Games as a Service is a Scam

No, because it's not a real problem and no one fucking cares

This.

The one time reddit as any actual merit over this shithole

Redditors actually defended this.

> it's illegal
Okay. Not going to waste 1 hour for this bullshit.

>aggregate and shitpost nirvana.
>either having anything resembling merit.

why is he doing this? just WHY?

kill yourself

>why is he shilling his own video here?

there's your (you)'s, go away.

Attached: you.jpg (789x2000, 887K)

Attached: Was.jpg (588x588, 42K)

what is there to discuss?
The industry is fucked, those who still have sense or any worthy opinion play obscure, very carefully selected and/or older games, and they are not really affected by all this modern bullcrap since 90% of new releases are 5-6/10 games labeled as 9-10/10 ones. I'm not saying every new game is shit, because they are not, they are just simply so forgettable and average you miss absolutely nothing by skipping them and they also have these artifical walls too so you can't access the product directly.

So basically you pay more for less, which is fucking retarded, and any argument which defends it is just a waste of time, and worthless.

Ross is too based for this board. He actually has an idea to shape the future of games for the better, and I for one will support him any way I can.

I don't disagree with this, but most old games were shit too. And lots of old games that people praise have shot gameplay.

It's truly hilarious the lengths manlets wi!l go

Attached: 1534321448418.gif (1920x1070, 2.26M)

Done right it´s not. Look at splatoon, game was barren at first and fun. Then they began adding more and more and more for free and in short timeframes.

Stuff like this is nice and can make some multiplayer games pretty good honestly.

that's a great doujin

Yeah. Great thing it's a good that you can continue to own and play legally once servers shut down.

>mutant hairlet
not gonna watch, sorry man

the main difference is inside the post my man.
If you pretend a shitty game is good then it will qualify as a good game. Now back then if the game was shit it was labeled as a shit game. An 1/10 shit game is an 1/10 shit game. End of the story. There is nothing to discuss here.
Lets make an example:

A journalist hypes up a slightly above mediocre game a typical 6/10 into a 10/10. Is this because he actually believes its a 10/10 or because he's told to say its a 10/10? At this point it doesn't matter because guess what? A 6/10 game became a 10/10 so the standard is shifted. So now most people have a warped view where an average game is now 8/10 instead of a 5/10, what actually is. A shit game is 5/10 while in reality its a 2/10. You can't do anything this because that's how it works now, and why you have an unbearable amount of shitty games being sold as good ones.

Source?

Everyone these days understands the inflation of ratings. Also, game analysis is impossible and always has been.

>stupid inbred thinks Ross would unironically waste his time here when he's being consumed by mold

>Great thing it's a good that you can continue to own and play legally once servers shut down.
same thing can be said about any MMO.

then what is there to discuss again? You are a fucktard if you let others to decide and make judgement of a game, which 80% of people who play games do, because they are unable to do so and need a medium often in the form of a gaming journalism in most cases to form their opinion.

If I told you I'll sell you a pack of virtual cards for 15 dollars, where these cards are mandatory to play and exist to fill a gap where should be actual content, and they also server to milk the game as much as possible with the little effort as possible. Now you would call this a shit game, which is in fact its barely a game its just a pixelated gambling device. The said 80% not only would accepts this, but they also would love it. This is the fact. And also why so many people watch other people play video games, they lack critcial thinking and need someone else so they can parrot their opinions.

TL;DR Its only impossible if you are retarded, and you lack any form of brain usage.

As long as you've invested non-subscription based payment into the game, you're damn right.

Based ADD retard

holy shit what a fucking cope

ok so three points

1: dont taint ross fanbase with nu/v/ zoomers
2: nu/v/ zoomers like and defend microtransactions, don't expect them to care about videogames
3: dont taint ross's fanbase with nu/v/ zoomers

you're a bit autistic, aren't you

here's your (you) have a nice day

There's no problem. It's not fraud and it's not a scam.

Next?

>buy the game
>developer cuts the cable
>money stolen

thanks man
don't understand why you treat Ross as some holy grail, though
ad revenue is good, even if it comes from the retards that inhabit this place
maybe some of them even take it to heart what he said and see that his cause is right

dont need to treat ross as a holy grail to understand Yea Forums is fucking cancer and would only have a negative effect on anything related to him

What was his endgame?

>buy a ticket to a theme park
>park closes down
>money stolen

a themepark is a service not a good

>service
>good

A park is a service. you're renting time to interact with it not buying the park outright retard. You know exactly how much time you're paying for and if they shit down before hand you're legally allowed a refund.

holy shit how dos he have such an ugly face, it looks like one of those creepypasta demon faces if you look at it from a distance, can't even bear through the vid with his horrible ugly manchild face blocking the screen, closed

just like video games

>game
>good
Nope, sorry sweetie. You don't own anything.

>they shit down before hand you're legally allowed a refund.
False

yes software has been ruled as a good in legal precedents

next

He spends the first chunk of the video showing off all the legal shit he's found showing the whole 'You just own a license' meme is a myth, and that in buying a game you DO own a singular instance of It as a good.

>You don't own anything.
In the EU I do.
Get fucked 56%. :)

Depends on whether or not the software is licensed and most of it is.

>Depends on whether or not the software is licensed
It literally doesn't. Read the ruling.

nope, hell the first part of the video explains this perfectly well. Law says companies cant just fuck you over because hey they made a document that is entirely meaningless and you signed it.

Sure, you can own the physical disk that the software resides, but if your game requires a service that doesn't exist you're SOL, buddy.

So like a contract? Sounds like bullshit to me.

Unless that Eula is written by the. Government, that thing doesn't mean shit in court.

thats why he's saying its a scam. That they are literally breaking the law in running this kind of practice. You paid for an item, and they're, at a point in time they choose, taking the item back from you w/o permission. A sale is a sale. Once that sale is complete, they lose all control over that ONE INSTANCE of the item sold.

>people whining about the only actual gaming discussion thread here
amazin'

If your contract breaks laws its null and void. It's why contracts that keep a person with a company forever are unlawful and have been overturned.

Nope. If you buy access to a service, you're not entitled to that service unless the company says so.

yes, I can write a contract that says everytime I sneeze you have to stab yourself 4 times with a knife. You sign it. Guess what? That contract is illegal, no matter how many lawyers wrote it. Just beacuse it is written by a team of lawyers does not mean its entirely garbage and illegal. Hell, they know how to slide by legalities to put it in favor of their client. Thats their job.

Why should they? Games as Service makes the publishers more money than standard Games as Games, and people are stupid enough to buy them.

After that former NRS developer interview discussion topic yesterday, you are absolutely correct.

Games as a service don't break any laws.

what service are they providing? The server? The game itself is a good as defined by law. So why is it legal for them to literally steal your copy of the good you purchased that is protected by law? Its theft. They certain and legally can rescind access to their servers as that is a service but for them to encrypt the data and make it impossible to for you to start your own server with the good you legally own is what makes it a scam. I guess its just easy to argue against the stuff when you dont take the time to watch the video or when you like it when companies stick it up your pooper, for some reason.

Either do your research or fuck off this doesn't concern zoomers. BTW you own your games.

They do when they shut down. When they are in operation they're perfectly legal.

If you watched the video, you'd hear Ross's case for why that may be false

thanks for reminding me about Rosskino, was busy catching up on Jermakino

The server is one way to provide a service, yes.

False

Ross doesn't have a case for it.

games literally cannot be a service, it was ruled that they are goods. by a court of law.

>BTW you own your games.
When did I say you don't? And I have.

False

>The server is one way to provide a service, yes.
Based retard.

See

Yeah, still a service, sweetie.

Honestly, I'm in the EU and I don't feel like making snarky comments about consumer rights ever since they've been pulling the article 13 bullshit

The server isn't a service if it destroys your game sweet tits.

The 'service' being 'allowing you to use the product your purchased, without which said product ceases to function' is not good enough

Not an argument. Still a service. You can't change the definition of a word.

Pastebin with all the links used in the video, since Ross is too stupid to provide it himself.
pastebin.com/UY32m3fq

>Will devs ever fix the games as a service problem?

Not unless you make them but not purchasing games as a service.

Why not, games as a service misuses a word. Your game is a good.

AHHHH WHAT IS HIS END GAME AHHHHHHHHH

The definition of a word as it is commonly used and the definition of a word within the legal framework that describes a specific set of things are two different things entirely. You lack both the intelligence and the knowledge to argue about these things. Watch the video, Ross explains it rather well and debunks all the "arguments" low IQ idiots like you bring forth. Of course you won't, because you want to shitpost, so I'm wasting my time. And so does anyone else replying to you.

archive.is/LKwb6

No, but the courts can, and have, as he shows

Your copy of the game is a good. If the devs pull the plug without giving you any reasonable way to keep it running, they're fucking with your good after selling it to you.

He and Ross are right though.

False

Devs being mandated to put in the bare minimum of effort to release the code emulators need to host their own servers

Should link to

Whatever you say mate. I'm glad we live in a world where absolute retards can have rights even when they deny it.

Ross goes over this in the video. Games as a service do not meet the legal or informal requirements to be services. There's no mutual understanding of how long it'll continue nor is there a timely fee nor do you lose access to your license of the game once it ends, because hey it was perpetual all along, your game just becomes unplayable which is the equivalent of destroying a sold good.
Imagine falseflagging as a shill for billion dollar companies

why does this video keep showing up in related videos
why does youtube keep putting one specific video in its related videos bar for a couple days, almost as if it's trying to push astroturf pseudo-viral garbage
at least in this case i do follow some gaming channels

Let's just acknowledge that many here are simply being divisive cucks for the sake of it. Anyone who believes that art isn't worth preservation on that premise alone doesn't really deserve to have their ideas heard desu. (Not saying they shouldn't be able to speak, just that you shouldn't listen.) If the law disagrees it should be changed. Luckily in this particular case it seems the law hasn't caught up with modern business practices yet. Games as a service will one day be rightfully regulated barring corruption or idiocy. It's also important to point out that arguing against owning one's games is not only an argument against one's own interest, but also against the idea of property as a concept. Not even communist countries would bar people from owning a personal good like a game, the position is nonsensical.

Interesting you would say that because, as people in the comments pointed out, parts of the video used to be corrupted for a day or so. Which is something I had never seen before on any other Youtube video

>art

Attached: 1516544466212.png (253x217, 14K)

>literal who e-begger
>long hair
>shirts with band names
>listening to metal past age 14

If you really cared about this issue you wouldn't shill this fags channel

Not that user but I think YouTube's algorithms are being torn to shreds between its special interests and public relations, and Stadia. For this video in particular. I also think they fucked with the video's views and comments like they usually do but I can't know that now and really should've kept track.

>e-begger
hello ebegger-kun
take your meds
and gtfo

If you think "art" is too pretentious a word, then surely you can't deny that video games are the result of creative efforts and energy. It's that creativity which is worth preserving because it could inspire someone else

what is this

Attached: games.png (804x516, 438K)

Mold

Body hair. You'll get it when you hit puberty.

Preserved human.

im a girl but okay

You don't think women get bodyhair?

artstation.com

The vast majority of featured content there is easily real art. And much of it ends up in games, or as concept art for games, or leads to artists there designing for games. /v is trying to actually do something here kiddo, maybe you should help.

Guess she'll find out :D