>>Valve plans to appeal the ruling. “We disagree with the decision of the Paris Court of First Instance and will appeal it,” a Valve representative told Kotaku in an email. “The decision will have no effect on Steam while the case is on appeal.”
>Steam drones unironically defend Valve, a company trying to take away their consumer rights
When did you realise Tim was the hero and Gaben was the villain?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Check the catalog before posting a new thread. There's one already up.
it's one guy shitting up the board
hey steam drone, time is up
stop spamming your gay shit
Tim?
>people acting like valve won't have tons of rules for reselling to prevent $60 games being sold for $10 day 1 and other abuse
Why would they want to prevent it? Do you want to lose fifty bucks per sale?
SEETHING
Why would people want to fuck themselves like that you slobbering retard.
>Jumps on the digital distribution store and battle royale bandwagon
>Hero
Kill yourself brain dead retard.
Posting this from the last thread.
This will be the death of steam.
>trying to take away their consumer rights
Because consumer rights aren't automatically a good thing?
>These COMPANIES want to take away your right to take their PRODUCT for FREE. They're EVIL and against your CONSUMER RIGHTS
Not what's happening but it would be the same concept. The argument why this is bad for the industry has been stated multiple times.
>tim is the hero
I don't think Sweeney would let people resell games either you shill.
STOP POSTING THIS
Just because steam goes down the road of being absolute fuck ups doesn't automatically make timmyboi a good guy, u stupid one dimensional monkey.
But billionaire *Tim Sweeney* = Bad, while
billionaire *Gabe Newell* = Good.
I hope it turns out like the refunds situation where Valve gets shafted HARD. They denied me a refund once and I have never bought a game on Steam since.
No, just GOG.
>implement resale feature
>give a cut to the platform holder
>give a cut to the original developer
Problem solved.
IRNEISNINGIDFNIDFGODJFNG
The argument why it's bad for the industry has also been debunked multiple times
BUT!! BUT!!! SAME GAME!! LOWER PRICE!!!
Man, sucks for gabe. guess he'll have to downgrade to a double Whopper from now on huh.
Where?
>The argument why it's bad for the industry has also been debunked multiple times
It has not. It's been falliciously compared to irrelevant bullshit, or else as here people acting like Valve will somehow get a say in what you get to do with YOUR GAME.
>Law says consumers have the right to resell games"
>Valve will just tell consumers they can't haha
That's the dithering retardedness we're dealing with.
Asking again here: I really would want to know at least ten entities, developers, worth saving by this alleged nightmare.
>it would hurt single player developers
Who? Yakuza devs or the massive faggots that made Control?
>consumer rights
kys communist
I don't see the ability to resale games on the epic store. I bet they wouldn't even be able to figure out a way to do it. NO CART
Consumer rights are bad, because I said so
Also, if reselling is allowed, poor Syrian refugee children will starve by the billions, also games will cease to exist, Nvidia will go bankrupt, Microsoft will be forced to open death camps for anyone who thinks mutilating childrens genitals is immoral, and mankind will likely be wiped out by a mutated, airborne AIDS supervirus. How do I know this? It's self evident you stupid goy! What are you some kind of holocaust denier or flat earther who asks for "evidence"?!
>implement resale feature
>give a cut to the platform holder
>give a cut to the original developer
>Third party site offers the same but without that nonsense, only taking a much smaller cut for themselves.
What don't you stupid fucks understand that under this law this is YOUR GAME TO DO WITH AS YOU PLEASE. NEITHER VALVE NOR THE DEVS CAN DO SHIT TO STOP YOU DOING ANYTHING WITH IT. THEY CANNOT FORCE YOU TO PAY A CUT, THEY CAN ONLY OFFER TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A SERVICE IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER SERVICES.
how the fuck can you resell anything that is digital
Jap devs will go back to exclusively selling on consoles, apparently. Even though this affects consoles too.
I liked this user's post so I'm gonna post it again, here we go:
>and Steam drones
Pretty soon, you're going to be able to sell digital games. While it may seem like a consumer win on the surface, if you're not completely fucking retarded and think about it for 10 seconds you'll realize how bad things will get. Digital "used" is not the same as physical used. There is literally no reason not to buy digital used for cheaper. That's not the real issue, though. What's going to destroy game sales is the ability to set your own price. Imagine a game swap thread on Yea Forums: you bought Sekiro and beat it, and now you want to play DMC5. Someone in the thread (there will always be someone) has DMC5 and wants to play Sekiro. You each sell the game to the other for $0.01. This goes on and on to the point that no one is really buying new games anymore. Sales will go from hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands, and you'll see devs try to make their money back by making more online games that require a copy to play with friends, or microtransactions, or preorder DLC tied to your account. Indie games will just die. Who's going to buy Baba is You at full price when you can pick it up when you have some free time for dirt cheap, or just trade it for another indie game you bought? If you have friends and family with steam, you all just trade games between your group for a penny every time. It will reek havock on the market.
I know that retards want to pretend all devs are greedy and evil (plenty are) and that they should be making games out of pure passion with no monetary incentive, but the reality is that things just don't work that way. Anyone crying about corporate bootlickers and consumer rights who's pretending this is unequivocally a win for us is a complete fucking retard without a modicum of foresight.
Remember, if someone can't actually form a coherent thought and just yells about corporate cocksuckers and doomers, they're a retard incapable of forethought.
Yeah, because comparing used software sales to... used software sales is a complete *googles correct spelling* logical fallacy. We should just be making up random worse case scenarios and passing them off as fact!
>Because consumer rights aren't automatically a good thing?
holy shit, how much of a bootlicker can you be? keep on licking mr. shekelsteins boots and MAYBE you'll get a 0.5% raise.
f-f-fuck c-consumers..
we had a good r-r-run e-epic b-bros
If this ruling became widely adopted then streaming would be the only future for gaming. Kikes hate seeing other people make money
>people think this is a Steam only problem
Heartiest chuckle I've had on Yea Forums so far.
found the unemployed parasite bernie voter!
you should go back where you came from honestly
>Yeah, because comparing used software sales to... used software sales
Comparing physical sales to digital sales is incredibly fallacious because digital media does not function like physical media. If you're referring to something else please elaborate.
That post was already debunked about a dozen times in the original thread though
No it wasnt
Can't wait to pay subscriptions to use singleplayer games and for the endless piles of f2p p2w trash
Wait, I get to own my games again? Based France.
>true face steam drone
where
Yes it was. Now dilate
When? When people said they went over to their m8s house and gave them video games back in the good old days or when people said "haha what if Valve just didn't let them do it haha".
>valve starts losing money to resales
>forced to make good games again
literally nothing bad can come from this, thank you frenchies
in the original thread
lol yes it was
>Valve will just tell consumers they can't haha
it's not like there's no precedence for them doing that or anything.
>>forced to make good games again
What do you mean, they will just up production on dota 2 and csgo shit
>he thinks they'll make good games
>he doesnt think they'll double down on making shitty rushed out microtransaction packed games
How making games good again affect resales?
The only way any dev could possibly discourage resales is exclusive content outside the original purchase of the base game which is already a massive cancer upon the industry. A situation like this only encourages that even more
___ _ ____ ____ ____ __
Thanks for actually positing a good argument m8.
Thank you for you service.
do you know how easy it is to take a screenshot? you fucking lying nigger
But valve has a pretty generous return policy despite that article
>How making games good again affect resales?
Once a company makes good games us GAMERS will come together in TOTAL SUPPORT and we will enter the golden age of gaming my man.
>50% buzzword density
Yikes!
So the main argument against this is devs/publishers are fucking evil and will stop using lube to fuck you over? Subscriptions, streaming, microtransactions, excessive ingame ads, the whole works. Of course, they'll still eventually do this anyway.
No we won't, us gamers will just buy the used licenses because it'll be much cheaper and fully legal.
Again I'll state it because
If regulatory bodies gave you the "consumer right" to take any product from a supermarket for free then I would definitely argue against that "consumer right". Because it would destroy business incentive and leave me starving. It would be bad for me to take this "consumer right".
If not being a communist makes you a bootlicker then IDGAF fuck commies.
How was it debunked a dozen of times if the original post only got 6 replies, 3 of them were just people telling others to read the post?
am I missing something here?
2 hours is not "generous" it's bare-ass minimum compliance. the original ruling was for two WEEKS to refund, which, granted, would be abusable as hell, but still. the 2 hours thing also led to a trend of games being front-loaded as hell, with the boring shit being withheld until past the refund point. or even worse, shit like sonic forces, where the main campaign is literally 2.25 hours in length.
It's not exactly peachy keen that we can't sell or trade keys, but I think that companies should have the right to not provide an inherently optional service. It only makes subscriptions look more profitable to investors and probably discourages developers from putting their games on sale, as not to lower their market value forever.
Why don't people just sell cracked games for $10. It's basically the same thing as this except you can only profit.
>buy used EA game
>"This isn't the original account that activated this copy of the game. To use this game's online (mandatory) features you must pay a one-time re-registration fee."
Can't wait to see this pop up again.
>companies duplicate 1s and 0s indefinitely for exponential profit
This is the nature of all digital goods. Their expectation of profit is what is insanely out of proportion compared to companies that produce physical goods. The only way you can realistically sell information is to introduce artificial scarcity and tightly control supply. That's what copyrights and DRM are supposed to accomplish.
In the end when you zoom out far enough the act of selling identical information to multiple users is in essence unethical. I'm aware that treating it any differently would destroy the currency industry. I'm perfectly fine with that kind of destruction. I yearn to return to the days where software and game developers put the work in simply because they had a passion and an inherent drive to create. Games were much more unique when they weren't financially motivated.
It's like the difference between a slut you pay to fuck you and a woman that genuinely wants to fuck you. If you need financial motivation to go through with it then it takes away from the experience. This is just an opinion by the way. There's no need to get bent out of shape over it.
or just an up-front 30% tax for handling payment of resold games
how exciting
people did, in the 90s
it was called pirated copies
Because that's illegal.
Because crackers aren't jews and will always do it for free.
Moving to digital distribution was a move which brought:
1) More profits for publishers
2) More control for publishers over their game, since they could effectively limit the usage of their software (including resell)
This is a great thing. It's effectively fucking over publishers who went as hard as they could into digital thinking only about their benefits, and about how much harder they could fuck over consumers. They made their bed by thinking they brought themselves somehow above the law, and now they get fucked because the law pretty much always wins in case which are about fucking over corporations and put sweet sweet fines on their asses.
ruling prevents restriction on resale
you should really go back where you came from
at least until the obvious brain trauma you suffered and the effects of your cracked skull injury subsides so you can have a thought that doesn't belong to a 10 yearold that has started shitposting here a week ago
It's exactly like the online pass bullshit they used to push. That's probably exactly what will happen.
Pirating is already illegal. Don't have much to lose.
blah blah tech illiterate
blah blah not just steam
blah blah you're a faggot
blah blah chinese have no souls
This would also affect certain kinds of DRM that limit the amount of machines you can activate on.
Good news, now they'll fuck you even harder with streaming and subscriptions.
>the hurricane flattening your house will mean you don't have to worry about that abestos insulation anymore!
but yes user, that is a silver lining ty.
Oof, hard yikes!
are you a consolefag?
also why do you want to sell your digital games tied to your personal account?
I'm just saying they would also have to address that in the ruling or else companies would just use that loophole to make games only able to be activated once and thus rendering resale impotent.
Profiting from it is a whole different legal ball game than just giving it away.
I don't understand
I would choose an escort over a girlfriend any day.
>pay her 100 bucks
>she fucks me like if I was a living god
>completely empties my balls
>never see her again, unless I want to
>get a girlfriend
>have to take her out (and I pay for the transportation)
>have to go out with her (and I have to pay)
>have to listen to her bullshit
>have to deal with her on "her days"
>have to stop playing videogames so much because "eww, videogames are icky, pay attention to me!"
>have to fuck her however she wants or else she is left unsatisfied
>have to buy her presents for the lovers day
>for her birthday
>for christmass
>for our anniversary
>have to waste my weekend on family meetings
>have to constantly plan take outs to "entertain her" or else she gets bored of the relationship
Yeah...FUCK THAT
They could probably just say that it isnup to the developers to solve issues with their own games restricting transferring and that Valve has nothing to do with that outside of transferring the Steam license
You'll notice I didn't say girlfriend.
The only one getting fucked over is you, the consumer, retard. Open your eyes. Indie devs and consumers are going to be the ones that suffer the most from this.
It really has nothing to do with steam as a sole entity and more to do with digital consumer rights which have never really existed despite a strong need for them overall. It makes sense that people should be able to resell keys as they see fit when it comes to digital games as much as they have the right to sell a disc they buy. No one should accept games as a service period when it's such a predatory model. For all the naysayers claiming that games would make money I find it laughable. People like myself only buy games on deep discount and use grey markets near exclusively and you would find that a lot of people would actually buy used games that would do the same or resort to piracy. If they add a small sellers fee for using their platform and to go to the devs I think you would find that they make more money and have more players overall.
it's funny because this only hurts developers.
Valve can still stake a cut of every re-sale, just like they do with items, and the developer gets nothing.
or how about this:
>be good at sex
>say "not really looking for anything serious"
>call bitches over to fuck and then play games while they lay quivering in bed; repeat every couple hours to keep them on the leash.
It's like you've never satisfied a woman before. here's a tip: go for average looking girls because they have serious self-esteem issues and will latch on to anything that praises them.
literally the easy response is to lock it behind another computer with stadia. Now you have ABSOLUTELY no rights to the software, and piracy is a thing of the past
We already have online DRM, so it's not too far fetched.
Europe is such a gang bang of regional laws vs global market
like tax evaders in Denmark or law dodgers in Sweden or debt defaulters in Greece
What are we gonna do realistically
Nobody gives a fuck about indie devs, they're trash and I'm tired of blocking their vaporware junk form the Steam store. If this kills them off then that's a sacrifice I'm happy fore them to make.
If you have to do all that for a girlfriend then she shouldn’t be your girlfriend.
Also not correct to compare escorts to girlfriends. Escorts don’t give a shit about you. Girlfriends love you.
>and will latch on to anything that praises them
Women everywhere are bombarded with praise their entire lives even if they're homely. You're just stroking their ego; not telling them something they haven't heard a hundred times before. This isn't the 1700s when women only interacted with 1 or 2 suitors before being betrothed. These bitches are swatting away a hundred different men a day all trying to give them compliments.
its not a thing about being good at sex
Sometimes you just want to ram your dick down her throat. News flash to you, incel, women don't have erogenous zones in their throats and they expect to get some sort of payoff.
Whores don't expect shit but your money, which is a shitload cheaper than a girlfriend.
>that fucking tip
lmao
Why the fuck would I settle for some 3/10 when a literal 10/10 is waiting for any male to call her? You're a cuck, it's easy to tell from your mentality of settling for the lower end of the spectrum.
>form
>fore
Maybe you should be taking English lessons instead of shitposting, Pablo.
>Girlfriends love you.
xD
Good. Information can not be owned, I have the right to arrange molecules and electrons in any way I want and if I want to spread that pattern, I can. If that "Kills" the "video game market" then the video game market didn't deserve to exist in the first place.
If the only way for a market to exist is to artificially restrain people from manipulating matter to their will, that market is immoral and the moral thing is to destroy it. The video game market will be destroyed.
lol try harder
they love you until you stop doing thing for her, then they love that one guy she met the other day
stop being a fucking incel and believing in Disney love holy shit lmao
>I want to live in the past
Pull your head out.
Those kinds of devs wouldn't survive anymore. They'll never exist again. The cost to just live is too high now.
And what you want is indentured servitude. You want people to entertain you for no reason other than you. Fuck off.
If that logic held true there would be no market for physical games as people would pull the same shit. People are going to want to get at least a portion of what they paid for the games back and no amount of fear mongering about muh poor incentive lacking devs is going to change it.
And this is how games become AAA/Gacha or bust.
Most indie devs are taking a huge risk already.
And yeah for every Terraria or Nuclear Throne you have a whole bunch of trash, but it's not like they know that before they make them. So kill gaming if you want but never complain when all you get is garbage.
I want to do the thing that will stop you from living and if you don't survive, you didn't deserve to exist in the first place.
Who are we going to miss? Make names, because nobody here makes any names.
Maybe they'll just make their games tradable after an allotted amount of time?
They'll do more than 2hrs sometimes, it depends upon the reasoning, but it is rare.
t. guy who refunded a game that went to shit after 100hrs of play time
I’m not incel though. I have a gf. Stop believing everything you read on mgtow forums. You’re rotting your brain and making yourself an unlikeable person.
Really, this is all it will come down to.
It's a consumer right that can definitely be waived.
Comparing living organisms to artificially created human markets doesn't work.
Also, eating meat is also immoral and the meat market will be destroyed as well, in due time.
you don't actually have that right, you know this don't you? I hope you were pretending to be autistic.
If you can alter your hard drive into containing whatever video game you want with no outside assistance, nobody's stopping you.
>Those kinds of devs wouldn't survive anymore
Not trying to make bloated budget games.
>And what you want is indentured servitude. You want people to entertain you for no reason other than you
I don't expect them to continue working in the industry. I was explicitly clear about that by saying I am perfectly fine with the industry being destroyed. I don't appreciate what it has become because money is the sole motivating factor in everything. You seem to think it must be this way. You lack imagination. You seem to think something is better than nothing. You fail to acknowledge that there won't be nothing; there just won't be the no-taste AAA shit you've conflated with actual video games.
It's probably been posted a few times by the same guy, the version I saw had a lot more than 6 replies. Go away shill
I'm not talking about missing anyone.
I'm talking about your mythical Blizzard North-esque developers that you want to see make a resurgence.
I'm saying they won't survive now. Life is too expensive. Time is too short. EVen if they do it as a passtime, jobs now require so much more time than they did in the 90's.
Basically, you have your head in the clouds.
I wouldn't complain if the current idea of gaming is killed. That's the point of my post.
Not comparing living things to inanimate things.
Comparing logic to logic.
Also, no it isn't.
>I have a girlfriend
>girlfriends love you
Come on m8, who the fuck do you think you're trolling with that shit?
>all that projection
Incel spotted.
Some of us aren't permavirgins, you know. Some of us do actually hit the gym.
The fact that you think hitting the gym is going to get you laid tells everyone you're the actual incel.
Yeah you would, if you think video games involves this much morals and principles then you obviously don't have anything else in your life to replace them
And if I want to give that pattern to someone else I have that right to, and I only don't if someone else stops me.
You don't own information. There is no such thing as "invention", there is only discovery and no one owns the right to a discovery, only the right to be called the first to discover it.
If your argument is reliant on the idea that the person you're speaking to is lying then you have no actual argument against the points being made. I'm not lying. Color inside the lines.
Or maybe he thinks, rightfully so, that the current world of gaming is fucking shit and not worth defending like a turbo drone.
The fact you think hitting the gym doesn't make you a healthy person tells everyone you're an actual incel.
God I’m hoping Steam loses. Everyone has a bunch of unplaced Steam games, gotta get rid of that shit.
I can play Doom wads forever m8 and never get bored.
You seem to think that people have infinite time available so that they can create entertainment for you.
You're a disgusting mix of idealist and nihilist. You're the kind of retard that would rather see a company fail than improve.
Kindly off yourself.
enjoy sales getting banned from steam, cuck
Moving the goalpost. The goal is to get laid which is what you stated hitting the gym was for. Now you're stating it's about being a healthy person. Let me stomp on your shitty point again. The fact that you think being a healthy person is going to get you laid tells everyone you're the actual incel.
How would the reseller benefit from selling it for so little?
Always amuses me to see these failures whining about women when they have no idea how to be human beings and bitch about what acting like animals gives them. Thank god most of you will never reproduce.
Could valve just stop business in France?
The fine is only 3000 euros a day, so if it comes that losing that much a day is less than the loss from reselling, they probably just won't change.
could france just stop? entirely, please
Yes, and they probably will.
You two know this was a thread about Valve court rulings in France, right?
Won't they just make the EU waive the right to resell when they buy the game like they did with refunds?
I don't expect people to create entertainment for me. This is an important part of my post. I was very clear about that. Many times. Destruction is a natural process that leads to improvement. The current industry has shown no desire to regulate itself and continually improve. It has managed to grow despite becoming worse for all customers everywhere in the context of actual video games. They've improved with DRM, and monetization, and capitalizing on whales, and exploiting problem gamblers, and skinner box simulators. None of these things appeal to me.
I would prefer the industry come to a grinding halt and the act of creating a video game becoming a non-profitable venture. I was actually around when the industry used to be just like that, and the amount of creativity back then was unprecedented. You don't know how bad it is right now because you don't remember what an untainted industry looked like. This has been all you've ever known by the way you're acting. Your first video game was probably on a mobile device.
But why? In the end this is just a huge barrier for entry into the gaming market.
No, the goalpost was moved when you projected everyone else is friendless. Gymbros are the best friends anyone would have.
You're an incel, through and through. There is no way around it.
Who?
Why what? Why wouldn't I complain? Because I'm dissatisfied with the current direction of the industry as a whole.
Based frogs
So now you're talking about friends. Yet another goalpost moved. You're a moron if you think you're convincing anyone of anything. Going to a gym isn't going to get you laid. Being funny will get you laid. But you don't know how to work out that muscle because you have no fucking sense of humor. Maybe getting laid will help you lighten up.
have sex
Except this is going to result in games getting much worse, so your argument is literally "Games are shit so why not make them really shit".
>I don't expect people to create entertainment for me.
You absolutely do.
What the fuck do you think
>I would prefer the industry come to a grinding halt and the act of creating a video game becoming a non-profitable venture
means?
You were never around when games were "non-profit" because that time never fucking existed outside of pong on an oscilloscope. You're fuckin delusional m8.
Don't @ me ever again.
Oh you've gotta be crazy to think that Tim was anywhere near the hero - he's worse, and so is anything having to do with Epic. Gaben is not the villain.
For the past several years Valve has been trying to implement resale, but they've been cockblocked by the publishers at every turn. The reason they're fighting this is to get more time. Valve would be fine with resale, hell they can even benefit from it (ie a certain amount of each sale goes to Valve as a transaction fee or whatnot), but the publishers are the ones who are screaming to high heaven and shitting bricks. Basically, the publishers claim that if you can resell digital content like this, they'll instantly revoke all their shit off Steam etc. Think about it, the AAA publishers want more control - they want Stadia-level "Not even happening on your computer, but streamed to you from their servers entirely" control anyway. Valve has been trying to figure out ways to counteract this without instantly losing all AAA titles.
They need more time to show that it works, just like refunds. Valve wanted to do better refunds, long before the EU thing, but the publishers were the ones bitching about that too. If we're lucky, Valve will implement some sort of resale system in the future where you can de-auth and pack up a game and then sell the key on Steam's internal system like a Steam Gift or whatnot. Valve will take a pittance, but they'll also need to figure out an acceptable kickback to the publishers or else they'll never let it happen - thats the big stopping point as the publishers are unreasonable. There will probably also have to be other things like limits on how frequently you can sell things (ie to keep people from just trading stuff for no money all the time) as the publishers aren't having it etc... but they will have a solution if they can.
Valve isn't the enemy here, publishers are. They'll hasten the push towards streaming only non-ownership specifically to get away from this!
Excepted selling our shit to Chinese hackers, what does Epic do "wrong" exactly?
ps: having less features is NOT something necessarily bad
You're the one that came up with the friends shit, incel. Go back and re-read your posts. You're also one that assumed you could get laid in a gym.
What is going to get worse? Gook games? They were going to shit either way. Western games? They already hit rock bottom, take Greedfall out and this year there was fucking nothing.
That's why I'm surprised to see many people not wanting things to get even worse. Again, worse than what?
Having way more than you faggot. Enough to realize that there's so much more to life and love and that a partnership will always be more rewarding than an empty orgasm.
>v*lve
>making games
>making good games and not cash grabs
>making even a semi decent cash grab at the least
They'd probably have to stop in the whole of the EU, which means billions less revenue
I didn't expect this news to gain so much traction on Yea Forums. This is just one country, who cares except frenchmen?
>something doesn't appeal to me so we need to get rid of it
Eat a dick you blue haired twitter warrior.
Not everything is FOR you.
>You absolutely do.
I absolutely don't. Your argument is relying on the assumption that I'm lying to you. I'm not.
>What the fuck do you think
>means?
It means precisely what it says. It reinforces my statement that I don't expect people to continue making video games because I'm okay with no more games being made.
>You were never around when games were "non-profit"
Yes, I was. The overwhelming majority of the C64 library was almost all shareware or freeware. Only a small portion of the titles were ever sold in stores.
You're too young. All you've ever known is this horrid, greedy industry and it shows. You think it's impossible to make good games without multi-million dollar budgets and 5 years of development. You are wrong. You think this bullshit because those are the only games you enjoy; likely because you have the most bottom of the barrel taste in entertainment. You can only enjoy something if you believe other people are also enjoying it. You have no self-reliant systems for determining value. Your opinion is irrelevant to me.
I told you not to get worked up over what I said but you couldn't help yourself. You just had to pipe up and try to defend an industry that treats you like a worthless paypig.
Your arguments are above the simple minds here user. You don't expect people to create entertainment for you but people expect you to buy their shovelware crap that has metastasized into hundreds of thousands of shitty games. The market would be better if resales forced more competition and novelty.
>You're also one that assumed you could get laid in a gym.
I stated the exact opposite. You seem to think I'm someone I'm not.
Worse than the occasional decent arcadey indie game.
Also Bannerlord soon. A nice place to die.
Based valve and gayben, fighting for their right to fuck you in the ass as a consumer, no lube.
How can one company be so epically based, bros? It sure is a good time to be a steamchad, bros.
Incredibly and epically based, fellow steamers. So, so very based and redpilled. Based for the win, even.
Superbly based. I don't have any frog píctures but imagine I posted one just to show how serious I am about the baseditude and redpillness of this saga of an event.
I would legit suck gabe's cock for being so superbly based, no homo.
every idiot has an opinion and the mentally ill OP spams his constant threads and it's bumped by epic poster trolls so it's on the front page a lot
The frogs think they've actually won a victory for once in their pathetic excuse of an existence and won't stop shitposting about it. I'm just here to egg them on.
Americans are so used to abuse and having no rights against big corps that the very notion of having them right scares them and thus they defend the big corps.
It's exactly the same thing with people in North Korean being scared of freedom. You are used to having no rights.
I'm simply stating I would be perfectly fine with its destruction. I'm not campaigning for it to die. If it can be improved through other means I'm just as likely to support that. The points I made are built on the assumption that these legislative changes are going to force the industry into a certain direction.
>steam takes bigger cut from devs
>steam is then forced to basically annihilate devs' revenue streams
what about EGS
Imagine thinking that any law is written with the interest of the public/consumer being the primary motivation. This law was written by interest groups and lobbyists the same as all others and will fuck over those it claims to protect, like all others.
Why do you think this event needs to be ignored? What's your angle, here?
>Be Eu nation
>Think you have rights.
>b-buh whaddaboud
But what about Valve, though? It seems to be the focus of the lawsuit.
you have an angle not me, that's why you keep posting in every thread and frothing about corporations and boots
based
On one hand, sp games could at least implement mod support so that there would be a purpose behind keeping your games.
It's pretty evident to anyone over 30 who pays attention that people are being raised as rabid consumers from cradle to grave and it's only gotten worse over time with technology infiltrating every aspect of life.
It would be forced on epic as well but I don't think they'd give much of a fuck as steam will and would be ecstatic instead
>Imagine thinking that any law is written with the interest
If the law is explicit about its scope and can be enforced, then why would it matter what the "intention" was? You're such a cheerleading cocksucker you're basically defending a company's intention to deny your consumer rights.
Your narrow slice of gaming experience doens't mean games were "non-profit". Hell you could find free games now. That doesn't mean games are non-profit now either.
There has never been a time when games were non-profit. It's always been financially motivated.
You flat out said you want people to make games for no money. That's called making entertainment for you. You're so fuckin gdumb.
And no, my first game would have been river raid on the atari 2600 retard. I just know that games aren't as bad as your nihilistic ass is making them out to be.
Stay away from AAA and you're fucking fine.
Your excessive desire to "grind the whole thing to a halt" is fucking stupid and demonstartes a lack of understanding of how humanity progresses.
You're scared of change - basically get with the times grandpa, and stop expecting everyone to cater to your bitch ass.
because steam is a recognizable name being made as an example like how Doom was the go to for violent video games
See the first two words of my post in . "You two" refers to the two of you. As in the fact that you are two people. I was speaking to both of you fags arguing about girls in a court ruling thread. Unless of course you are one samefag. That is possible. But I posted assuming you are two different people. "Two" is how you spell the number "2". Which comes directly after 1 and is directly before 3, when dealing with natural numbers. Not be be misconstrued with "to" -which usually refers to motion, approaching or reaching, physically or otherwise- or "too" -usually meaning "also"- or even the spanish word, "tu" -directly translating to "your"- or even "tú" -which translates to "you"-.
Yeah the original cut of what was given to each the first time so you sell it and they get all the money. I don't think they're actually asking for people to be able to make money back kids the right to sell their stuff. Platform takes cut revs take a cut since there is no degradation like a physical disk the price is full price and you never see a dume
I'm not the OP, I have no horse in this race, either. I get most of my games from the CODEX store. Why do you think this lawsuit needs to be kept secret? It's a simple question.
Except violent video games are proven not to have an impact on people. This has a direct impact on consumer rights and right to resell.
Why are you drawing false analogies and trying to muddle the issue? What about Valve?
way to completely miss the point
No because France is one of the most important members of the EU and if Steam doesn’t adhere to the rules set by them the whole EU will buttfuck Valve majorly
>If the law is explicit about its scope and can be enforced
France can't enforce this ruling except to deny Steam the capacity to offer their service there.
You're oiperating under the assumption a french judge didn't make that ruling on behalf of some wing of the government looking to make a profit off of fines (which it is obviously what's happening) or that they can infact force Steam to do shit.
>France
Give gibs
>Steam
No
What happens next? Nothing, because France can't do shit in the larger scope of things but cry to papa Germany that the mean Steam won't give it money for nothing.
Unlike you, some of us do have plans for Saturday. Some of us aren't abnormal fucks (aka: incels), so I have been getting ready to get out while speaking to you.
So yeah, stay mad, incel, and stay virginal. Enjoy your 3/10 fat whore while I fuck the most beautiful women my local area has to offer. Bye Incel, I'm gonna go and enjoy my Saturday. Tomorrow I may or may not hire an escort to satisfy me as well, I mean I'm not poor.
>France is one of the most important members of the EU
There's no way you're this fucking stupid.
All I said was I would be fine if the current industry disappeared. You took this personally as if I was attacking you. You claimed I was lying to you instead of acknowledging what I said. I was clear that this was simply my opinion. The current industry is not appealing to me and it shows no signs of improving. What other opinion should I adopt if this is the case? Should I alter my perspective to be permissive of business practices I find exploitative and predatory? No. That's not going to happen.
You're intentionally misinterpreting my words if you still think I'm saying I want people to make games for me for free. I said very plainly that I want games to not be financially motivated because I believe this absurd level of greed is what is corrupting the industry. I also stated very clearly that if that change occurred and video games stopped being made that I would be perfectly fine with no games being made. Do you understand? That's not making entertainment for me because that's not making entertainment and I would be fine with that. Get this through your head. I'm not expecting games to be made for me. What I want is for the industry to go back to its roots and focus on what is best for the player instead of what is best for the bottom line.
You're conveniently ignoring the parts of my posts that explicitly mention how the industry used to be different despite your claim that you were around back then. That's an absurd claim. The industry looks nothing like what it used to in the context of pure, unadulterated greed.
Name one country more important than France except Germany and the soon to leave UK?
Fucking male fragility the post lmao. Have fun sticking your dick in a trash compactor buddy it's what you deserve. You aren't worth human emotions.
Way to back out of your failed analogy, garbage boy.
>France can't enforce this ruling except to deny Steam the capacity to offer their service there.
So they can enforce it. That's some weird wording you tried to use there.
This isn't "giving money for nothing" or even giving money at all. It's like you completely failed to read the headline and went into a steamtard stupor at the very mention of papa gaben.
>Name one country more important.... Except for all these countries that are more important.
He's right though, most of the EU are third world shitholes which only joined for the gibs
Your insecurity is out of control. By all means keep going to the gym thinking it's going to get you laid. It's your life. But you're not going to fool anyone who actually gets laid. You're only going to fool incels like you into going down the same ineffectual route you've taken.
I didnt back out, you are just too dumb to understand what I was getting at.
Niggers
It's going to be a Gamestop-tier trade-in system
>Done with your game after a month and no longer plan to play? Well now instead of just removing the game from your account, you can trade it in for a whopping sixty cents in your Steambucks!
There's going to be regulations on that because that's acting in contempt.
Lad it says people have ownership over their games. Valve doesn't design the system.
you've already been found out to be an epic shill by everyone with a brain 2 posts before
if you are an adult you should rethink what your actions cause
He's correct surprisingly. Switzerland withdrew from the EU long ago. Italy and Greece are broke last I checked. Though Italy less so. Spain is okay I think but lesser than France. In a pure economic sense that is.
>game developers put the work in simply because they had a passion and an inherent drive to create. Games were much more unique when they weren't financially motivated.
games were always financially motivated
I don't believe Switzerland was ever a member, and their existence makes France, Germany and Sweden seethe non-stop.
Umm indies are gonna get fucked, they will have to look elsewhere for profit. Both asia and Latin america are growing markers. I could start a company offering spanish localizations for indies.....you know what, fuck eurocucks, this could be a business opportunity for me.
Link to archive or didn't happen.
Developers do need something to eat.
Do you prefer AAA?
>you've already been found out to be an epic shill
Nice diversion tactic. Try to address the points made or go cry about your brand loyalty somewhere else. This is about valve, not epic.
>Sell 'used' physical item.
>Chance of low quality with no warranty.
>Potential scams
>Market limited to local area unless you want to pay additional postage fees.
>Sell 'used' digital good.
>Perfect condition.
>Steam has to handle the transfer to your account, little to no chance of scams.
>Market limited to everyone on this planet with an internet connection and possibly the ISS if a guy wants to play moonbase alpha on his laptop.
Did i miss anything?
>Developers do need something to eat
Video game developers do not need to exist. They have chosen that profession. They should know how profitable it is likely to be. If the change occurred that made video game development not profitable these people would not starve to death. They would find another profession if earning a living was a priority for them. This would not stop people from making video games as a hobby or as passion projects.
reselling is already allowed dipshit. EU is forcing valve to change their services so the games they sell are resellable.
>One of the most
>Only top 3/soon to be or already effectively top 2? lmao i win haha
Are you mentally retarded by chance?
LMAO YOU'VE BEEN ARGUING WITH LITERAL COMMUNISTS HAHAHAHA
user i want devs to keep existing amd if that mrams you don't get to sell digital games then so be it.
I acre about indie devs. I don't wantbtue market to be all AAA multiplayer trash.
And it's fine to think that and have that opinion. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I'm only stating what my opinion is.
What I'm stating is the truth. The problem is you believe quality is parallel with budget. I disagree.
Oh yeah. I looked it up and you are correct. I guess they were in negotiations with joining the EU for a while but then pulled a fast one on them. You gotta respect Switzerland. Yeah they are shady and don't mind fucking everyone else over but they just can't stop winning. They're like Bill Belichick.
I dont get it, since when does France get to tell what a foreign conpany has to do?
French are the ones using foreign conpany services, not the other way aruond. So wtf, how is this even a thing?
>What I'm stating is the truth. The problem is you believe quality is parallel with budget. I disagree.
AHAHAHAHA
Imagine spending TIME and EFFORT trying to argue with a LITERAL COMMUNIST.
10/10.
Lack of a realistic way to implement the changes on a country-by-country basis because of the nature of the medium. People would simply use a French VPN to sell their games worldwide.
Regardless of the fact that Valve is US based, when operating in another country you must follow that country's laws. Same thing with US citizens that break laws that only exist in foreign countries.
Can't you already let other people play Steam games owned on your account via Steam Family Sharing? I've never used it but if there was someone you trusted and you wanted to swap games you could just do that.
This is bad for devs tho.
What does the ebin faggot store has to do with this you retard?
God i hope this is enforced
I have such a large backlog i want to get rid off
And? You can resell physical games so you should be able to resell digital games too, especially since they cost the same which is a big scam by the way.
without monetary incentive, video games wouldn't exist
Would steam help people sell their used games? I thought they would go the route of gog.
You've disengaged from the argument and therefore lost the argument. You're failing to address the points being made. What I'm saying has nothing to do with communism. I'm describing how capitalism operates in an environment where digital information cannot be contained. An industry that used to survive on the concept of being able to indefinitely reproduce a product for nigh unlimited profit being changed into one that can only realistically sell a fraction of what it used to would need to undergo drastic changes in order to survive.
You've shitposted so much against valve these past months and defended the epic store people can tell from the way you type.
What are you russian or something? Are you supposed the be the most eloquent of these sub 90iq monsters that came over to the board for that reason mentioned above?
You don't understand people don't give a shit about the stuff you think is important, nobody gives a second thought about your questions and fake answers. Stop bumping these threads for your agenda, you won't change people's minds. You are like the anti/v/ and people can tell that you're not a regular poster from this board.
This is wrong. Many video games are made without monetary incentive; you just don't ever hear about them. AAA games would cease to exist. There's a gulf of difference between AAA games and all video games.
>There is no such thing as "invention"
Legally there is. Patents are significantly less shitty than copyright though, since they have an actual reasonable expiration date (though that doesn't stop patent trolls from trying to make them as bad as possible).
Based EU shitting on digital cancer, go ahead, start 40 different "games as a service" models and see it all crumbling down like video streaming services will soon.
We need to go back to better times.
Fuck endless corporation greed, fuck the scam that is "digital goods" and fuck incomplete shitty products.
The guys who made Pong had money on their minds. The video game crash completely made game development stop in its tracks, until better security protocols were made in the next gen consoles to secure profits.
Video games would physically not exist without monetary incentive.
The thing about the ruling is, wouldn't Valve just be the vanguard of this since they're one of the largest market players in digital goods? Wouldn't this also effect all digital game sales, including EGS, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, GOG, etc?
US is much better at protection consumer rights.
Volkswagen customers in the US got thousands of dollars worth of compesation for the fraudulent Diesel cars.
Volkswagen customers in the EU got nothing.
You can technically already sell GoG games, though it's illegal of course, but it's different since you actually own the thing you buy, you can copy it to a flash drive and use it forever on any PC even if you never install GoG.
The current industry would not exist without monetary incentive. You're still not acknowledging that this would not stop people from making games for fun. People used to do that. You're not acknowledging that. It's fine for you to want more video games to be made. It's okay to want that. You're not wrong for wanting that. It's just not something I care about. I'm fine without them because of the turn the industry has taken. Do not equate how video games were made in the 80s to how video games are made right now. There's a million miles between then and now. The problem itself isn't that any money is involved; it's that money has become the singular things that controls almost everything about the industry. It has become greedy and corrupt as a result. There is no denying the existence of this change, or reasonably insisting that it's impossible for me to dislike this change.
> Games were much more unique when they weren't financially motivated.
Videogame were created for profit, they were always for profit, and they will always be for profit
Educate yourself you fool. If you don't like it, stop buying it and the market will adjust.
>Current industry
explain the video game crash from the past industry.
user literary every classic game tbis places sperges a out would not exist. Not Doom, not Quake, not Super Mario, not Deus Ex. The only market that would survive would be the AAA market.
>pretend to be good at sex
FTFY
She's not going to find out until it's too late
see
Also the argument that voting with your wallet will result in change you want is erroneous because people want different things. This only results in change that the majority prefers.
That requires you to forego selling your games to anybody who doesn't have a 10MB/s Internet connection or who has data caps.
You want me to explain how unfettered greed damaged the industry?
You're misunderstanding the entire discussion. AAA games would be the most affected by a legislative change that allowed people to sell and distribute video games they've purchased because the act of selling video games doesn't have a cost or barrier to entry like shipping a physical video game would. The more money you've invested into making that product the more your bottom line would be affected. The least affected developers and publishers would be the ones that minimized their investment into creating the games they sell.
I too can't wait for online passes for games to become a thing again.
You dumb retard, even art games need money to survive. Why are so people here so fucking stupid, do you guys actually believe this shit?. The only ones who would survive are AAA, this utopia where people where making free games for everyone did not exist. And don't you bring up shareware since that was also a way to monetize.
It was debunked because it had no sources or evidence in the first place. Stop shilling now steamcuck
I'm not insisting that they need to survive. You're intentionally ignoring that part of my statement. I'm okay if they don't. You're unable to reconcile with this idea. You're ignoring the words I'm typing specifically for you to read. You're forgetting about video games that are not made with any sort of monetary incentive. According to you these video games do not exist, and people who enjoy making video games for fun do not exist. AAA is not the only way to create.
user again, no games would sell besides AAA. AAA can manuever itseld into a new bussiness model where everything is a meme game. Small studios cannot. You cannot have a business when every single customer that buys from yiu essentially becomes another digital store that undercuts you. You cannot minimize investment in this case because no would be paying you, because every time you sell a copy you gain another competitor.
Please explain how exactly you've been swindled by your digital copy of a video game.
You don't understand basic economics. Its embarrassing stop posting. Good games sell well, Shit dead genres and games dont. The end.
>You want me to explain how unfettered greed damaged the industry?
Greed is what made the industry, what destroyed it was that the industry was too free in what it could do. What revived the industry successfully was corporate quality control.
That's not what I'm describing. I know that developers and publishers can find a way around this kind of legislation. What I'm describing is a scenario in which they could not escape the legislation. You didn't read my original posts.
And good games do not require millions of dollars of investment. The end.
Okay? No shit, I never said that.
>too free in what it could do
You're conveniently ignoring the part that this freedom manifested in a course of action that was compelled by insane greed.
user YIU STUPID DIMB FUCK
Videogames are made for money. Not every genre is some autusm simulator, even small art games need funda. Every dev needs to eat, and you cannot eat of you go broke. There is no videogame industry withiut money. You might be ok with every game being a 15 minute text adventure but not everyone wants that. People wanna play games besides some retarded free 15 minute experience or some autism simulator like Dwarf Fortress.
In other words what you're saying has nothing to do with what I'm saying. I'm saying good games can still be made by people who aren't motivated by money.
Not even a thousand dollar investment would be possible. Indie darlings like Undertale couldn't exist in this market, and if something as simple as Undertale can't exist then nothing can.
>Videogames are made for money
In the current industry. Obviously.
>Every dev needs to eat
Developers do not need to exist. This industry is not a necessary one. It's entertainment. If a change occurs to make the industry no longer profitable then the industry could die and the world would continue to spin.
I'm aware that you want AAA games to be made and you're perfectly fine with unchecked greed ruining your experience because you don't consider the experience ruined. You have different tastes than I do. That's okay.
Name one good game that is completely free and zero way to "donate" to the developer.
user again. user.
The AAA would be the ONLY one that surivives. Indies amd AA would die. How can't you not undertand this.
This is an incorrect statement. People spend their own time and money on all sorts of things. Creation is one of them. People paint beautiful paintings despite the cost to learn and produce them can be high, take a long time, and that painting will never be sold. Same with any other artistic endeavor that is not motivated by greed. The creation of video games could exist in that same space. The trouble is you think this can't happen. It could happen if making video games became legally not as profitable as it currently is, which is why this is even being discussed because a change like this could affect the entire industry and how it approaches investment.
All video games that were developed by companies that no longer exist.
Thatll just give devs more an excuse to put more greedy micro transactions into their games
This won’t harm goodies like 2K or Ubisoft one bit
>There are retards cheering this on
>There are retards that thinks this wont result in utter scumbaggery moves from devs and publishers ends since the option is vastly reduced sales figures
The fact that you underage faggots are advocating for this without taking a step back to think about the potential consequences just further proves to me why you all deserves the current shitshow that is the modern game market and everything that comes with it. Believe me, I'd be for this if it wasn't for the fact that there' zero drawback or some incentive to actually buy a new game over a "Used" digital copy.
And before any morons tries to claim that this wont happen, take a moment to consider that you're saying this on the board where people still throw a shitfit if a game that's under 8 hours costs more than 10-15 bucks. Yeah, don't lie to yourself, we both know exactly what will happen.
I'm all for consumer rights, the reason I'm against this is because it will fuck everyone over, companies first and consumers second over time.
Profit has always been a priority. The only reason digital goods became popular is due to consumers, don't blame companies for following consumer trends. Nothing stopped anyone from going to a physical store and buy physical games.
People create things generally to get compensation, user. Games aren't art even if you want to suddenly pretend it is for the sake of the argument.
But games itself isn't art. It almost always requires co-operation, multuple people with different skillsets and opinions to get together to create something. And very rarely will this be done for free. Games takes considerable time to make, and working full time to get it out in a 3-4 years time instead of a 10-15 years time is a big difference.
I feel like almost everyone in this thread doesn't understand just how much work and effort is needed. Some of you fucks seems to think it takes just a year when in reality games generally take 3-6 years.
>Muh digital
this also applies to physical copies you brainlets. Can't resell PC games ever since Steam made you permanently tie your CD keys to your Steam account.
You are not wrong, indies and 3rd parties bloated the market with trash that created a major distrust over the consumer. That's why quality control became a major importance in its revival.
You're the one here that doesn't understand what is actually being discussed. How would you expect AAA publishers to still see positive ROI if they're investing tens of millions of dollars into development and only selling a fraction of what they used to? That's the scenario we're talking about if people had the ability to re-sell their digital games. People would swap between one another for pennies and publishers would not get any bite out of that. Indie developers would profit remarkably more per sale because their investments are so much lower.
user i don't wanna break your dreams of an utopia but almost every major work of art in the world was funded by rich people. Literary centuries of art would not exist of some rich guy didn't tell the artist "just create and i will fund you".
>Tim was the hero
You realize Epic is lobbying against this too, right?
>counting Steam-key-on-a-disc as physical copies
>implying all PC games are Steam keys on discs
lol
People can already do this with physical games. Not an argument. You sound like a failed Gamestop Exec.
>And my favorite class, is the spy
Name all those fucking great companies we're going to lose. Nintendo seems to be the only company that could fuck their audience and they're still desperately tied to physical, so it's a non-issue. Sony and Microsoft are far gone.
Do you care about turds from Activision, EA and 2K? Well then you deserve it.
lol you fuckn weirdo loser
I'm aware. But art that isn't financially motivated still exists. I'm arguing with people that are explicitly claiming that this could never happen with video games. That's not reasonable. People have been making free games with no thought or expectation of compensation for as long as video games have existed. A legislative change that made this more common could potentially happen.
That can happen right now. People can make video games right now and choose to distribute it in a away where they make nothing from it. You, for some reason, want games that make a profit to die. Why can't both of them exist?
Do you just constantly repost this thread?
Ok, fine, only 99.999999% of them.
Gamestop is a middleman that is taking all of the profit from this. Digital goods are remarkably different. Legislative changes that made restricting the sales of digital goods illegal would result in people trading games with one another completely free of charge.
please for the love of god, let me resell my unused season pass
I mean, multiple season passes now
I support the French, if solely for the reason that Steam will stop region based pricing if this goes through for obvious reasons, and then no more worthless spics or ruskies in my games.
user indie devs would die because with every sale they gain a competitor. AAA will just shift to a subscription or one time use model, every game would be a Fornite clone or whatever isnpopular that week.
Indies cannot afford the infrastructure to do that, not to mention i doubt the majority of indies got into the business to make fornite clones. Indies will not survive, AAA will.
Name some games that were just made for fun and no money incentive
All the garage heroes from the 80s and 90s you're thinking of sold their games massively and got deals with publishers to fund then
>Many video games are made without monetary incentive; you just don't ever hear about them.
Probably because they are shit
>people trading games with one another completely free of charge.
Yes they still had to buy them first. God forbid I don't want to pay twice for a game my girlfriend and I want to play just because its digital. Steam already allows me to share my ENTIRE LIBRARY with people DIGITALLY.
The discussion is about how legislative changes could potentially make the development of high budget games less profitable. This could affect the entire industry. I'm not saying I want them to die. I'm saying I'm fine if they do because I don't like video games made with pure greed. Those games are very easy to spot. Non-stop DLC, microtransactions, loot boxes, etc. I don't like that shit.
The people making free games have been maling autist simulators. Literary every game people like would cease to exist user.
The thing that really, just irritates the shit out of me with this is.
Being able to resell your license in no way enables piracy, hell actually treating the people that buy software like they own the software they buy wouldn't enable piracy either.
That's the big thing they like to pretend is the issue but like.
You HAVE to buy the game in order to resell it, there's literally no way to enable piracy through this, short of downloading a tool to crack your steamDRM and backing up EVERYTHING for it including dependencies stored elsewhere, and at that point if you weren't already cracking all your games why wouldn't you just download a repack?
do the fageuttes really have any influence on this happening? i'm sure gabe is laughing at this right now
I think that user might just be a communist. Funny enough Marx himself wouldn't have been able to write if his rich buddies didn't fund him.
You're arguing in bad faith here by proposing that AAA publishers would escape the legislation which is the same as acting as though no legislative change occurred. The discussion is about how the industry would or could be affected if the legislation were actually effective.
You haven't thought about this at all, have you? That's okay, most of you haven't. The ones that will survive this is the big corporations such as Activision, EA and 2K. They're the ones that can afford such sudden change, find loopholes and come up with ways to profit anew (subscription being a likely option).
Smaller companies, the ones that you claim to not be against?
They're fucked in the ass hard. Enjoy your shitty future where your only options is either AAA games or "Deep" artsy games made not to profit but just to virtue signal or appear "Intelligent".
I already brought up the C64 library but that was ignored. Apparently you want me to list open source games or games you've never heard about and want to google.
So putting a Steam key in the box means the consumer should lose all rights?
Thanks for saving PC gaming, Gaben!
I know that. Your post has nothing to do with the discussion. I'm not saying that's a bad thing or a good thing. I'm only talking about what effect this legislation could have on the industry if people could get digital games from eachother.
>Its alright for Steam not to because Epic is incompetent
Do you care about consumer rights or not?
Good point. Indie devs would die, AA devs would turn to indie devs then die, and finally AAA devs will turn to AA devs, then indie devs and finally die. The only games left will be flash games and school projects.
I hope they lose like in Australia. The genie needs to get out of the bottle, finally we will own our shit, not only on Steam but in every non stream based platform.
And if that happened I would not shed a tear. That was my original post. I'm aware of what could happen. My statement was that I'm okay with it no matter what. People got offended by this and acted as though it would be impossible for someone to not care.
You say that like Gabe actually made the demand for that or that giving a physical voucher means they can't include the game with it. (They can)
Sure is a lot of idiots thinking that if Valve were forced to offer digital reselling it wont end up applying to all digital stores, including EGS. If you are for this you are for literally every publisher adapting a subscription model and fucking over small devs.
Make fucking names.
Who are these smaller companies that will be fucked that deserve to be rescued? Everybody talks about those elusive entities to be protected but nobody says who.
Again, another example, here He says [THING] would turn into [OTHER THING] but he doesn't mention what we're specifically losing. I wonder why.
Small devs do drm free releases and occasionally do physical releases.
Why do you expect a specific, calculated outcome from a legislation that affected the entirety of the industry? Try and argue why it wouldn't happen instead.
seeing people defending that fatfuck good for nothing gaben is great, how fucking miserable you have to be to defend a company wich hasn't produced anything worthwhile in years and only sit on top of their pile of money all day doing literally nothing, absolutely pathetic
>So putting a Steam key in the box means the consumer should lose all rights?
I didn't say anything like that you actual retard. I'm saying not every physically distributed PC game meets the description you gave.
>was almost all shareware
Meaning there was more content for a price.
You're a fuckin idiot
DRM is unrelated, it's the fact that small devs would probably lose sales by having their game resold with 0 money going to the devs, just like how physical copies work.
And they can't adapt a subscription model because odds are they don't have a vast library to offer with said model.
Gaben literally sold Half Life 2 encrypted on the DVD. You couldn't even install the game without permanently registering the CD key to a Steam account first.
Gaben invented this crap
>resell game on steam
>valve takes 95% of whatever you sold the game for
CHECKMATE FROGS
youtube.com
You conveniently ignored the following two words because you couldn't make a point otherwise. How about you go back and read those two words for me and then try to make the same point?
>Gaben invented CD keys
I think you're missing the point. Independent developers ALREADY sell games that can be resold. If it would kill them it already would have.
C64 games were garbage, so your point is irrelevant. The freedom of sharing and creating was cool but it becomes massively unfeasible with any kind of more capable hardware to provide anything approaching good gameplay. Just look at it's successor the Amiga, where most of it library was not freeware.
Bootlicker
>gaben invented this
try battle.net
People forgot Gabe worked at fucking MICRO$OFT possibly the most greedy nickle and diming company in electronics.
before Half Life 2 CD keys were just a number. You could sell them to anyone along with the CD and the game would work.
Half Life 2 made you permanently tie a CD key to a Steam account. Without the Steam account the CD is worthless and you can't sell your Steam account with the CD because there are dozens of other games tied to it.
Most open source games of any worth were games that were sold for a while and then made open source later on.
Why would they, or any developer make or release games on Steam when people will just resell it to their friends for one cent?
Y'all niggas remember keygens? The good days.
We have different tastes. Which is why we have different opinions about what we value in video games. You want more AAA games that extort you. I don't. You're fine with underhanded monetization that utilizes psychological manipulation to extract as much money out of you for nothing of value in return. I'm not. You're fine with the current direction of the industry. I'm not fine with it.
Which is why any legislative changes that takes control away from companies and puts it in the hands of the customers is going to get my support even if it damages the current industry.
DRM free digital games still doesn't let you magically resell it. You are basically just promoting piracy, especially as many games tend to require to be redeemed on a platform such as EGS, Origin or Steam. DRM free games basically operate on good will and while they are unlikely to lose millions like some anti-piracy fags claim it's still a potential loss. Reselling games is always a 0 profit for the dev/publisher and digital would be no different.
All right. Saying most is a strong claim but even if you're right it doesn't change my stance. I'm perfectly fine with games being exactly like that.
keygens had some sick soundtracks
That's because c64 games are too primitive. Nobody sits there and thinks "gee c64 games had great gameplay. I wish games were more like them" It was a cool time as a frontier of emerging technology but has nothing on the era of DOS and Amiga
>B-But they will just rEEEEEEsell it for one cent
And where did the copy to resell come from
>"my billionaire is a better person then your billionaire"
Except being objective means supporting them when they do good, and not supporting them when they do bad. Because if you genuinely want them to do better, you do not support the worst parts of themselves. Just watch, this post will get flooded with "lel epik centrist memes" like being objective and unbiased is a negative.
>X billionaire is good Y billionaire bad
Yess user, let them bounce you back and forth like the unmotivated tennis ball you are.
No, I don't care about AAA games. My favorite era was the 90s, which were games made by small dev teams, but even they wanted to be compensated for the time and money they poured into creating them
You seem to think that video games just be untainted as an art form by any profit motivation, but no art form has ever been that way. The finest musicians and artists of their times also enjoyed financial success and many contracts.
Tools have improved since then. Techniques and programming languages have improved since then. Game development would not suddenly revert to C64 era programming if games were no longer AAA levels of profitable. Even making games with no expectation of profit in return could still result in very good games. One might argue that making games with no expectation of profit could result in better games depending on what sort of things you value in games. I've been very clear that I value those things more than AAA budgets.
Why are they still charging me retail price even though they don't have to print a physical copy, pay to ship it out to retailers, while also letting them make a cut.
The only reason digital copies cost the same is because they don't want physical copies to sit on shelves, this is why games only start going on sale once the physical copies stop moving.
all these retarded people against steam are just piratefags
>DRM free digital games still doesn't let you magically resell it. You are basically just promoting piracy
No, You sell the game, and then you give the files to the person you are selling to, additional storefronts could be updated to say "oh hey, he don't own this now, don't let em install"
And again this is all ignoring
>Why would you not just go to traditional piracy instead of trying to resell a legit copy of the game that had to be officially purchased at some point?
This is your mind on Yea Forums
>buy game
>sell it at immense loss
For what purpose?
Name wonderful games other than c64 trash then that were never monetized.
It's not a crime for people to want to get something for their efforts, even if it was as a hobby or just for fun, you seem to massively underestimate the time commitment of making a good game.
You're in luck. Games like those made in the 90s can be made for free by even smaller teams with even less money and even less development time can be made with no expectation of compensation nowadays. That's what the benefits of improved technology brings.
I'm not denying that money is an effective motivator. My argument is that when money is the single largest motivation the resulting product takes on a different direction and games feel worse as a result.
You can make just about anything for free, doesn't mean anybody will. Time is money too.
To recoup losses spent on the product. It would minimize money lost on purchase, which is actually pretty powerful of a change, especially if this applies to all games played beyond the refund period.
You have no sense of humor.
>sucking any corporate cock at all
fucking faggots kill yourselves
>Normal People: "I should be able to buy a game, and let my buddy borrow it to play it, to see if they want it, and if they do, they can buy it from a store for themselves, physical or digital"
>Gamers: "Well yeah duh, that is obvious, that is how its supposed to be, you buy it, you own it, so you can let other people borrow it, or resell it yourself"
>Legislature: "People should be able to buy a game, and let their buddy borrow it to play it, to see if they want it, and if they do, they can buy it from a store for themselves, physical or digital"
>Gamers: "HOLY SHIT FUCKING NOOOO THE INDUSTRY IS DOOMED NOT THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT FUCK YOUUU"
Can someone explain what the hell is going on?
anyone want to buy some digital music from me? Slightly used still in pretty good shape. I also have bottle air for sale, barely inhaled or exhaled.
>and even less development time
LMAO, you're a tag who knows nothing about making games then
Make a game if you think it's so possible. Go on, change the industry with your pure ways!
You'll get frustrated and sick of working on it after a mere couple weeks
youtube.com
We lost an entire era of greatness when the internet became what it is today. Google, Facebook, and Microsoft are the gatekeeper to an increasingly shrinking amount of content.
>Name wonderful games other than c64 trash then that were never monetized.
You seem to think my argument is reliant on examples. It is not. I'm stating my opinion that even if no games are made I'm fine with it. You seem to think I'm stating that games will be improved and that there are examples that prove they would be. That's not my argument.
>It's not a crime for people to want to get something for their efforts
I know. I'm not insisting that it is. There's a gulf of difference between wanting fair compensation and expecting almost infinite returns for your work. The current industry is doing everything it can to distort the industry into one that is the latter instead of the former and this unchecked greed has changed how video games play. I'm not the only person in the world that has noticed this change.
Put your bifocals on faggot
And I've stated a dozen times that I'm okay if they don't. Nobody seems to be willing to acknowledge this.
my pp is up
So you have no points to make. We're discussing what could happen to the industry if legislation like this actually changes the industry. I'm okay with any changes. You're not. This boils down to different tastes in video games. I'm not trying to change your tastes, but you seem to think it's your duty to try and change mine.
>WAAAAAAHHHHH ALL CORPORATIONS BAD IF YOU DONT LIKE MY CORPORATION
Keep shitting yourself steamie
So you'd rather puhish the guys who only want fair compensation too even though they have little to do with AAA trash?
You're an edgy nihilist faggot.
>buy game for $60
>flip for $20-30
how does this make any fucking sense to anyone
The age of shareware ending was a mistake.
Aren't you lucky that the government forcing this legislation on everyone happens to benefit you.
Yea Forums is shitposting central. take none of this seriously. at worst 1:100000 people actually think that
Never said that fag. I was taking OPs bait
I'm not bringing up make-believe solutions to fix the industry. I'm talking about changes that could happen if legislation like this passes. Obviously I would go about things differently if I had a magic wand.
Because nobody gives a fuck what a self important NEET autist like you is okay with.
when did you realise that steam and epic games are both gay and the only options are piracy and gog
Do you have brain damage?
This will destroy ALL tastes in video games, even yours.
It's not my government. And as many people have stated the AAA publishers will just use a loophole and make their games even worse until even more legislation occurs. Their greed will not be stopped.
>that Somnium game straight out early PS2 was sold for $60 like it deserves it
>NOOOOOOO MY SAINGOL PLOYARS
>Buy Bayonetta 1 for 60€
>sell for 40 after a week
It's reasonable.
name one thing government has made better.
desu I've always wanted to get games off my steam list without deleting them outright, I wish to could just transfer ownership to someone else who wanted to play them.
How can you resell free games on Epic? They are the most owned things there.
That's the idea. We'll see how the appeal goes, and what the rest of Europe has to say about it.
Then nobody had any reason to respond because I was very clear that what I was stating was only my subjective opinion.
My tastes will remain as they always have been. This will not change what video games have already been made. It would only affect what games could potentially be profitable in the future.
Sell me a copy of Bad Rats for $0.01?
you can't resell games on the EGS either my guy.
Transportation
Sewage
EPA protections on fresh water
GPS and Satellites
You retarded son?
From one sale. But all it takes is one sale to get the train going among friends and family?
So when a person does it its good, but when the government does it its bad? Still aren't explaining why.
Why do you ask such a deflecting ad hominem?
i haven't bought a game for 60 dollars on steam for a long time; that was retail price for a game before the death of brick and mortar.
Why would you resell copies of a free game, retard?
>have game installer
>make infinite copies
>competitors also have installers and make infinite copies
>keep undercutting each other until the games are worth 1 cent
wise words user
I like having clean water.
You're free to go buy water from Somalia if you think the free market provides better water than a functional government.
protections of fresh water. Wait are you saying you're antifracking, kill this man.
Opinions posted on Yea Forums do not reflect the opinions of any sane and rational individual.
>COMPETITION BAD
As expected from a steamie
>Now it will cost people in France $100 for games
you can call me a "valve drone" but this will just backfire
I was just pointing out the consequences of making all digital products resellable.
>gaslighting this hard
fuck the frogs
>gov apologists always have to point to a country full of niggers as justification for their draconian bullshit
The Clean Air Act of 1963
Yes I'm anti-fracking too actually. I wish we'd stop the scare tactics and actually invest intelligently in nuclear power and renewable. Not because muh environment but because its just smarter to use nuclear instead of the rest of the shit we do.
Ultimately the consequence is budgets for video games will need to be reigned in because right now they're out of control and only sustainable in an artificially controlled environment where nobody owns any rights to the things they purchase.
You can go buy water from Flint too. The white republicans there thought it was a great idea to fill the pipes with the cheapest water that the market would provide.
Nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger
I don't like valve or Gaben but that doesn't mean I have to buy Tim's bullshit either. So stop making this a package deal pal.
>government water
>”clean”
That never happens. Tap water is smelly, nasty and pumped full of flouride to make you docile and dumb. Bottled water is clean and refreshing all while providing a convinient way to take it with you. You cant do that with tap water.
>steam drones finally losing it
the npc script died
Imagine unironically believing retarded bullshit like this.
>people acting retarded is gaslighting
okay user go ahead and put your peepee in the frogs
It isn't artificially controlled. The EU forcing digital distributors to make all their software re-sellable is an example of artificial control.
try to drink water in nigeria and try to drink water in germany, you will feel the difference dumb mutt
based
>not distilling your own water and only drinking pure grain alcohol
fucking commies
Let me rephrase. The artificial control is in the hands of the companies and not the customers. This legislation would take some of that control away from companies and put it in the hands of the customers. Don't ignore the fact that publishers have slowly been trying to take control away from customers for years now. That's an artificially controlled environment. You're just overlooking it because it's so commonplace and the idea of it returning to a more traditional exchange between two consenting parties feels alien to you.
FUCKING LOL
imagine being this retarded
Imagine being a commie drone
Whats your obessession with me drinking nigger water?
in traditional exchanges the seller has to provide the place of trade/transport the good; you can't force someone else to maintain a marketplace for you. Digital goods are nothing like physical goods, to equate the two is pure ignorance.
>everyone who doesn't agree with me MUST be an american
based retard, i can get down with that
Enjoy your breasts (and also the fluoride they put in it)
>Whats your obessession with me drinking nigger water?
you have a stroke steam drone, you need that water for your meds
Reminder that all the Epic vs Valve bullshit in these threads is misdirection. Epic has just as much to lose from the French decision as Valve. The shills in these threads are actually Google shills, Stadia and other shit like it are the services that have the most to gain from this.
Google is manipulating you
Neither Tim nor Gabe are the hero. I realized years ago Gabe was a villain, and realized Tim was a villain about a year ago. Both are awful, I won't defend Valve, but I'm basically a slave to Steam at this point since I own hundreds of my games on it.
this
Nice proof retard
>commie wants me to drink flouride with dummy drugs
>thinks i want to buy government mandated steam trash
Hard pass
Yeah yeah ad eminem strawberry man I know that lingo, fuck off you donkey and think twice before posting again.
you're forgetting there's also retarded commies that don't understand the first thing about economics parroting dumb shit about "rights" on a completely private software distribution network. It's like demanding google allow you to sell your ranking on their search engine to another website.
Hey bruh, you might want to get off the internet. The internet is owned by the government and every single thing you do is being traced.
>the french will simply be banned from steam if this is upheld
Sounds good to me.
>get's destroyed with logic
>you have brain damage
>ask why you are deflecting
>STOP USING BUZZWORDS I TOTALLY WON THIS ARGUMENT NOW
this is next level denial
Great, the frenchfags no longer get to use steam without a VPN then.
I guess GOG, Playism, itchio just don't exist then huh.
OH WAIT
Games will cease to be released in this format you fucking retard. They'll go to subscription exclusivity and then eventually streaming exclusivity which is the real endgame where you will own nothing.
This French bullshit might look nice in the short term but in the long term it will play into the hands of streaming services and ruin everything.
So what's stopping Valve from blocking all french IPs?
Seems like a win win to me
People clearly don't want re-sellable games. You can buy games from GOG and itch.io right now, make infinite copies yourself and resell the games used. Yet there is no used digital game market.
>eventually streaming exclusivity which is the real endgame where you will own nothing.
How many fucking times does this shit have to be explained to you google shills? It is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to have reliable game streaming for nearly EVERY kind of game in existence.
Please read your posts out loud before posting mate, if you wouldn't be able to say it in public without looking like a sperg don't post it :^)
Nobody is forcing anyone to maintain a marketplace for anyone. You seem to misunderstand how this change would manifest. It wouldn't force Steam to create a new service. All it would do is force Steam to stop preventing a feature of a service they currently implement. I.E. activating the same key across different accounts.
>resellable digital games already exist
>Guess the government doesn't need to force all distribution platforms in to this model
OH WAIT
make a voocaroo of your post then champ :^)
You first, handsome :^)
you dumb fuck do you think digital goods exist on a neutral cloud in the sky? who do you think maintains that? think you retarded fucking nigger, think. read a fucking book. ffs you know what, just kys.
>People clearly don't want re-sellable games
Are you smoking crack? If I can get a game for remarkably cheaper I'm going to do just that. The issue you're running into is the market for piracy. There is no used digital game market because companies like Steam disallow it on their platform. If people could activate a used game key on their Steam account I guarantee you a used game market would emerge.
> activating the same key across different accounts.
Preventing that is the entire basis of selling software. Singling out games in this manner simply show how fucking stupid this judge is.
Why don't American companies selling digital goods just exclude all EU territories?
If EU wants to be a bunch of retards, let them.
that's what i thought. next time you try to argue with me at least post some facts. Lets face it, selling used games is a great way to recoup some money if you miss the refund period
enjoy drinking plastic
Doesn't matter, those games that don't work in the streaming format will cease to be made. Even if it's a completely awful service, companies are going to push streaming until it goes from ridicule, to irritation, to the norm, just like what happened with DLC, microtransactions and P2P multiplayer.
You're not understanding what is actually going on in this discussion or what this legislation could do. Steam already allows you to activate legitimate game keys on its platform. The problem is their definition of what constitutes a legitimate game key. They don't allow games to be resold in order to increase the likelihood of being the platform that sells them. This is unethical. Exactly why do you think it's somehow bad for people to be able to sell something they legally purchased? Why are you against the idea of actually owning a digital product?
"used" digital goods.
This is the biggest oxymoron I've ever heard.
I'll ask again ITT, why is reselling games bad? Literally every single person here right now has those buyer's remorse games that you regret buying after you've played them, what's wrong with selling them off? The game company that created the game already got their money from you from the initial purchase, you aren't taking that money away from them so why are the 'against it' people against it?
It would not save people money. The base cost of the game would be drastically increased to account for how easy reselling becomes and the effect said reselling would have on the bottom line.
But how would that impact the publisher you donut. Are you going by the logic that piracy hurts sales?
For me it's the Mcdonalds McChicken, the best fast food sandwich around!
>watch entire movie
>eh I didn't like it, gimme my money back
Retard.
I'm aware. That's how the current industry functions. But that is not a legitimate argument to condone its current existence. You're arguing that nothing should change without a legitimate point to make about why this is beneficial to customers. Right now customers are having a right taken away from them and it's been going on for so long you think that this is the way it SHOULD be just because it is the way it has been for so long. This is not a legitimate argument.
Hey stupid.
Maybe this concept is too hard for you to understand, the point of contention you had was that you could just get an installer and make infinite copies to share. (Because you're a genuinely stupid motherfucker and don't realize that storefronts that aren't Steam or EGS actually give you installers) I, correctly, pointed out that there are MULTIPLE storefronts that ALREADY give you a DRM-Free installer that could be copied indefinitely and shared.
Thing is though, there are no legitimate means to "Sell" your copy to another user. IE: direct downloading rights from the service.
Because again
You are literally trying to conflate SELLING YOUR COPY, AND LICENSE OF A GAME with piracy.
You irrefutably scummy and disingenuous piece of shit
>this zoomster has never heard of yard sales
ffs...
Because it's the implications of what could occur.
A small group of 10 friends. One person buys the game and then sells it to a friend for one cent. That friend then sells it to the next for one cent.
Because they want to receive money from European customers.
>how would people buying games without having to give any money to publishers hurt publishers.
HMMMMMMMMMM
_ ____ __ ____ ____ ______
So?
Propose a viable alternative that would not screw over the people making the products and I will listen.
Destroying a system without having a viable replacement in mind is insanity.
listen up you dumb fuck cuz this is the last time im explaining this:
either a: you can resell your key externally to steam which means steam is now providing bandwidth to numerous resells without taking in any monetary compensation, which is literally unsustainable for a company because the keys in service are never going to decrease
or b: steam sets up a marketplace and takes a cut which is therefore forcing steam to maintain a marketplace against their will. Steam won't hurt much from this but indies will be fucked up the ass because unlike major AAA titles they do NOT get 90% of their sales in the first week and actually require word of mouth for marketing.
Wouldn't that be great for you as someone who watches movies? If you really felt like a movie was not worth your money wouldn't you want your money back? Exactly what argument are you trying to make here? That everything that can convince you to gamble your money is therefore automatically entitled to keep that money? This just reinforces creators to develop convincing marketing and advertisements rather than making something worth spending money on.
>Doesn't matter, those games that don't work in the streaming format will cease to be made
NIGGER THAT IS LITERALLY 88% OF ALL GAMES
THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE GAME INDUSTRY WOULDN'T DISAPPEAR OVERNIGHT JUST FOR FUCKING STREAMING
Why bother when the EU has consistently proven to be a thorn in their sides?
"Hey, we are no longer making good sales on PC/steam, we will no longer be bringing products to PC/Steam."
You don't have to pay a factory to physically produce the game, you don't have to ship the game to stores with all the ramifications, you don't have to give a cut to retailers, explain to me then why a digital copy must cost $69.99 with 0 resale value and no lasting value because there's no guarantee your purchase will last past a console's lifespan and the next one.
>but you're not paying for the disc in itself but the idea, le gaym as in le conshept
So basically game manufacturing, shipping, middlemen, taxes were amounting to 0% of the budget?
That's not what you told me in the past.
Where are the savings you told you were passing to me, the customer?
I still see games not only costing $69.99 but they're rigged so I have to spend more in order to get the full experience.
All alternatives are viable; even the complete destruction of the current industry. You seem to think you're entitled to new video games on a regular basis. You're not. People are entitled to own the things they purchase. If the industry cannot find a way to reach a compromise between these two competing concepts then the industry does not deserve to exist. If your entire business model is reliant on fucking over your customers it doesn't matter if no taste assholes like you are OK with it. You don't speak on behalf of everyone else.
yes there is. Go online and find some buyer, they send you money through paypal and you email them the installer. You could also meet up with the person put the installer on a usb and trade it with cash.
>steady implying that no one will buy new games anymore when they release
Wew.
The gamble with movies is ten to twenty bucks, a gamble with games is sixty bucks.
reminder
>epic's chinese backers, tencent, incredibly mad because steam is a PRIVATE company, thus, they can not buy up like they did with epic
>even angrier because chinese in china prefer steam and PUBG
>they launch weird smear campaign against steam via video game media and their own launcher
>try to demonize steam with lies -- this kind of weak deception does not work in the west as it does with bugmen in china
>says steam is anti-dev even though it's the most open and most diverse for devs
>all this was done in order to try to "force" steam into a "corner" so they can get "desperate" and open the gates as a publicly traded company
again -- this kind of weak, see-through smear campaign, full of lies, just does not work in the west yet. my biggest thing is that they actually thought this would work. i'm literally baffled, but then again, it's cheating, sniveling corporate chinks who either buy up the competition or try to destroy its competition.
all steam had to do was stay still and say nothing because they knew it was tencent just throwing a misguided fit. honestly, though, with the kind of money epic and tencent has, they DID have a chance at giving steam some competition, but it's the retardedness of chinese "businesses tactics" that held them back
>yes there is. Go online and find some buyer, they send you money through paypal and you email them the installer.
You stupid nigger that's copyright infringement. Not selling your copy of the game.
I hope they lose and all triple A games go to shit. Vidya needs another crash to save itself.
The reason the complete destruction of the industry is occurring is because of government intervention. You act as if this is "naturally" happening.
what fucking game released at 69.99 base cost? you're obviously playing overpriced triple A garbage, why should the government intervene because of your stupidity?
based and accuratepilled.
Government interventions told Square to shuffle FFXV assets and call it FFVII R to sell it for $180 + dlc?
Whew.
>Law passes
>Video game prices go up
>People continue to buy video games despite the hiked price because they can just resell them to get back some money
every so often you get a glimpse behind the veil
>all triple A games go to shit
That's already happened. There hasn't been a good AAA game in at least 20 years.
None of what you're saying changes what I'm saying. Steam decides what games to offer up on its platform. If Valve decides that a game is no longer going to be profitable to host then it can remove it from its platform. Steam does not possess an inherent guarantee to exist. It is sustained right now by being reliant on the precept that customers do not have the right to sell what they have purchased. This is a tremendous benefit that all sellers of digital goods have reaped the benefits from for as long as they have existed, but this does not mean that this is the way it should have been or should always be. We're talking about information.
Get this through your dumb ass head. Customers deserve more rights. If I buy something I deserve the right to decide what happens to it. That's ownership, and I deserve to own what I purchase. If current business models cannot sustain themselves while customers possess that right then those business DO NOT DESERVE TO EXIST.
people have NEVER owned software because it destroys the business model you dumb fuck. If you want to destroy the industry just say it. Enjoy game rentals from now on.
>incel! Incel! Incel! Everyone is an incel except me! *sqwak*
The government acts on the behest of the people, and people feel naturally. Believe it or not this is not some conspiracy. People are tired of being fucked with so they're asking their government (the people who serve them) to do something about it.
Make your own platform that allows reselling then instead of using government violence to force existing platforms into your idiocy.
If consumers are so concerned about reselling surely they'll move over to your service.
And I'm okay with that business model being destroyed. How many times does this need to be repeated for your retarded ass to get it? Fuck the current industry. I want to own what I buy. Full stop.
>why bother to receive money
Because money can be exchanged for other goods and services.
enjoy no games. people dont put in 18 hour days for your enjoyment you dumb fuck.
It wouldn't be able to compete which is why this legislation is being put on the table in the first place you moron. That's the core problem.
oh why wouldn't it be able to compete? I thought it was perfectly fine and everyone would make money?
>The government acts on the behest of the people,
That's cute user. You actually believe that too don't you?
No shit you fucking moron. I'm okay with no more games. I'm sick of the current industry only putting out garbage that's designed to extort me and having no choice in the matter. These people making these decisions not only don't deserve my money, they don't deserve to make any money by preying on people like you with weak wills.
>people dont put in 18 hour days for your enjoyment you dumb fuck.
Wow you cracked it! You totally broke into why all modern games (And software) is shit!
*Slaps you with a billion dollar lawsuit*
*Also forces you to change your terms and conditions.*
*Slaps you with another lawsuit.*
Yes? That's the fucking problem we're bitching about you absolute troglodyte.
>instead of using government violence to force existing platforms into your idiocy.
But using government violence to enforce protections on the distribution of certain information is okay?
Yeah, you obviously don't understand the situation in the industry. Ask an indie how he feels about any bite into his profit margins. Seriously, ask the people who make the games how they feel, instead of just whining. They're all online, go ask. We don't make products out of the goodwill of our hearts. Once again, big corp AAA garbage will be perfectly fine.
>It wouldn't be able to compete
Oh? So it's the governments job to force a model that can't compete to be successful?
That's always worked out well in the past.
Now you're just being ignorant. It couldn't compete because businesses that do the same thing make more money unless the changes made to the industry are all-encompassing. You know this. That's why legislation needs to occur for something like that to even be possible. That's why we're discussing it in the first place. You need to stay the fuck on topic if you want to talk about this.
Ur angry lmao
The industry has long contemplated increasing the price per game due to a variety of factors but they haven't now and they won't anytime soon
>dollar inflation is getting worse
>consumers on average are poorer then ever
>AAA budgets are overinflated
Microtransactions have been and will continue to be the way to circumvent the above.
>classic commie argument
>our policies don't work in our system, but if EVERYONE DID IT IT WOULD WORK
>it never works.
The government is the reason why the current model exists in the first place, retard.
Then the change is even better. The less people paying for shit will let it die faster.
I don't give a fuck. I've said my piece. AAA would be most affected because they are over extending their budgets more than anyone else. Their risk is extreme and they rely on the current business model more than anyone else. That's how this business functions. If investing 15 million dollars into making a game suddenly no longer results in 30 million dollars in sales but only 1 million dollars of sales instead who do you think is being most affected?
Flint is run by niggers. What a stupid counter-argument. Do you even think before posting?
If someone went to court over this they would won, it's that simple. No EULA goes above Law, how stupid are you really.
the people who can literally no longer sustain themselves making games
I'm not saying it would work. I'm saying I'm fine if it stops working. This isn't communism. It's consumer advocacy in capitalism. This is literally how the market adjusts. No industry is exempt from regulation because at the end of the day governments are run by people.
Which is everyone if they're operating using an antiquated business model that is reliant on preventing people from owning what they purchase. Everyone will change, but AAA publishers and developers will change the most.
You say that like the situation with digital goods isn't literally only a thing because the government from ~25 years ago was convinced that for entirely arbitrary reasons "Digital Goods shouldn't count as real goods because Stealing I guess except not really."
Steam is the "good guy" and has been working against the asshole AAA publishers for years on this very issue. The publishers are the ones holding things back, as we saw with the more open returns policy (even prior to that pubs got mad that Steam was "too lenient" with requests for refunds etc), Valve was able to use the legal issues about the refunds and EU in order to convince the publishers to let them implement the refund system we have now (discretionary, but still limited).
The same will happen with this issue. Valve will likely use it to implement the resale program they've championed for years, where Steam keys could be de-authed from an account and "packed up" able to be sold, traded etc. Users can sell their games on Steam's marketplace, get most of the money, with a small cut going to Valve for managing the service and another cut going to the publisher so they don't sperg out any more than they already do.
This is the best we can hope for and Valve has always been in the user's corner for openness and whatnot, so they may be able to make this happen. Sadly, publishers may decide that even if this is the case, they'll run even faster to Stadia-style "you don't own anything" streaming systems to avoid resale at all!
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR
>people actually think it's a good thing that the government is making a move that would literally crash an industry and destroy the jobs of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands at least.
for what? so you can get 5 bucks back on your 30 dollar purchase? jesus christ guys, use your head...
*contains about a quarter of the world's total wealth*
>small cut going to Valve for managing the service and another cut going to the publisher so they don't sperg out any more than they already do.
This would be a proper way to implement it. I suspect steam sales would end up being less generous in the long run though.
Indie devs are the best thing that's happening to game industry right now, sure most of them are trash but those who aren't usually evolve into AA devs. And AAA publishers are fucking shit nowadays.
I've never seen a thread make Yea Forums cope AND seeth more than this
>Indie devs are the best thing that's happening to game industry right now
>most of them are trash
Literally all of them are trash.
>LITERALLY NOBODY EVER WOULD MAKE GAMES EVER AND ALSO PIRACY WOULD BE LEGAL IF THIS IS ALLOWED TO PAAAAAAAASSS!!!!
>PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD LET ME ROB YOU OF THE MONEY YOU PAID ME BECAUSE I DECIDED I DON'T LIKE YOU
>EUUUUUUULA!!!!
controlling the price is the only thing that keeps software viable; if users can set their own price that will crash the market immediately. it's either that or subscription/freemium model. so make your choice.
Holy sheeet, posts literal stereotypical incel talk, calls others incels.
>Resseling digital games
How the fuck do you even do that? Who'd be stupid enough to buy a 'used' digital game, for cheap, when you can just wait for a sale, or hell, just pirate the damn thing? Why even buy it at all, lol, fuck them, pirate that shit day one.
Then you clearly don't browse Yea Forums.
who is robbing anybody you dumb fuck? it's like someone put a gun to your head and forced you to play a game or something.
*seethe
surprise surprise, there's a lot of people on Yea Forums who work in the industry; it's almost like their lives could be ruined by this ruling!
>good guy
Arguable. I think they're providing a useful service at a competitive price, but that's not really the same as being "good". I guess by corporate standards they are, but they're still concerned first and foremost with making money for themselves.
Fuck em. I want to own what I fucking purchase. That's the bottom line. I don't give a flying fuck if the industry crashes tomorrow. I won't want an industry existing if it needs to exploit me and take away what I believe to be my right just to continue existing.
This is why Valve has to explain it to the idiot, short term thinking publishers. They should still have Steam sales as generous and in fact have 3rd party Steam keysellers (legit ones, like GMG, Humble etc) and get MORE revenue from this setup.
There would be a near constant trading of games, with a small but significant amount adding up going to the publisher every time (and valve) in such a service. They don't need to price things higher, as it opens up the ability for each game key to have a "lifetime" of transactions, rather than just a single one. That means that for any given key out there, the publisher can be getting a percent of every sale over and over again.
This is the kind of thing with a huge "everyone wins" setup IF DONE WELL, but the AAA publishers focus on quarterly shit rather than anything else, instead of looking at the big picture. If Valve can get them to grasp this idea, it will be the best route forward.
Nigger if you decide a game I bought from you I "don't own because you bwoke my euwa" you robbed me.
>have copy of game
>resell it
>game disappears from you library permanently
Its not a hard concept to grasp
>if it needs to exploit me and take away what I believe to be my right just to continue existing.
rise up gamer
I don't think I've ever seen evidence of anyone on Yea Forums being an actual game dev except for CounterAttack.
>breaking NDA to prove something to a faggot
Reminder that you are not Proletariat, you are Bourgeoisie and will be shot in the finishing stages of the revolution.
Motherfuckers ITT never heard of yard sales and swap meets. Are yard sales and swap meets killing the industry in any way shape or form? Are yard sales and swap meets having any affect on people buying new releases of games?
>go to swap meet
>see a PC game that came out in 1999
>buy it
game industry fucking crumbles completely
Really? you fucktards actually believe this?
apparently it's already having an affect on my meme arrows
Well, I'd go as far as to say that aside from filing as a public benefit corporation / B-Corp, they're about as "good" as any for profit company can be. This is probably because they're privately held and controlled by Gaben who has a strong ethos.
WE've seen them do things that are positively rare in corporate america today - they've had the opportunity to be a douche and make more money (ie Epic -like exclusivity agreements ) and they didn't. They have added lots of features to their platform, many of them open source, that don't specifically get them more money in the short term. They've supported Linux gaming in the long term, set up the paradigm for "game sales" being significant as we know them, chosen open source stuff like SteamVR and Proton vs proprietary, built in features that improve their platform, do not require DRM etc..
Its possible to make money and be ethical while doing so, but its really fucking rare these days that anyone takes that path because being unethical always allows you to get more stuff, faster. Valve's definitely the best advocate for the player/customer we've seen to date and have a long history of times where they could have been worse/evil, but chose otherwise. Nobody else in the arena has evidence of anywhere near as much customer-centric stuff.
>just believe me bro I swear I'm legit
Not overnight but it would disappear.
We're never going to have PC sales again if we are able to trade games freely. Digital goods get discounted in part because they cannot be resold.
High end games would cease to exist. No RE2R, no Sekiro, no DMC5, etc. etc. etc.
So basically you are asking for shovelware that some teenager made in their spare time. Undertale and Stardew Valley's for the rest of PC gaming history. I like those games, but I want higher caliber ones as well.
Capitalism created and perpetuates the games industry, pinko retard.
yes a swap meet is completely comparable to the global network where a key can be exchanged with two clicks. this would crash the digital software market in all its forms, end of story. You may want that, you may not, but it is definitely what will happen as a result of this. The price of software will crash immediately unless it's a service; and there will be no point to spend years making a piece of software that will be worthless in 1 month.
There's a bunch of amateurs over in /agdg/
Though the only openly successful one I can think of is the guy that made risk of rain.
I don't doubt that plenty of people do actually work in the industry though.
do you know how many people there are on the internet?
Reminder that you have no reason to want what is against your self interests. In your case you believe that video games existing are worth any price you have to eventually pay because you have no standards or self-worth.
It's better than buying used physical copy, you literally buy the same thing as if you were buying new only for cheaper.
Swap meets and yard sales are held globally, and have been a thing for decades, hasn't hurt the industry in any way shape or form yet.
>Motherfuckers ITT never heard of yard sales and swap meets
Internet trading is on a whole different level and it's a dishonest comparison. Ivan from Russia and hundreds of thousands of other users are not gathering in your backyard to swap games.
You might as well compare a lemonade stand to Starbucks. It's on a different scale.
actually hundreds of years if we want to get technical
>High end games would cease to exist.
Your idea of what is high end is only what is high budget. Your tastes are not my tastes. This doesn't make me a fucking communist. It makes you a shitter who cannot determine the value of a game unless a lot of people know about it and say it's good. You no argument having retard.
Hey. You know that thing you keep doing, that thing where you are pretending ownership of a legitimate copy of a game and piracy are the same thing?
Stop that. It's pathetic.
The concept is the same which is what you're desperately trying to bury with your bullshit analogy.
I should've made myself more clear. Game dev who actually released a product. I ain't shitting on those who are trying there hand but there isn't a lot of strong evidence to support the claim. Even though I also choose to think a fair number of Yea Forumsfags are either in the industry or seriously interested.
>Ivan from Russia and hundreds of thousands of other users
aren't all buying my single solitary copy of a used digital game.
here's a (you), nigger