The European Commission released their full position now on the Stop Destroying Videogames initiative, and it's not the response many will have been hoping for.
Under SKG, the new title would effectively be forced to compete with the old despite the fact that the IP holder doesn’t want that.
chad_yes.jpg
Publishers shouldn’t be able to erase existing games consumers have purchased so that new games don’t have to compete with them. That’s the equivalent of Disney confiscating all DVDs of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy and destroying them so that the new MCU movies don’t have to compete.
If their new products aren’t good enough to compete with the old, tough shit. Not an excuse to confiscate and destroy what consumers already paid for.
So, that’s the thing: what did you pay for? I’m speaking specifically for SWTOR as that’s a good case to work from. When you bought it, did you buy the servers and infrastructure behind it or did you buy just access to that service or did you buy a standalone product?
They aren’t taking your discs. You bought that, right? They are turning off a computer they have on their end. That’s their property, right? If they don’t have a right to take your property, do you have a right to take theirs?
Then you get into private servers. Do you have the right to their software that they didn’t sell to you?
That’s the funny thing about this. If you have the right to take something from them you didn’t pay for, do they get the right to take something from you that you did pay for.
Do you understand the difference between the law as it currently is and wanting to change the law to be something else? Because you’re arguing that the law is what it is and everyone else is arguing that the laws should be changed because what currently is is fucking ass.
Currently we don’t access to whatever infra software companies run to keep the games working. One of the possible solutions to what SKG wants is that when you buy the game you also essentially get the server software as well so that if the company decides to pull the plug you just go “cool. I’ll get my own hardware and run it myself”.
And would you defend the same shit when it came to physical goods? Let’s say a car came with a software solution that makes the car ring home to make sure you’re allowed to turn your car on. Your argument in essence is that this is fine because you own the car and the fact that you can’t turn on the car once the car manufacturer shuts down their service is completely fine. Would you be happy with a car that the manufacturer can permanently disable whenever they want? This goes back your previous IP argument as well. The old car model is competing with the new car model so to keep your arguments consistent you should be in favor of having your car be permanently disabled because a new model came out.
In case you want an actual example of something similar, do you think the people who got outraged by BMW introducing a subscription service for heated seats were stupid? After all there are no laws that prevent BMW from doing this so people should just suck it up. Or are you’re going to argue people should push back if they think it’s a stupid idea. In that case what the fuck do you think we’re doing right now?
You currently don’t have access to infrastructure software because you didn’t buy that. You bought a game that uses it.
Given your BMW mention, if you buy a car, do you own the road it operates on? No.
Well, maybe that’s separate right? BMW doesn’t own that road, so what about the factory it was made? Do you own that? No.
I do online banking. I own that too. If they shut down for some reason, I should have access to their codebase? No.
I have an Amazon account. Do I own AWS infrastructure code? I mean I paid for that, right? No.
It’s not that laws can’t be changed, nobody made that argument.
It’s about feasibility. Is it feasible for me and justified for me to own AWS infra because I paid for an Amazon account? No.
In this analogy, can the car you paid for still be driven? Because the problem SKG wants to address is that the games people paid for cannot be played, and I don’t think your analogy makes any sense with regards to that.
You currently don’t have access to infrastructure software because you didn’t buy that. You bought a game that uses it.
Well, depending on the game I do. Some games come with server binaries that let me run my own server and regardless of what the developer or publisher does in the future I can still play those games. And once again, that could be the solution to the SKG movement wants solved. Maybe all games should come with the infrastructure software.
Given your BMW mention, if you buy a car, do you own the road it operates on? No. Well, maybe that’s separate right? BMW doesn’t own that road, so what about the factory it was made? Do you own that? No. I have an Amazon account. Do I own AWS infrastructure code? I mean I paid for that, right? No.
It’s not that laws can’t be changed, nobody made that argument. It’s about feasibility. Is it feasible for me and justified for me to own AWS infra because I paid for an Amazon account? No.
Ookay, I’m not even going to bother trying to decipher whatever the fuck this is. Either try again or don’t bother me with this again.
Analogies should have a point. What point is in your meth-induced analogies? I don’t have a problem with analogies, I have a problem that you think I should somehow understand what your brain-broken thought process vomited out.
Ad hominen attacks are insta-win for the other side. You have no valid argument so you just try to attack the person instead of the idea. That ends the debate. I just won.
AS far as I’m concerned you have not addressed a single thing I’ve said (except the some games do, which again you did not explain at all so I don’t think that counts either) so my arguments stand as they are. Just because you’re incapable of having a real discussion doesn’t mean you’ve won. And the fact that you think there’s anything to win shows you’re nothing more than a debate pervert. You make up your own rules and then claim you’ve won so go parade your win and let the adults speak.
If you bought a game, and they’ve made it so you cannot play the game that you paid for, they are taking the game from you. This is the whole point of Stop Killing Games.
chad_yes.jpg
Publishers shouldn’t be able to erase existing games consumers have purchased so that new games don’t have to compete with them. That’s the equivalent of Disney confiscating all DVDs of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy and destroying them so that the new MCU movies don’t have to compete.
If their new products aren’t good enough to compete with the old, tough shit. Not an excuse to confiscate and destroy what consumers already paid for.
So, that’s the thing: what did you pay for? I’m speaking specifically for SWTOR as that’s a good case to work from. When you bought it, did you buy the servers and infrastructure behind it or did you buy just access to that service or did you buy a standalone product?
They aren’t taking your discs. You bought that, right? They are turning off a computer they have on their end. That’s their property, right? If they don’t have a right to take your property, do you have a right to take theirs?
Then you get into private servers. Do you have the right to their software that they didn’t sell to you?
That’s the funny thing about this. If you have the right to take something from them you didn’t pay for, do they get the right to take something from you that you did pay for.
Do you understand the difference between the law as it currently is and wanting to change the law to be something else? Because you’re arguing that the law is what it is and everyone else is arguing that the laws should be changed because what currently is is fucking ass.
Currently we don’t access to whatever infra software companies run to keep the games working. One of the possible solutions to what SKG wants is that when you buy the game you also essentially get the server software as well so that if the company decides to pull the plug you just go “cool. I’ll get my own hardware and run it myself”.
And would you defend the same shit when it came to physical goods? Let’s say a car came with a software solution that makes the car ring home to make sure you’re allowed to turn your car on. Your argument in essence is that this is fine because you own the car and the fact that you can’t turn on the car once the car manufacturer shuts down their service is completely fine. Would you be happy with a car that the manufacturer can permanently disable whenever they want? This goes back your previous IP argument as well. The old car model is competing with the new car model so to keep your arguments consistent you should be in favor of having your car be permanently disabled because a new model came out.
In case you want an actual example of something similar, do you think the people who got outraged by BMW introducing a subscription service for heated seats were stupid? After all there are no laws that prevent BMW from doing this so people should just suck it up. Or are you’re going to argue people should push back if they think it’s a stupid idea. In that case what the fuck do you think we’re doing right now?
You currently don’t have access to infrastructure software because you didn’t buy that. You bought a game that uses it.
Given your BMW mention, if you buy a car, do you own the road it operates on? No. Well, maybe that’s separate right? BMW doesn’t own that road, so what about the factory it was made? Do you own that? No. I do online banking. I own that too. If they shut down for some reason, I should have access to their codebase? No. I have an Amazon account. Do I own AWS infrastructure code? I mean I paid for that, right? No.
It’s not that laws can’t be changed, nobody made that argument. It’s about feasibility. Is it feasible for me and justified for me to own AWS infra because I paid for an Amazon account? No.
In this analogy, can the car you paid for still be driven? Because the problem SKG wants to address is that the games people paid for cannot be played, and I don’t think your analogy makes any sense with regards to that.
This is regarding MMOs as already stated. Your comment is irrelevant.
Well, depending on the game I do. Some games come with server binaries that let me run my own server and regardless of what the developer or publisher does in the future I can still play those games. And once again, that could be the solution to the SKG movement wants solved. Maybe all games should come with the infrastructure software.
Ookay, I’m not even going to bother trying to decipher whatever the fuck this is. Either try again or don’t bother me with this again.
I’m sorry you don’t work with analogies. And you chose to post, I didn’t request your feelings as input, but whatever.
The first quote still stands. “SOME GamEs i DO!!” is just ignoring the server infrastructure point, so go cry elsewhere.
Analogies should have a point. What point is in your meth-induced analogies? I don’t have a problem with analogies, I have a problem that you think I should somehow understand what your brain-broken thought process vomited out.
Ad hominen attacks are insta-win for the other side. You have no valid argument so you just try to attack the person instead of the idea. That ends the debate. I just won.
AS far as I’m concerned you have not addressed a single thing I’ve said (except the some games do, which again you did not explain at all so I don’t think that counts either) so my arguments stand as they are. Just because you’re incapable of having a real discussion doesn’t mean you’ve won. And the fact that you think there’s anything to win shows you’re nothing more than a debate pervert. You make up your own rules and then claim you’ve won so go parade your win and let the adults speak.
If you bought a game, and they’ve made it so you cannot play the game that you paid for, they are taking the game from you. This is the whole point of Stop Killing Games.
This is regarding MMOs as already stated. Your comment is irrelevant.
Why would that make it irrelevant? MMOs should not become unplayable either. All games should be preserved, regardless of genre.