to play at your leisure. Show NeoCore games some love for this move, and also get an extremely underrated ARPG.
One huge issue I have with Inquisitor Martyr is the camera is so slanted I have to constantly rotate it to be parallel with the direction I'm going in
@danhowell2818 damn... this game hurt you bad. Good talk.
I'm a huge fan of Inquisitor-Martyr, I'd play it more often if I had any friends that played it. Got a lot of hours out of it.
i just missed when online wasn't the end-all be-all for games
you can blame MOBAs and live service games for changing the landscape
It's like saying ' Hey, we have this awesome game for you to play, do you want it? ' and then you play for the game only for them later say ' Great, now we have your money, we're gonna take the game back! '
When it comes to purchasing at item in a game, it reminds me of a court case from quite a few tears ago now that the gamer won.
He/she had bought a sword or something within the game, using real money, for it to have then been stolen by another gamer while playing.
The gamer went to court and argued that they had paid real money for the sword, and yet it was taken away from them in the game.
It was discussed that the sword wasn't real yet later determined that neither is digital music when you buy it, yet you still pay full price for something.
They won the case because they could see that we did the same for music and movies and pay real money for them, so you own that object. It doesn't matter if it's digital or not.
I'm sure if it was taken to court, people could still win based on this court case.
Although some often say, when you buy a game now, you're not paying to own a copy of it, you're simply paying to have access to it for a period of time.
If that is so, then it should be specified.
I remember the days when you could buy a game, pop it in the console and off you go.
You had the full game to enjoy, and there no need to worry about things such as micro transactions or the game being taken away.
It's all about taking as much from the customer as they can and giving them less.
The think laws on ownership are crystal clear here in Germany. If you own something, you can do whatever the fuck you want to do with that product as long as it doesn't violate any other law, the maker/publisher/sales-person has no say in what you do with the product you payed for. That includes mods, cheats (there is no law against cheating in games), private servers etc. But getting banned for cheating on official servers is also totally valid on the publishers side. It shouldn't disable private and single player though.
Depends on the case for cheating. If its a cash prize event and someone cheats or hacks in a way to help them win, then that is seen as theft by fraudulent action plain as day and could land the cheater with a fine, suspension or worse. This is why the COD scene is haywire at the minute with cheaters/Hackers - Particularly in big lan events etc
Clauss swabb gonna change that soon
@@karlsmith8113 It is not illegal to cheat in a competition.
@@karlsmith8113Well, obviously?
Just wait till it's consisered racist to own games and then the whole of Europe will ban them
I often think that online games should have the same rules that a lot of companies do with business software, simply that if the company stops selling and licensing the software they are required by contract to provide the source code so the users can continue using it if they want.
100%, if they want to make "games as a service" they should have to follow the same laws as other digital services
there no such rules, wtf u talking about. Nobody is obliged to provide such contract that makes no sense to me
Lmao who's out here providing source code when they shut down? I work in software development and rarely see a closed source project being released after it shuts down. There's no rules about that and it's not common.
@@IIMiikexDII literally the last three companies I worked at, 2 for the NHS one for libraries 🤷🏻♂️ maybe you just work at shit companies
That makes sense yes
29:58 Nobody _signs_ terms of service. These are not signed contracts. These are coerced agreements which generally don't hold up well in court whenever a term in the "contract" is remotely unconscionable.
Clicking past an "agreement" does not constitute a signed contract.
well they do, companies have the money and the army of lawyers....we have diddly squat in a court...... justice is not impartial nor blind as they make it seem to be... it leans to who ever has the money......
also a lot of the player base are to blame for this... ever gotten a " they dont have to give you anything, dont be entitled" as a response to a post about issues with games? well those ass kissers are the ones that defend companies to do more shit like this"
the only ways to make it change is to stop paying for this shit , no more digital crap that has to have a shit ton of day 1 patches, no more "always online"
just buy physical games physical, and ask for refunds if it asks for a day 1 patch (that you could not access later in time) before they did not have updates, they can do it again
stop buying microtransaction shit, etc etc
This may come out as being weird and random, but I've mentioned these things to Meta AI, and asked about these possibilities, and it's response was that it's all to flabbergast and gaslight a situation that's been exaggerated. Just like how the WEF don't actually want people to own nothing. That was snowballed out of context by the Media.
@@victormanx That's what people should be: Sensible in what they do, even in what they support and what they purchase. Good luck convincing enough people to be that way though, they're too busy "living life" to notice or care how we're all in the same sinking boat, losing our sense of responsibility and ownership as consumers.
@@NoedigJK471Our sense of ownership was always present from day one, although it doesn't seem like it with digital software, ya know? I own my house, my furniture, and vice versa.
Actually, it's quite easy to explain such a situation to seniors.
For example: Imagine you bought a vinyl record or cassette tape of The Beatles. Years go by. The record company that sold and produced these cassettes or vinyls announces that they can no longer support your vinyl records and tapes, and from next year, they will no longer play on your record players and devices.
But I paid for it? Sorry, dear old Betsy, but it's not profitable for us. The end.
That’s a really good way of putting it.
vinyls and cassettes 😂
Real life case: one author sues another. Publisher desides to withdraw the e-book of sued author. The issue is withdraw of unsold and SOLD e-book from private library of a SOLD e-book of their customers. Look it up, there are channels that talked about case and followups.
For example in our world and not internet: the publisher finds names and adresses of their buyers, enters homes withouth permission, and takes the book you paid for withouth your permission.
How would you feel? Would you dare to buy another e-book of that pulisher? Or any other?
Yes, if you imagine the vinyl player functions through some digital means -and that digital capability is then revoked out of the blue even though you paid for it and can maintain it yourself just fine.
Or even worse: that record player is now owned by another company and the new management wants you to accept their EULA (you have no other choice and you couldn't predict that happening).
Also it turns out that the new EULA enables your vinyl player to also play ads before and after songs.
"B-But I already paid for the vinyl record!" You say.
"Oh, sorry dear old Betsy, we have to profit from the last company acquisition. Also you already accepted our EULA. Bye, bye."
Ubisoft: you don’t own paid digital game license.
Than pirating isn’t stealing
Not like anybody is going to pirate their games anyway 😅
@@NoNo-ll8ogtrue, I can happily say I own zero Ubisoft games lol
bro not this copypaste again
@@vespertellino I will click like on the copy paste every time
But thats the point. You cannot pirate The Crew. How do you all still not unterstand this.
If I pirate a game, I remove in some way the need for the game to check if it is actually a normal purchased copy. I trick the game into thinking it is a valid copy and that I can play it.
Ubisoft is shutting down their servers for The Crew. Now I pirate The Crew. Okay, you can probably start the game and it will work maybe all the way up to the Main Menu. And then you get a error message along the lines of "Can't contact ubisoft servers" or some other crap. And that is it. So you can now stare at your main menu screen as long as you like because you pirated the game. BUT YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GAME!!
Change the "BUY NOW" button to "RENT NOW"
Easier said than done.
MY WALLET MY CHOICE
If you like to buy shit and eat said shit - then yeah
That comment could have gone either way lol!
and you chose wrong every time, from games, food and politics to everything else
Generally yes, but what if you got screwed over? Should you be entitled to get your money back?
No sorry.
I don't know why refunding isn't a thing. Look at what Google Stadia did with all its flaws. The service closed down and google refunded all the games you bought in your library.
I feel they knew woth the way people have been burned by the industry that if they didn't that would have been a class action on them. It's Google after all, not some middling company that couldn't make it.
Because no one would ever make another live service game ever again unless planning to keep it alive forever, With that thought Imagine WoW or any other MMO dying completely like alot of MMOs do and they have to refund 100% of purchases made, Company/studio would go bankrupt instantly since they would have to pay back every single person that ever bought anything from them. Now not saying that is Wrong or anything and for Consumers would be Huge win, but realistically would kill any game like that cause no publisher/studio would see that as a risk worth taking, Especially small/mid sized ones.
@@quackingduck7201 I'm fine with that, I will never give money to a product I will never own fully
that’s a terrible idea. Stadia refunded because it died QUICKLY. most of these games that shut down are games that have been in existence for years that barely have a constant player base. if there weren’t articles and vids about it, most people would never know that the things shut down cuz they’re not playing them. plus, if you could refund indefinitely, no one would ever make any money ever and the entire industry would collapse.
@@kirerunte1046so do you never pay for anything in life that isn’t a physical product you can hold? never paid for a service, like a car wash, maybe a massage, a gym membership? it’s not like you can take those things home with you… if you think about it like that, a one time fee of $60-$70 for something that entertains your for years isn’t really a bad deal. people just need to be savvier and understand what they’re paying for when they buy online only games.
now, if you want to say that they shouldn’t be able to take legal action against people who set up their own servers after they shut down the official ones, i’m right there with you, but if you play ANY game that’s online only… yeah, but the official servers shutting down is just an inevitability. nothing, i mean NOTHING will ever be supported forever, nor is it reasonable for anyone to expect it to be, and legally forcing companies to support games, or even make them try and predict how long a game will be economically viable for is NOT ethical. it’s just the consumer being greedy at that point. but i guess greed only matters when the big company does it, right?
in the end, it is your money. spend it how you want. that IS really what this comes down to. we don’t “need a law,” honestly, any regulatory “solutions” will just introduce more unintended consequences and probably solve little in the long run, as is the case with almost ALL “pro consumer” laws. it’s up to the customers to actually understand what they are paying for. it’s really that simple, and in the end, you are paying for a license. and it has ALWAYS been like that, really. it’s just that the hardware was different in the past. but even with old NES, they won’t last forever. the metal will rust, the save battery will die, and the plastic might even get moldy…. huh, you know, i never see anyone complaining about how Xbox live Arcade no longer works. people are acting like this is some new problem all of the sudden and i don’t know why… its weird.
2:57 Game companies can shut down old game servers in order to move the player base to new games. I think it will be difficult to regulate shutting down private servers whether they shut down an old games service or not when a publisher can have a new game “in the works”. Some of these games take years to come out. Maybe they have a different franchise they want to move players to. GTA to Red Dead Redemption, something like that.
unless you apply dmca drm to almost every facet of game so if people create private servers they take those down because its getting around encryption
The first step is that game companies need to be forced to clearly label what you're doing with your money when you get a game. Are you subscribing to a live service? Are you renting a limited period license? Are you buying/purchasing a personal copy that is yours to do with as you please indefinitely within the confinement of general law? This should be clear with no room for misunderstanding, right where you click to part ways with your money. Not after you pay, not on page 27 in an EULA. Upfront, in plain sight.
If you go into a video store, you expect to say right on the case if it's for purchase or for rental. When you go to a media entertainment site, you must in equal degree see clearly if you are buying a product, or subscribing to a service.
It's that simple.
This. That way consumers can make an informed decision. Unfortunately the fossils that make the laws, don't even know this is a problem to begin with . 🤷♂️
@@its.araragi Fair comment... but at some point in time, those "fossils" won't be around to blame anymore. Then what? You think it'll just magically get better? If not, then maybe the fossils aren't the problem.
also then every steam game would be needed to be labeled a "rental" since you are paying for a license to play not a product you own.
@@treytonsams3637 Yes, by nature you are renting a license, not buying a game. So obviously they'd need to change. It's scam to call it anything else even if it's been normalized to think of it as a purchase.
Every game and service say it in the same way though. To read the full rights for video store is also a long one, but it is understood that is how it is. Steam is also very transparant that you only have access to the game on the service, as long as they/the publicer allow it, this is as well-known as video store rentals/purchases.
But on the other hand physical media breaks, lacks patches, etc. and then you permanently lose access to the media unless you buy a new one. You still aren't allowed to pirate it.
"Any digital product sold by a publisher that requires services provided by the publisher to facilitate the intended and/or advertised (or any other reasonable means of expression or communication facilitated by a employee of the seller or their subsidiaries) functionality of the product are required by law to either 1. Provided a version of the product that allows the buyer to continue to use or own the digital product as originally intended or advertised that does not require services provided by the publisher 2. Offer a refund for any digital product and subsequent, related products intended and designed to only be used for the purchased product, that can no longer function or be available as originally intended or advertised."
TLDR: If you buy a game and cannot play it after the publisher discontinued a service or purposefully disabled your ability to use it, then they either need to provide a stand alone version or give you a refund.
Is that a specific legal code somewhere? The regulation makes sense, but is it anywhere that actually has any real teeth?
@@ryanh7167 No, this is an example of what a law could look like that I came up with. This is not an actual law or code. I liked the idea and I wanted to see if I could write it out in a short, concise way that would make sense and be enforceable.
When I was writing this out, it occurred to me that this would also impact software subscriptions like Adobe's or Microsoft 365's suite of apps which have a similar problem at the moment. On one hand, this is good because they are also getting away with something I think is very unfair. On the other hand, it makes me feel like something like this will not happen since those companies and others like them have enough influence to make sure it doesn't happen.
I'm sure a lot of game developers already have ways to circumvent this in their T&Cs that you read for most games that have a live service embedded into them. I.E.: You paid for the privilege to play the game, not for the ownership of any product.
If your game does NOT currently have an offline mode, it is NOT a product you are paying for. It's a digital amusement park you have a pass for.
4:35 I think it's salient to mention that as a phone's storage fills up, which is usually middling NAND flash connected to the chip via eMMC (aka the shittiest data bus known to man), you will see severely degraded performance. Try deleting lots of data from your phone and maybe a few background apps. You may see a giant performance spike. Storage controllers, especially on phones, struggle when the storage is near capacity.
Digital items should be treated exactly the same as physical ones. Any purchase should be yours forever and transferrable. As long as you have a digital copy stored you should be able to do whatever you want with it.
Fun fact: the highest court in South Korea ruled almost ten years ago that digital goods were subject to the same regulatory processes as physical goods.
In my country Software is treated as an "object" and if you buy it, you are the legal owner of this and can do whatever you want. Thats why we can sell games from our steam library. We even have a seperate legal text that regulats this matter. And the consumer is always in a better position in comparison to companys.
Its the same when EA said, that they will delete your account if you don't use it for 3 years. A high Court decided that this is illegal.
Lets say, the law in a lot of countrys is way more advanced as in the US. way way more tbh
@@IfUanswerMeUareGae what country is that? also how does that work that you can sell your steam games to others? thats sounds insane to me ngl
@@l.3626I'm pretty sure that he was talking about Germany
@@TheSilverShadow17 I'm German actual 💀 so I don't think the was speaking about Germany, as a 10 year German pc gamer I never heard a single sentence about being able to resell
Even IF signing a contract would be able to revoke your user protection, companies start to change the contracts after the purchase and either indirectly, if you want to keep using it, or directly, by not giving you an option to reject, forcing customers to sign.
For an easier to digest example. Imagine you bought a car, the company lost money on that model of car, so they disable any online service that came with the car and cut their maintenance for parts. Makes sense so far. But then the car manufacturer decided, that they also need to remove the engine from your car and every other one they sold, because they're just not selling that model anymore.
And that's what's happening to these games. It's not that they're losing support, its that the company is crippling them so that they are unplayable after the point from which they lose said support.
Exactly. And also you can't just substitute it with another engine, because every fitting model was stolen from EVERYONE and nobody has the knowledge to make another one that would work.
I mean then again mechanics exist, but that's because they repair and fix vehicles out of passion.
@@TheSilverShadow17 Oh, and I forgot to add that there's no available blueprints and the whole engine is kind of a black box where no one knows what exactly is it inside. And any attempt of simulating what goes inside makes the engine explode.
That's the analogy for server encryption, to break through which there needs to be the kind of people like the ones that cracked the WW2 military codes, and I'm only slightly exaggerating.
@@konstantin3001 Server encryption is possible and can be done but very risky. So you're not wrong in that sense, you have a point there.
Imagine your house contractor come in 2 years later and removing walls. Or ripping out cables. I bet the congressman wouldnt like that.
We need a sacrificial lamb indie dev-- release a game, revoke access to it quickly, launch a class-action suit. If you go after big publishers, they have big legal departments that will try to win; whereas an indie-dev wont be able to afford it, or, they could be a willing sacrificial lamb and lose on purpose to get the precedent for future lawsuits to have a far stronger chance to win
Didn't this happen with The Day Before? Never played it so maybe i'm wrong.
there's a million ways that can go fucking wrong though
One issue is you can only sign the contract AFTER you purchase the product. What other purchase does this occur in?
I suspect if you choose not to agree to the EULA, you can get a refund. I dunno if anyone has tried it though.
on steam it is before you buy - but that is the STEAM agreement, not the agreement with the company you are buying from
The fact that if I get an account banned when that account has cosmetic dlc purchased that I lose that entirely. If the account gets banned a refund MUST happen since I no longer can play.
I lost my old account. And with that an entire catalog of old and new games lost with it
thats bs, if you get banned for cheating ofc you lose access to all of it
@@l.3626 sure lose access but you should get money back for the dlc
@@PokerKing1993 no, if you buy into an online service and you lose access through cheating you dont get anything back, bc it was your fault and not theirs
@@l.3626 well, not really, RIOT had to give back all the skins a player had purchased to a new acc when the old one was banned.
It happend 3 or 4 times in BR.
The laws here are pretty strict, and most companies cant get away with this kind of BS
I used to think that, whenever PS3 first came out, the disk was expensive, so I would save money for as much as I could so that whenever a new game that looked interesting came out, I could grab it and play it on the weekend. I still have a bunch of PSX, PS2, and PS3 Disks at my parent's house, neatly in the basement where me and my brother would play, and sometimes invite friends over for some tabletop sessions, it was a great memory.
Then PC gaming gained popularity, and we got to play CS and Garry's Mod, I remember the talk with my friends about how in Steam, you can own a game, but at the same time feels like you're not owning it, now, years later, lo and behold, some publisher making it the norms that you have to feel comfortable to not 'owning' a digital product copy of the game you purchased, mind you, BOUGHT, not rental.
To hell with "live service" gaming, to hell with digital ownership, gaming is not about having fun anymore, people are too sweaty and obsessed with meta, publishers only care about the sales numbers, dev putting 3D live render cutscene that cost tons of money but never care about worldbuilding and the gameplay itself, I'm sick of watching 30 minutes cutscene tearjerker and another 1 hour of tutorial before playing the game, only for the game to tell me what to do every 15 steps. fuck, fuck, fuck it all.
You own the drm free diital datas only
@@midnightblue3285 Not even that sometimes.
just replay dark souls 1
This is generally a problem with AAA gaming publishers. You wont really see this kind of malpractice with AA and indie studios. Switch your focus there and you'll appreciate gaming all over again. I definitely have.
just learn to emulate and pirate bro
i never looked back ever since, i've barely spent a dime on anything i've ever played
That actually made me think of a scenario. If you bought a year subscription to *game* and a month later they update the TOS in a way that you don't agree with are you eligible for a refund since they wont let you play what you payed for?
Can't say for sure but there is probably a clause in the TOS that says they can modify it any time they want.
What's with this trend of games either not having demos at all or demos being time-limited? I mean, what is the point of this? Do a game suddenly stops needing a promotion after the release? Bc that's what the demos do by simply existing and being available.
I remember like 20 years ago i bought some game magazine that came with disc with demos, patches etc. So i installed the demo of F.E.A.R., and it was just the game but you cannot progress past the act one. So i played it and immediately walked to a store to buy a disc with a full version. Imagine if i tried to install the demo but got an error "sorry buddy, you are late, the demo was time-limited". Yeah, okay, then I wouldn't have known that I needed the full version and would not have bought it, what is the point of that?
They're pretty much exclusively used to drive hype before launch now, not the "try-before-you-buy" like they used to be. It's especially relevant for new live service games because these games launch with scarce content to begin with, and often don't have enough content planned out to span a solid 6-12 months after launch, so they can't afford to "waste" content on a 1-2 hour demo for their 10-hour content cycle.
At some point, boardroom execs decided that it was more profitable to just let people buy the games they wanted to try, since they can't refund them after the fact.
It's BS, but boardroom execs make their salaries based on BS.
This happened to me with the demo for Amnesia: The Bunker. I downloaded it when it came out and didn't play it right away, and when I got the time I couldn't launch the damn thing anymore. Maybe if I close Steam and click the EXE directly and... no, nothing.
DRM on demos is insane.
@@kveller555 Nah, DRM on demos makes sense because iirc there were some cases when demo version was used to create a pirated version of a full game. So if the full game has DRM it's kinda reasonable to add it in a demo too.
The time limited demos are still stupid though, with or without DRM. :)
@@supersonic443 Yeah well boardroom execs missed a great opportunity lauching physical media with demo's like FRESH used to do, Where we pay money for demos!
@@kveller555 Time limited is EVIL.
As an OG gamer, I remember how fun LAN games were, especially RTS, or even split-screen games, but what you want (making private servers always an option) is impossible in todays environment technologically and practically. Most of the new games don't even support LAN or direct IP connections anymore, so it has to be running on dedicated server and not just that, nowdays it often runs through a 3rd party provider or a cloud server, which means you can't share anything inside of that infrastructure. If it's running on kubernetes, which is now the case for larger multiplayer games and MMOs, it will be an infrastructure that costs about 100x the game itself (sales + development cost), because these are billions of dollars investments with thousands of people and decades of work usually. But these larger companies usually have in their portfolio at least 10 big games, which means they only need to build their infrastructure once and then make some customization for the others. It is invaluable and so I don't think any company would ever share that as open-source, which would be needed for "private" server to be possible. And even that would be problematic, because it would need to run on cloud anyway, so it would never really be completely "private" as dedicated servers can be. So all of these larger companies would rather let some of their games die and stop all servers for that game, than ever releasing their server-side code.
Basically tech has advanced and it doesn't work as it used to.. back then server files were often even included in the client of the game itself, so it was really easy to setup a custom dedicated server. The only solution to all of this that I can see is whenever the company decides that it no longer profits from some game or actually starts losing money, the gamers should have some right to "donate for their service to run" as long as they donate the money, it should be running and company won't lose any private data or infrastructure.
Very well said, the one thing i see about your proposed solution - The donations would have to be often and substantial enough for the company to make a return on the resources they spend to keep those servers running. Plus that would require the company to buy more infrastructure for each server they dedicate to "dead" games.
@RAM_845 yup I wonder if BF1 has the same thing becuase I think they still have some servers up. At least they did a while ago when I played. Probably been over a year since though.
The companies will try to defend themselves entirely on one argument. That everyone who bought the game agreed to a contract in the terms of service BEFORE the game booted or the players got access to the game per-se. That's the real scummy part. Have you guys ever stopped to READ the terms of service you're agreeing to before you play or install a game? On steam you sometimes get a notice detailing all that crap before you install a game AFTER you purchase it.
PIRATING games gets you a PHYSICAL DIGITAL COPY that’s disconnected from internet. You can have a library and keep game history
it's not physical
You could burn them on a DVD, I guess. @@vespertellino
@@vespertellino Yes it is. A DVD/CD is just a storage medium. The hard drive you store your data on is physical, thus digital copies stored on a hard drive are physical. Companies could easily sell physical copies on flash drives or hard drives that get plugged into a device but they don't because consumers already have that physical hardware. Laws just haven't been adjusted to account for that fact.
@@vespertellinoits is, having this copies in your external disks its literaly a physical copy
@@vespertellino Burn that dvd image, so one more step
You are legally permitted a back up rom of any digital media you own...this includes dvds, cds, etc...the issue is now you are no longer 'owning' your games, you are purchasing a 'license' to access it.
That's primarily the case with digital games, but with physical discs I believe you own them.
yea owning the game files mean nothing when they aren't being locally authenticated but instead have to go through a game company monitored online authenticator that can be shut down any time they please.
@@TheSilverShadow17 always has been licensed, not owned. Physical or not. Maybe it's legal to back up, but against eula. Which may only mean the service provider just stops providing a service to you.
There are laws in Japan meaning no modifying of hardware or software. Usually only enforced if people take it commercially. People selling modified save games being fined is a good example. Sure it may not be a law where you are but you know certain major gaming companies are from there so that mindset leaks over to other countries.
@@zedamex Then what happens if I backup my games onto an HDD/SSD? Will they send a legion of cops after me or something all because I chose to secure the things that are in my possession?
@@TheSilverShadow17 that's why I said when sales gets involved. Because that situation is potentially large scale, it's also more obvious where it is coming from. If Joe Smith copies games at home it's likely impossible to know it even occurred. However the tools required to copy in Japan basically can't exist basically due to an anti competitive law.
Fun activity, go to Nintendo search game manuals, they have some Gameboy advance ones there, check like the last page of the final fantasy one and it says it's illegal to copy, even for backup or archival, and those that do will be prosecuted. Don't think that actually exists in the US though. I'm no expert on law, only had to do licensing on a business level so read too many eulas out of interest.
If you buy a game and you can't play it two years from now because the company has somehow shut it down, you have to be a really bug sucker to ever buy another game from that company again. No one should ever fund further theft like this, and yes, it is theft. You paid for a product which was then taken from you. That's theft.
They also need to patch out any errors the game throws related to unavailable online features. E.g., PS3 Tetris throws stupid online error every time you play in non online mode.
I disagree with Asmon's comparison at 1:22 because vinyl records contain the total media you'll ever need to enjoy that album. In the days of physical game cartridges, companies knew that they had one chance to get it right and tested their games a lot more prior to release, and then what they released was the final game. Of course some nasty bugs still made it through and were then permanent, but that was the way of things.
Now most companies intend to support their game through patches, so the release product is never the final product and typically quite buggy. Even if you have the vanilla game on disc, it's no longer the final product after a month or two at best, so if the company decides to quit offering patch downloads or blacklist you, you're either just screwed or have to rely on "pirating" patches that are no longer officially available. Either way what's on the physical medium isn't all you need.
4:36 Regarding phones maybe I'm an outlier but my phones are lasting way longer than that and I don't really see a performance difference. The main thing I'm mad regarding smartphones is how manufacturers stop releasing OS updates way too early even when the device itself is still perfectly fine thus contributing to e-waste.
I think it's like Netflix and movie. If they give something like gamepass with a reasonable monthly subscription fees and you can play all the title in the list, it's acceptable. But if you pay crazy amount for AAA title like "Diablo 4" (just an example), you should have the right to own it and can play it anytime in the future as long as you have the game requirement met.
The difference is, you can save the netflix content. With games as a service it won't work, because the vital components that are needed for the game to launch are allways on the company's side, on a server that will eventually be shut down.
@@konstantin3001 downloaded content from Netflix has limited time of viewing as well. It will have the same effect as not owning it forever. So what's your point?
or, JUST PIRATE.
@@angel_of_rust Go ahead, pirate LawBreakers, the Crew or Overwatch. And if you'll be able to pirate Darkspore, I'd be REALLY impressed.
2nd Video Game Crash.
No. Nor was there a first crash. This was more correctly the american console crash; nobody outside the US even noticed. What we saw was a smooth transition from console to much more capable home computers like the C64.
This time its some AAA thing which doesn’t affect me noticably either. Good AAA games have been an oxymoron for 20 years; what do I care? Gaming hasn’t been in a better place since the 90’s.
Why is it translating your comment 😂?
It needs to happen.
@@soylentgreenbAmiga 500 was the GOAT
@@soylentgreenb Of course there was a first crash and it _is_ going to happen, again.. it _is_ happening right now. There is an abundance of low quality games over saturating the market, 3x as many as there were in 1983..
*Chevie drivers paying hundreds of dollars on new rotors every time they replace their breaks*: "heh, owning a Ford is like paying for a live service."
🤣
By the way, hey Chevie owners, how is your speedometer doing? Still accurate? 😂
The best is when the publishers put games about to be shut down on sale a couple weeks before they're to notify players of the games servers being shut down just so a few dollars more can be made off of a soon to be dead product.
Gaming got infeltrated by the WEF. You will own nothing and be happy.
I will NOT eat the bugs. I will NOT live in the pod. I WILL own the things, and that'll make me happy. Klaus Schwab get rekt!
Who's WEF?
@Diogo85 the World Economic Forum, they are a group of non-elected Elitists who think they have the right to tell all of humanity how to live.
That’s like saying the chicken coup got infiltrated by the farmer , your on his plantation my friend
Here's a fun fact about the WEF: Not once did they say that they have any true intent on making people own nothing. That single essay quote from Ida Auken snowballed out of context and proportion. It's really a scenario of what COULD happen not what will happen.
Another clear distinction that needs to be mentioned is that purchasing something in a digital store implies ownership of what’s purchased. What people should be fighting for is forcing these companies to change the language they use to force transparency. Instead of having the apparent option of “buying” something, it should be labeled as “renting”. That would give companies reason to pause and give more agency to consumers.
They hit the kill switch on P.T.. if I connect my old ps4 to the internet at all then my access to P.T. will be revoked.
P.t?
@@Toothbrushs Kojima's Silent Hill playable teaser.
That's valuable. You're not the only one to have it still, but hold onto it. It may become lost media in the future far from now.
Lucky bro, never got to experience that demo, looked wild as fuck
Legal strong arming based on the pricing model might be the best solution for consumers.
Large lump payment ($70): If a company sells the product with a large lump sum up front, the consumer owns the item/game until they sell it (like any other item in the world) or until it breaks AND it’s labeled as an item in stores.
Subs: VS subscription based (or f2p) pricing models where if the business shuts down, you loose access to the product (gym memberships and Netflix works this way). These could be force-labeled as Subscriptions, not items.
Over time, consumers would see subscriptions (games) for what they are (this might not last forever), like a gamepass subscriptions. And lump-sum games would then be treated like anything else in the word you buy, upfront, and outright. Doesn’t mean the items lasts “forever” (what does?), but it’s treated like a real-world purchase of a DVD movie.
Dude what are you talking about 'the consumer owns the item upon purchase otherwise it's simply fraud
@@RobotronSage it’s forced labeling of digital and physical gaming products. They already do it with game age ratings and if there are in-game purchases. Defining and forcing terminology of what is an “item” verses what is a “service” is the end goal.
We need to push that law for refunds on inaccessible in game purchases, and ya law to be able to refund micro transactions in general
Why though, you got what you paid for
@@lordchaos3819 no you are getting what you paid for taken away
99% of the time government regulations just end up protecting monopolies by gatekeeping the competition. And in order to enforce them you must give the government full control over your industry. Do you think a fully regulated video game industry wouldn’t 100% require some Sweet Baby type nonsense? Be careful what you wish for?
I have heard that ph@rma or GM0 giants can even lobby for unbearable regulations for their own industry, because they will suffer but survive, but any smaller competitors will outright die or just will not be born in the first place. This probably works the same in the every field.
Btw, on a totally unrelated note, any ideas why very reach people are often so vocal about "tax the rich" thing?
“The government has a monopoly on violence, thank god for that” so true of a statement yet so chilling of a realization.
"they will be gone. And all you'll have left is your rule 34"
This is the stuff I come here to see lmao
It’s not enough to not buy their games. SBI Curator did the right step… WE HAVE TO POINT IT OUT
"If you could get a refund after they cancel the game, things would be fine" -- This "refund" idea is a non-starter, a blood-from-a-stone pipe dream.
If they cancel the game because it's not breaking even anymore, where will the refund money come from? The money they already collected already went to dev salaries and paying off the loans they used to pay the dev salaries before they saw a cent of customer revenue.
I think that the only plausible solution here is to have _licensed_ private servers, where the license fee is enough to cover the costs of making sure anyone playing on the private server, legit bought the game in the first place.
There needs to be something in the terms of sale that live services games need to stay online for x months/years after the final digital item is purchased; whether that's the game itself or items in the game.
Imagine the monopoly man barging through your front door yelling "I'VE HAD ENOUGH!! IT'S OVER! MONOPOLY IS NO MORE, EVERYONE GIVE ME MY BOARD BACK! IT'S MINE!" ... but mr monopoly, its offline and we paid for it! "I DON'T CARE, GIVE IT BACK, IT'S MINE!"
This is a very important topic! It is now growing in our attention, because the necessity of "clearing up obsolete games" becomes more real every single year.
Once naively thought: if games went "out of service" one day... there would be a small modification, which enables to run the game completely offline. But obviously, this is not the case. So, maybe all of this will shift quite a bunch of players back to the days with cracked offline versions of games?
btw... as long as I remember, there was never such thing as a "real bought software" in the past. Although it SHOULD be in terms of a COPY of this software!
=> Companies always give (or sell) you the right to use it, nothing more.
--- But I just want to use it as long as I want during my lifetime, once I bought it (!). So, if the actual use time is truely limited, it should have to be called "rented" or "rented without specified runtime". The same relates to "bought" movies on streaming platforms.... 😞
Cheers,
Easy, explain it like music.
'Oh that album you brought, you can only use it for a few years and then after that the company that controls it will restrict your access to it. A refund? No, they keep the money.'
Ez.
"The pirate's life for me"....
For Games as a Service, piracy would do nothing, sadly.
The essential code to run the game, inner logic, networking and stuff like that is located on a central server, and only heavy stuff like models, textures, sounds, music, animations, text and other stuff is located on the user's machine.
The analogy is that there's body (assets) and there's brain (logic). When you are connected, the game is alive, and when you are not - the game is decapitated. Then what are you gonna do, pirate a bunch on assets you wouldn't be able to launch? Pfftyeah, no.
@@konstantin3001 I have faith the pirates will adapt more in the digital age.
@@konstantin3001 Private server is a things. I remember back in the day, the mmo that available locally in my country was too pricy. Because of that someone pirate that sh*t and make his own server to play with, of course with his own customization to make the game content more accessible
@@TheUmbraSol Well, it's not impossible, but the problem is that the "missing brain" part of the game has to be either reverse-engineered or written from scratch. If that's not enough, the server software is encrypted, too. So, in order to make GaaS playable again, it has to have a large community with a bunch of programming and encryption geniuses in order for them to have a chance of making the game work. Only about 2% of GaaS live through that experience after the server shutdown.
I've primarily been a console gamer for over 25 years and sailing the seas has never seemed so tempting before.
I absolutely refuse to spend a dime on in-game purchases specifically for this reason. I’m at the point where I’m incredibly scrupulous about the games I buy in the first place, even on consoles and Steam.
As far as signing contracts: there are contracts which are void by nature based on the specifications of consumer protections. Examples can be found in tenant vs landlord disputes.
Had this problem with City of Heroes and Star Wars Galaxies. I was in to both games and both were snatched and it was years before they became privately available. If a company stops supporting and selling a game, it should immediately become public domain.
some of the issues arise because studios want people playing the latest and greatest. So if 200 people are still playing a game from 2017 they want to be able to "shut it down" and get those 200 people over to the newest title they have. May not seem like a lot but 200/300 people at 70-80$ game is still money to them. In some ways I get the idea and why studios wanna do it but what happens a game reaches EOL and no new titles are out. What if the studio reaches EOL and no one buys the IP....its a slippery slope.
Games that are sold as live service need to go both ways. If you want us to invest time and money into the game then we will, but only if we get an "offline" or private server option when a title reaches EOL. This way people can continue playing if they want.
Someone from Amazon game studios responded to someone asking "you're planning a new Lord of the Rings MMO, are you worried about competition with the one that already exists?" with "obviously everyone will migrate to ours because it will be newer and have better graphics etc."
@@Xazamas that didn't age well huh?
I still remember the exact moment in 2005 when I realized we were going to be fighting a war to take back our hobby.
19 years later, we are still fighting that war... welcome to the future of gaming, soldier!
thank lary fink
That's gotta be the most unsuccessful war effort I've ever seen.
Do NOT preorder games.
Do NOT support games as a service.
Do NOT support modern gaming.
Buy classic, physical, copies of complete games.
Graphics are not a selling point in a game, only gameplay matters.
Games should be on the disc that you buy. I shouldn't have to connect to a server to play a game. Online only games should be the only ones that require the connection. Not all games should be made online only. Games as a service should end also.
If you pirate it you get a superior product you can burn onto your own blu ray that doesn't need to be always online.
@@ChrisGrump?
One issue though is even if you have a physical copy with an actual disk that game still has DRM on it that requires you to connect before you can play unless the dev was "nice enough" to give you an offline mode. So in the end new games even if you have a physical copy wont be playable in 5 years, or 10 years, or 40 years or whenever; even if you have working hardware that can play said game. Where at least with movies and music if you buy a physical copy there is no DRM that I am aware of that would make them un usable.
pirate just pirate yar har har
something about pirates getting a better experience than paying customers
if it comes to a point where we are paying only for access to a service, the price should be a lot cheaper compared to paying for ownership of a product.
...and 23yrs later, my Gamecube runs better, more quietly and requires no updates.
Same for the PS2 I got the year they came out. That thing still runs like a clock. Even got a couple games that still run. It's the discs that usually cause me problems
@JTJ-wm4cm PS2 will also play media that Xbox & PS4/5 fail to even read.
Go Team Retro!!!🫡
In my opinion to the point of the older representatives in our country not having understanding video games. They 100% understand music.
So we could explain to them that “now that we have music on our mobile devices. Imagine if your purchased and enjoyed it. Then the owner of the music decided they no longer wanted it to be put to the public and now you can’t listen to your music”.
It’s not a perfect argument but I think it would get them in the ballpark of what’s going on.
the argument that guy was making about being comfortable not owning music and movies doesn't really hold weight, theres no kill switch sitting over ur music and movies, if spotify goes down or netflix goes bankrupt, there will be a ton of other ways to get what you want, either legally or illegally, because they can be PRESERVED, this is the fundamental difference between always online games and other media
Plus a 10€ CD is not the same as a 70+€ Game - that might not even run as is
lol
You just discovered bridge?
Cars are a good tangent, or atleast getting there. There are some that drop most power if GPS isn't available etc. Imagine if car is inoperable after 5 years, especially with all the money you have put into upkeep and what not for it. Also gives a tangent to microtransactions with purchased gps maps or other possible upgrades that are not easily transferable
The obvious solution is to not buy more new cars
Thats the problem even when you buy a physical disc if that said game has access to the internet at anypoint they can remove the content look at Bungie, i have Destiny 2 on disc but cannot access or play any of the content that was sold at the time off release discs are just a key nowadays
If it's got the physical copy on it you can.
This is part of the WEF's famous, "You will own nothing and be happy". The future plan were everything is licensed and to own something is only a privilege for the rich. Games, homes, cars, and whatever else that can be "licensed", welcome to our dystopian futures.
Except that that essay quote was blown out of proportion by the mainstream media, the WEF never said they'll actually make people own nothing
So can they delete your physical copy disc games on your PS5 hardrive or just the digital ones.
Not if you back them up in a HDD or SSD, then the games can't be deleted
if they're on your hard drive and the game doesn't use any online authenticator or server to play, then you're fine. It's true offline mode, where all data needed to access and play the game is stored locally -that they can't touch. But if anything is authenticated through online servers whatsoever, then they have 100% power over your product.
@@Real_MisterSir I'm not sure if you heard about what Sony did with GT Sport but that game received an official offline patch that forever preserves the game and people can play it literally whenever they want to. That's a bold yet good move on them to do that since they aren't updating it anymore.
The issue is, at least from what I have heard, is that some disc games do not have the entire game on the disc so you are forced to have internet to download a portion (usually a bigger amount than on the disc) from the servers of say Xbox or PS. Pretty much means even though you own that copy of the game, you won’t be able to play it forever if the servers of those companies go down, which seems impossible, but Xbox or PS servers have gone down before and who knows if they are willing to keep those servers 30-40 years from now.
@@Saigaiii Well GT Sport is now the exception because it got an offline patch that forever puts it in preservation. I can play it whenever I want now after that happened.
@asmongold @8:25 the current online refund policies set by credit card companies (visa, mastercard, etc) is sitting at 120 days.
Any transaction made before that, technically can be refunded, however doing so is rendering said action open to arbitration by the companies selling the services.
Not to mention you are forced to sign it AFTER you purchase the game. It's not like you agree to sign something and then purchase the game under full awareness of the terms you are agreeing to. You buy the game and then they say oh yeah you have to agree to this or you don't get to use the product we sold you.
the problem is even if u have a hard copy of a game u can not play it with out the updates
There are also dlcs. Go on, play Borderlands 2 (a 12 y.o. game) without dlcs, enjoy your one-third of a game.
Its the same concept with sports, my favorite team isnt playing im not buying stadium tickets. My favorite team isnt playing in my state im not buying flight tickets.
Now we go to games, they ruined my favorite franchise? Im not playing it anymore. The game has shitty mechanics? Im refunding it
1924: "The customer is always right." 2024: "All prices and/or terms of service are subject to change without notice."
2124: .........
He need to address bridge if he did awsome if not it’s a must
The problem is lots of modern games are just scams and people want to be scammed. If you dont buy it they wont do it
some disks also had drm that made games stop working once they couldnt check in with the drm server.
This is why im against consoles going away so as physical media!!
A pretty slim chance of consoles going away as they make up a large portion of sales that are related to tech
@natmarelnam4871 As someone who owns a PS5 it's still pretty new and up to date tech wise, but it will be replaced by the PS6 someday
@natmarelnam4871 the schematics should go open source when a company decides they don't make enough money from them anymore.
@natmarelnam4871
They could either future-proof their games or make newer consoles backwards compatible.
@@TheSilverShadow17 ish. Its not really a mega powerhouse
I am really doubtful about the cloud gaming thing, mainly due to:
1. The Internet speed around the world still isn't good enough nor do I see it being fast enough in the future. We have hit a bottleneck in the development of the internet. While 5G is becoming a thing, they cover too short range. And Starlink will stay ridiculously expensive as it's owned by Yee lon ma.
2. Cloud streaming could have the same issue as streaming services now. They become too expensive to afford. Also, how is the pay model going to be? Do you need to pay for each game? Paying stupid amount for the streaming sercive and the games separately just rubs me the wrong way.
3. It has failed every time it has been tried. There's no guarantee it'll be any different in the future. People still dislike the whole concept.
4. Mobile gaming will be the future, no doubt. Phones in the future will be so powerful there's no need for cloud computing
Imagine buying a Tuxedo and wearing it years later at a wedding, when suddenly the manufacturer of the Tux decides to shut down access to that particular model. They press a button and your Tux unravels and falls to the floor, leaving you standing there in your undergarments. Sounds ridiculous, but this is exactly the power gaming companies are using, just on a different purchased product.
Singleplayer games that have to be played online should be a crime
I completely agree witht the old times hardware breaking beeing on you. I still have my playstation 2 and all the games still work. I almost yearly play atleast one 15 year old game. I probably played ratchet and clank 1-3 20 times xD ohhh and jak and dexter
I've been playing Legend of Dragoon again
I remember when video games were fun
Hell my N64 and even my Super Nintendo still work perfectly fine.
@@TheUmbraSolman Legend of Dragoon is so fucking good, one of the goats on ps1, need to get ne another copy. Loved the combat sequences and the story/atmosphere was great, good times.
I actually really liked the concept of The Cycle Frontier. My only issue was the predatory pvp aspect due to higher level players and/or players who bought their gear stomping on you while you're dealing with the game's wildlife during your mission.
17:35 So basically, Gamers and Weebs need to start a Political Party? Sounds like a Good Idea. 😈 Reminds me of "The Pirate Party", a political party that's actually real and wants to make copyright non existent.
"You will own nothing and you'll be happy" - Them
"Im not giving you my money or time then." - Us
Problem solved. 😊 Also, Piracy will never end. 🤣
If you're talking about the Swedish Pirate Party (since they were the first one), they don't want to make copyright nonexistent - they want to reform it.
@@perlundgren7797 Must be another Pirate Party, there's multiple of them that have sprung up from my understanding.
Amazon does this with their videos already. My dad bought a series that no one had available and one day it just dissappeared.
Also to note, a surprisingly large number of Americans don't have good internet. We literally switched to using mobile internet cause our isp had max 3Mb/s and 70% uptime . Sure we lose cell signal sometimes, but we at least get 90% and 20Mb/s. Meanwhile the next neighborhood over has fiber access and gets 1000Mb/s on their bottom plan for half the price.
bro...I feel you i get 1.3 Mb/s download on a good night(usually in the kB) for almost $200 a month and 50 feet down the road has fiber access for $60-70. My only other options is satellite dish.
Well, at least people can record the videos. You can't just record an online-only game. Pirating the files, storing your downloaded copy and even keeping a physical disc would not matter once the server shuts down, because the server stores vital code needed for a gane to function. It's more like them selling you a car and then stealing it's engine in the middle of the night. Except you can't even substitute it with another engine, because the same engine was stolen from EVERYONE and nobody else can possibly make them.
@@ChippaizationMegabytes or megabits?
One things is Mbps and other MB/s
Bring in the millions of ebook readers on this. They are also on the cusp of having their ebooks removed on the whims of some activist publishers. Their situation mimics some of the area that gamers have, but will dumb it down in explaining what the problem is.
Everyone knows that one of Dr. Seuss’ books was deemed racist because it was using stereotypes for characters. Well they stopped selling that book. Now what happens if the company who was selling that book went and removed all already paid for ebooks for that title? People would lose money on it.
Now what happens if in 6 months, they decide it wasn’t so bad and reverse their stance on selling that book. Now you have a company who sold a product, took it back, didn’t refund those people for losing that digital content, than said a few months later that you can now buy that product again, and than not resend that content back to the people who previously bought a copy.
There is no consumer protection from companies that literally could screw the customer by doing this over and over again. Let’s hope they stay ignorantly unaware of this possibility.
Destiny 2 is another example where Bungie deleted 3 expansions worth of content we paid for
Sadly I agree management made some horrible calls, Final Shape depending how the year goes I might just drop Destiny permanently
Cloud gaming may hit triple A as a fad,but everything else like 20% of "AA" and 99% below "AA" like indies will still be single player as the 2 audiences separate(the 'dei that doesnt buy games and nondei which is the actual existing customers)
And im still playing command and conquers and duke nukems from many years ago cause i absolutely love em
That would be fantastic if there were a law that made getting a refund for any digital goods purchased, possible within a certain period. Dragon Quest of the Stars (a mobile game) did their fans really dirty by having a HUGE sale (everything 50-75% off if I remember right) on their packs, passes, and other digitals, and then literally after the sale ended they announced that they would be closing the servers down permanently in a month or so (I don't remember how soon it would take effect but it was sudden). I was on the Discord server for the game and there was pandemonium along with a mass exodus, including myself. Every comment I found said that they felt betrayed. It was pretty dirty.
That COD Warfare thing was really dirty too. One of the few games I dropped a bit of money on. All the glam gone.