French Court Says Valve Must Allow Steam Users To Resell Games

You don't understand. The law doesn't say Steam needs to offer some sort of marketplace.
The law says users can sell their Steam games wherever they want. Ebay, Amazon, Wherever.

You gotta source us with that

>The law says users can sell their Steam games wherever they want.
where does it say that? pdf of the law is in the OP.

Why do you retards think this will mean you'll be able to re-sell your Steam games even though your games weren't bought in France? Games on Steam are already region locked.

if it applies to France it applies to the entire Eurozone.
if it applies to the entire Eurozone and the profit loss is minimal they might just well roll it out everywhere to save themselves having to do region policing.
refunds were won in the Australian courts.

I don't speak frog but if the law says you have a right to resell a product there can be no restriction as to which store you can resell it in.
BMW can't reserve the right that you only resell your car in a BMW dealership.

Sauce me up senpai

>pro body hair cartoon
Of course it's French. Did they follow up with a section about the perils of antiperspirants?

Why does this shit pass as news now.
>X Court says contrary thing
LITERALLY who cares, its just like the shit where an article comes up every single week about some democratic state court barring one of trumps moves and its inevitably smashed by the real decision makers, not some faggot ass court that has basically no power.

It is fucking irrelevant

>if if if if if
I can tell I'm talking a nincompoop, you don't have to make it so obvious.

>"No."
>N-NO YOU WERENT SUPPOSED TO S-SAY NO NOW WE CANT SUE AN AMERICAN COMPANY
>NOOOOO TYRONE BRING OUT THE WHITE FLAG WE SURRENDER, PLEASE TAKE YOUR COCK OUT OF MY WIFE RIGHT NOW AND DO IT!

If I spend my money on a license, access to a service, or a product (physical or digital), I should be legally allowed to transfer ownership of that purchase to another person the same as I would be able to if I owned it.

No company is entitled to be the sole proprietor of a good or a service. Valve should not have the right to prohibit the exchange of goods between two other parties. There's no legitimate reason why digital distributors should be legally allowed to dictate that they are the ones that get to sell things and nobody else can.

Attached: 1501991512874.png (417x578, 195K)

in this case you don't own the BMW car, you own a license redeemable with BMW to drive their car.
even if they gave you a printout of that license to go sell to someone else, you need to tell them you sold the license so they can update their records to remove you as the license holder and add the person you sold to..... during this process it seems likely they would charge some kind of fee like "license transfer fee" or whatever. if you have to pay that fee anyways it makes sense to use a license transfer market set up by BMW directly rather than an outside platform's market who will have their own fees.

>tfw europe's citizens have more freedom than americans

when did we switch timelines

so... what about epic?

>No company is entitled to be the sole proprietor of a good or a service.
what do you think a license is in the first place?

Remember when Yea Forums all laughed that Valve would win the refund case against the Australians

Smells like dejavu in here

>constantly linking to previous thread
At this point you might as well move to mate

If you have a problem with what I said you're going to have to explain your position clearly. I was very clear. What's on your mind?

Can't they just not sell in France? Do French court rulings always apply to the whole world?

Attached: 1507158254577.png (415x364, 78K)

no I don't remember

>if it applies to France it applies to the entire Eurozone.
no, retard

epic is in china
they literally couldnt care less about european laws

If Valve loses it sets precedence that could be used in courts around the world and the likelihood of Valve winning those rulings becomes even smaller because of the precedence.

So in all seriousness because I just don't see the big deal.
What is just preventing Steam from telling this court in France to fuck off and die?
Like, why do they care what France of all people have to say? And if they do, whats the court going to do? Make Steam Illegal in France or something? If they don't do anything what will the courts do? Just ban it or some other shit? Explain this to a burger

Good. Now 10 year old games won't sell for full price but actually be subject to supply and demand as they should be

Valve does business in France. If they continue to do business in France without conceding to the ruling they will be fined constantly until they submit or stop doing business in France.

Pretty much. In the end this will fuck over france once the public revolts about it. Steam already won and they dont even have to do anything.

the refund case made no practical difference. It was just about wording in the terms of service.

How big are these fines? Would it literally be every day UNTIL they quit operating in france or just accept the terms?

They sell games on Europe too. Will those free games become more valuble to the consumers or is Epic going to drop them for losing to much money?

a license comes from a sole proprietor.
there's no other way a license exists.
for example your driver's license comes from the sole proprietor of your legal right to drive (the government).
if you recognize the legitimacy of a company selling licenses you've already given up on
>No company is entitled to be the sole proprietor

>he buys ph*sical instead of fighting for digital commerce rights

Attached: psycho-dad-shreds-videogames.jpg (1226x646, 215K)

Which is why buying a license from Steam initially is how it's done, but you CAN transfer licenses to other people. That's the entire argument made by the French courts. Prohibiting this kind of transfer was deemed illegal. I was very clear with what I said. You need to educate yourself more on the situation before you start mouthing off.

It's actually 3000 euros a day. I would imagine the fine is close to the money they make on France everyday. I don't know how much money Valve makes on France tho

how does Disneyland circumvent this shit?

>no free games
>matchmaking/friend joining that stull isnt better than fucking xbox
>no new games worth shaking a stick at
Steam is ded and only chinks are keeping it alive anymore

What do you mean?

>Disneyland sells annual passes
Are the french allowed to sell these to anyone?

The funniest part is that if steam had a system to allow this from the start places like G2A would have never had a chance to even start AND they could have taken percentages off all "used games transactions" for even more dosh but no instead they go full retard and run the opposite direction.
They are always shooting themselves in the foot arent they?

>but you CAN transfer licenses to other people
if the law determines so, yes.
steam is still the sole proprietor of it's licensed goods. you can't take that license anywhere else which means they have complete control of the product still. you have no actual consumer rights, you're just reinforcing steam's monopoly.

A lot of places sell annual passes, but I'm sure if you raised enough of a fuss you could have the owner of that pass transferred. It doesn't make a huge difference to them in the grand scheme of things. You probably just have to pay a charge for the processing which might be so high that the effort may not be totally worth your money.

Fuck the French lol. Valve will just stop operating in France

So all you're doing is acknowledging why people have a problem and why this litigation is occurring. If the law determines you can transfer steam licenses to other people Steam will no longer become a sole proprietor of the licenses. A secondhand market will emerge. That's the entire fucking point. You seem to think sole proprietor means sole initial proprietor. Obviously that's not the case. Stop getting hung up on semantics and assuming I'm meaning something I didn't explicitly say.

no they won't

based psycho dad

Peepoodo

peepoodo.bobbypills.com/episodes/

G2A exists because steam has long encouraged devs to use steam keys (which they have final say on production of, not devs) which doesn't make sense at all from a profit perspective (they make no money whether or not the keys are sold)...
but makes complete sense from a user acquisition perspective.... many competing stores got pressured into allowing devs to release steam keys through their storefronts to the effect of funneling users out of other stores and into steam. (to make it perfectly clear: steam never provided any automated way for devs on their platform to give out keys for other stores and doing so manually is against their terms of service)

I only come to these threads to see amerimutts seethe

I thought a developer could request as many Steam keys as they wanted to be used elsewhere. That isn't automatic?

fuck you too

>Steam will no longer become a sole proprietor of the licenses.
is your brain ok?
just because you can trade the license in some secondary market does not mean there is a second proprietor.

G2A exists because we cant sell the keys on steam dummy.
Which is very related to whats discussed here.
Seriously they easily could have controlled their own used game/steam key market within steam and made EVEN MORE MONEY but they are fucking stupid.

I assure you that it does. Anyone who sells something is a proprietor. That's literally the definition. Unless you have an actual argument against the shit I said there's no point in furthering this.

>I thought a developer could request as many Steam keys as they wanted
they can, Steam can deny a request though and since the the post-greenlight era of pay-per-game-release i hear they have begun becoming more discerning.
>That isn't automatic?
nah. in fact many things developers interact with that you would think are automatic aren't. not sure if labor is cheaper than programmers or what.

i agree with the function of what youre saying but from steam's perspective, it's better to try to either destroy or ignore G2A than to emulate them. the keys were never designed to make them a direct monetary profit, it's for user acquisition, which is worth losing money on short-term if it results in a long-term monopoly.

we're talking about the digital good (the redemption of the licenses), not the licenses themselves.

>the keys were never designed to make them a direct monetary profit, it's for user acquisition
Which is also how a lot of other aspects of steam started as well, especially for account customization.
Now we can trade backgrounds and nearly any thing else related to our accounts, unless its a game.
Steam is pretty fucking stupid most of the time and it shows when their new UI is actually worse than the old one for people with large libraries.
>but its okay cuz its new
Literally all steam ever says. They said it about selling movies, steam boxes, steam link, big picture, and much more.

So youre saying its pretty much to keep more users on their platform?
When fucking origin had a refund policy that worked before them?
When they are literally the last to change anything about their service everytime because "why bother competing when you can be a fat cat"

Finally digital games are looking more appealing. This was my main concern about digital games, that you actually never owned shit.

omelette du fromage

steam's out loud arguments should not even be in these threads. they're lying jews.

their actions clearly say that making it easy for users to trade licenses is a long-term revenue drain which is super obvious. steam is already a race-to-the-bottom market, adding a secondary market will amplify that.

if forced to by the law they will obviously concede to it but they're going to fight against it hard and come up with any arguments or loopholes they can.

you still don't own shit.
the EU can't force steam to keep servicing your license if they declare bankruptcy.

would there be a reason to buy games "new" anymore instead of from the lowest price reseller?

So why aren't game publishers included in this lawsuit? Since they're the actual copyright owners it's arguable that they should be the persons responsible for the handling of their licenses. Steam is just a mediator between them and their customers who they've granted limited authority to.

retard, steam is selling more shit in china than epic

Yes. Its called supporting developers and getting game when they launch.
Unless you really think that people will magically sell every game they buy at a loss on day one for no actual reason.
>used games are only okay when a giant corporation can make money off of them
What a great world

neither the state, nor the "consumer rights" group that sued nor steam give a single fuck about the actual producers of the content.
this is the result...

So what would happen if Valve just says "nah" would they get a fine? because if it's something like a 500k Euro fine I could bet they'll ignore it completely by paying pocket money to them.

It would be a fine per unit most likely.

Yes. Fines occur if they don't obey. But if they disobey for too long the fines will increase. Other countries will see this happening and smell blood in the water, reach the same decision in their own courts, and get free money from Valve just like the French until Valve finally submits because dozens of countries are making them hemorrhage money.

i can't parlez vous the francais but can they get around this by allowing user to sell the games back to steam for (probably very little) steam credit?
I can imagine they'll ever allow you to sell games on the marketplace or ever transfer steam credit into a bank account...

Attached: 1520826395922.jpg (2000x2575, 676K)

Do you buy games you have no intention to play just to boast your steam library?

How are you going to resell a game nobody wants

they could also just say they're suspending activities in france (including possible license changes), take down the ability to buy games from france and wait one week for the french to riot
I mean the french really love rioting, but they don't seem to have had a good reason to

Doubtful. The point of the litigation is to give people the rights to transfer the licenses to other people. Steam only allowing people to transfer the licenses back to Steam would be defying the reason the litigation occurred.

>or ever transfer steam credit into a bank account..
that one i know for sure is in the law.
steam wallet is no longer monopoly money.
page 30 i believe.

>he thinks france will riot and be on steams side
kek
Those frenchies are some of the angriest people if you even look at their personal rights the wrong way

I didn't say they'd be on steams side
but the french government loves to sweep things under the rug to get the rioting to stop

It's a lawsuit started from a french citizen, some kid told his dad and they went to a civil servant who took it to court. It wasn't from an organization.

Everything written in these threads is bullshit and nonsense
The pos OP wrote it intentionally wrong.
This court doesn't have the lawful power to make a precedent that affects everything digital.
ALL that french court ruled was they FORBID steam from having a CLAUSE in their written TOS and EULA (that you agree to when you make a steam account and buy a game) that FORBIDS YOU from 'selling your digital games'.
And because they are tied to a license to your personal account and you don't actually own them (the game's publisher does) steam simply has to allow resale of the steam account in France like on craigslist, ebay or a physical ad in a newspaper or whatever way you fucking want.

This has other implications where people can scam others which wasn't possible before since they can "resell" the same account to multiple people by fooling them or whatever, then there is the fact security has to be changed in some way because they might have access to your old credit card information you left on your account they might access somehow etc. who knows.

the epic store doesn't have anything to sell, they offer 1 big free to play game called fortnite

>some kid told his dad and they went to a civil servant who took it to court.
proof again that steam users are mad frog jew boys

lowball and fuck over any other sellers so you still get some money back while baiting resellers into falling for it

>Its called supporting developers
yeah I'll waste more money needlessly to support devs lmao this isn't a charity you fedora faggot
>on day one
no one said on day one, not everyone are consumer whores who only buy games on release

Literally nothing will happen

>asks why you would buy new
>to get it on launch
>HURRR NO ONE EVER DO THAT FUKKIN RETRD

Valve says Steam wallet isn't fiat money.
Court ruling says it is fiat money, "monnaie électronique", that's isn't abiding to french laws and regulations.

Every app store merchant in existence will pour money into appealing, and they'll win.

this is a ruling that steam has to change their tos and eula from stating that you 'can't sell your games and personal account' to someone else
nothing more and towards no one else

You could sell your games after you finish them.

>console players can do this without any sort of issue
>all the money goes to a corporation so its okay

>steam users cant do this because its unfair to the market
>the money would go to other users so its not okay

dumb reason, just wait a few days until people finish a game and resell it for less

Whats funny is all they have to do is add a check to see its its the first time use of a key and then they could give rewards to the initial purchaser like how physical games work to incentive new purchases over used.
Its literally the same shit weve had for a decade but steam is just a big dumb

Right now they don't care. And they won't do anything. Moreover, they are appealing, and considering that it already took 4 years to get there plus the fact they can reach pretty high in jurisdictions this will take a while still.
However France is a pretty large market, this if they lose will apply to other countries at least in Europe. And much like the Australian refund lawsuit, this would extend to the rest of the world.
Thus if they lose, its game over. So they will stall for as long as they can. Don't expect them to stop selling in France, but don't expect anything to come out of this for some time either.
With that said, Europe did have a ruling in that sense in 2012. Provided another country does the same things may actually get worse for Valve since they would be forced into compliance much earlier.

none of this is making steam less of a monopoly

They absolutely forbid the reselling of accounts in this decision.

It's not a monopoly. I buy each time more games from GOG and some other games will never be bought since I already got them free on Epics weekly give away.

>Not be something
>Something happens that has no effect on the state of being said thing or not

I mean, you're not wrong but not for the reason you think you are.

The existence of other storefronts makes Steam not a monopoly.

thats could be turn into an avenue of getting a cut.
for example allow players to sell their games via the steam market but valve gets a cut and the developers get a cut.
i can actually see this working out positively in the long run for both valve and developers.

If its doesn't exist, it will be, just like steam full refund policy

>the existence of other websearchers makes google not a monopoly
>the existence of other video platforms makes youtube not a monopoly
do you know how much like a fucking dictionary you sound right now?

good test of whether or not you're a monopoly is if the business practices of your competition causes you to change yours in response.

...in the same time that Steam's competition introduced sub-30% cuts for developers, Steam not only have not reduced their cut, they have introduced a per-game fee on developers.

Being popular doesn't make you a monopoly. Employing monopolistic business practices to prevent the emergence of competition makes you a monopoly. The definition is extremely specific for a reason because actual monopolies are illegal. Since you don't see the fucking U.S. government intervening with Steam, Google, or Youtube then the U.S. government has determined that these companies are not indulging in monopolistic business practices. It is those business practices that are the problem. Not the success of the company. Successful companies are encouraged because that's good for customers. If you want to claim Steam is a fucking monopoly you're going to have to describe the actions they are taking that actively prohibits competition. And no, being very good at providing a service does not fucking qualify.

>Employing monopolistic business practices to prevent the emergence of competition makes you a monopoly.
like this?

Except they are under investigation retard

Oh yeah? For being a monopoly? Bullshit, you fucking retard.

That's not a monopolistic business practice. Other storefronts can appear that do a better job in this context. Valve does not stop these storefronts from popping up.

>congress is investigating google parent company alphabet, facebook, and amazon for anti-competitive practices
Really jogs your nogs

Well let me know when they determine Valve is an actual monopoly. Until then you don't have a leg to fucking stand on when you call Steam a monopoly, do you?

I wonder how much of a shitstorm there would be if Valve and other game platforms decided it wasn't worth the effort to deal with the law, packed their shit and left France. I bet that would get overturned real quick.

see you are kind of forgetting that France is a member of the EU
and the EU has a very firm policy that if any company tries to strongarm one of their member states, they put the entire EU weight behind that country

what's Valve going to do, stop selling in the entire EU?

Businesses don't succeed by abandoning millions of pre-existing customers. That's hitting a fly with a hammer.

>i cant handle that multipl;e people are talking on an text based image board
kek
I only posted this sperg.
It was a reply to you saying that google isnt under investigaion when they literally are for monopolistic porctices.
Retard

>but valve
Then why bother bringing other companies into the conversation big boy?

Finally steam going to burn down.

EULA cannot override nation's laws in the EU mate

It might come as a surprise but in other countries, companies are not allowed to just do whatever they want

>operating at a loss to starve out competition is not a monopolistic business practice
i'll let Bezos know he has nothing to worry about then. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders can't do anything about, it' legit!

Because I only responded to some retard that called Steam a monopoly you cretinous imbecile.

based until it showed the furry shit

Do you believe Steam is operating at a loss? No? Well then the statement that Steam is a monopoly doesn't hold any fucking water, does it?

>cant handle that a thread on 4chin has more than 2 posters
>or that he was corrected on some random information
>hurr i smert u dum
Classic

Attached: tencent.png (587x558, 352K)

Except there are different types of license and in the case of goods, a singular copy of a license for personal use can be resold.

Why? You don't open the games, you just own the license for them. I can't resell my adobe license or my windows license.

I'm not interested in irrelevant information. If you respond to me in a tone that attempts to correct me on a point I'm making you better make damned sure you're trying to correct my point and not some irrelevant shit someone else said. Reply to them. Not me. You fucking moron. Learn how this place works.

>I'm not interested in irrelevant information
Then why bring other companies up in the first place big boy?

I didn't.

Attached: 1312958346311.jpg (498x614, 32K)

Pretty sure you can in the EU.

According to whom?

And I only responded to two posts originally.
Namely this tidbit right here you started sperging over.

>Since you don't see the fucking U.S. government intervening with Steam, Google, or Youtube then the U.S. government has determined that these companies are not indulging in monopolistic business practices.
This is all I replied to but you had to go full retard and just shout
>HURR IRRELEVANT
The only irrelephant in the room is you faggot

It's Disney, when have they ever been held accountable to the law?

that Steam key scheme was not only operating at a loss, it's encouraged short-sighted developers to operate at a loss on their behalf.
and once they starved out their competition (this all already happened) they increased their prices on developers, lowered the quality on consumers, spit in the face of consumer advocacy groups asking for refund policies and never suffered a financially for it because they're literally a monopoly.

And if you bothered to look at the shit I was replying to they specifically brought up Google and Youtube and examples alongside Steam as monopolies. Holy fucking shit you really are retarded.

Attached: 1326944895458.jpg (483x409, 46K)

By changing the law.

It is legit though.

So you dont want to have the right information to correct retards?
Okay have fun with them user!

tell that cuck who thinks Steam can't be a monopoly because he bought a game on GOG once.

You should have been correcting them. That's why you're getting fucking called out for bringing up irrelevant shit. Don't act like you're correcting me when you agree with me. His examples aren't relevant to whether or not Steam is a monopoly. Get that shit through your fucking head.

It's a theoretical situation. It wouldn't be the first time a government made a law purely to spite a business and try to make money off them in fines and it definitely wouldn't be the first time itbackfired

Attached: France law.jpg (893x2207, 261K)

>You should have been correcting them

Is correct user in saying that google and yt are not magically in the clear by the simple virtue of other things existing when they are literally under investigation.
Why is this so upsetting?
You tried to defend google and got corrected. Thats it.

No, that would be fucking insane.

1) Yes, the example you just posted is in fact legal.
2) The law is tailored specifically to help exactly that. Operating at a loss, especially for a big business like Amazon, makes Bezos eligible for a fuckload of tax breaks, so while he and Amazon legally operate at a loss, they make huge bank in tax breaks.
3) No, the Demon Rats can't do anything about this.

Yeah well let me fucking know when any legitimate agency or government determines that Steam is utilizing monopolistic business practices because until then it's not accurate to describe Steam as a monopoly. Bottom line. That's my point. If you disagree with it then feel free to explain yourself. If you agree with me then congratulations on having the correct idea.

>what is the EU
>what is precedence in court
Go learn some

Bribing the Anaheim city council.

It's incorrect to claim they are a monopoly simply because they are under investigation. Being accused of murder doesn't make you a fucking murderer either. These are specific terms. You don't get to arbitrarily decide if a company is a monopoly or not. It's a crime. They need to be found in a court of law to be in violation of the law to be considered a monopoly.

>what's Valve going to do, stop selling in the entire EU?
Yes.

>they arent a monopoly I swear
>these anti-competive practices dont exist and surely arent under investigation because theres no firm ruling to say so
Yeah because congress would totally waste time with this if they werent already knee deep in shit.

Theres a reason amazon, google, and facebook are in deep shit right now but MS is just cruising by. One of these understands how to opperate on a global scale while the others were invented in the 2000s and cant handle actual business practices unless they use monopolistic strategies.
MS already went through its court shenanigans, time for the new kids on the block

its not about operating at a loss.
it's about operating at a loss to starve out competition that cannot operate at a loss.
this is a well known practice of monopolies and cartels.
previous user saying it's only a monopoly after it gets broken up is full of shit, you're also full of shit.
OPEC doesn't stop being a cartel just because you cant do anything to stop them.

Why would they do that?

Remember that those aren't Valve's games. They're the devs games. Valve doesn't care if they sell a game from dev to user, or from user to user. They can take a cut either way.

this is correct.
the only reason they're delaying and fighting is because it's a profit loss. same as they did with refunds.

Repeat after me: I cannot dictate what is or is not against the law. I am not the omnipotent arbiter of justice. I do interpret and enforce the law.

Calling Steam a monopoly is a lie. It is false. It is not true. Steam is not a monopoly. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Many other digital distribution platforms exist and are profitable. Steam did not hinder or stop any of them from existing or succeeding. There are new ones popping up all of the time. Rockstar just opened up their very own a few weeks ago. The idea that Steam is a monopoly doesn't hold water when you can't name a single thing Valve is doing to actually be a monopoly. I understand if you don't like to use them, but that doesn't mean they're a fucking monopoly. This bears repeating. Having a popular business doesn't mean you have a monopoly.

>still hung up on steam
Too bad you cant read.

here
I dont care about what you think.
All I care is that you know for a fact that google and many other tech giants are under investigation. Investigation that simply wouldnt exist if they were not using monolopistic practices.
That is all.

I never once accused steam of a monopoly but you cant seam to hold a conversation with someone unless its screeching about how right you are and how good steam is.

My only point was about Steam you fucking moron. Everything else is irrelevant to my point. If you disagree with my point then state your fucking case. If not then you agree with me and have no reason to respond you buttmad faggot. You're bent out of shape that I'm not jumping down some irrelevant rabbit hole with you. I don't give a fuck about other companies being a monopoly or not. I didn't bring those up. I just corrected someone who called Steam a monopoly. That's the end of it.

>Investigation that simply wouldnt exist if they were not using monolopistic practices.

>If you're not guilty then why are you under investigation?

shut the fuck up

Attached: 1277206535109.jpg (428x469, 18K)

So you cant read or follow a conversation.
I only attempted to give you further info on the state of many tech giants that were indeed mentioned in your post. Almost as if you responding to the user brought up companies beyond steam started a fork in the conversation.

Its ok user. You can just admit you goofed

>actually defending facebook and google
top kek
Theres already so much evidence its hilarious.
You dont end up in front of congress without evidence buddy

>Steam is not a monopoly.
>Steam is not a monopoly.
>Steam is not a monopoly.

>Courts will usually look at a company’s market share for a particular product or service to see if a monopoly exists. If a company has a market share of greater than 75 percent, they will probably be considered a monopoly.

Steam 2019: a billion registered accounts with 90 million monthly active users.

>Once the courts find that a monopoly exists, it will move to the second prong of monopoly power. The second part of the test is whether the company engaged in some type of unfair or anti-competitive conduct. This second prong is not defined by a statute, but rather is evaluated on a case-by-case basis

I've made it clear to you I was never interested in having a conversation with you about other companies. You're the one still trying to rope me into it like I ever gave a shit. Deal with it, retarded faggot.

It's called stare decisis

Then why reply?
Why get so upset you were given information on a subject brought up in the current thread?
Calm down sperg

The concept that a person or entity is innocent until proven guilty is constitutional. Are you insisting that just being under investigation is synonymous with guilt?

God I hope so. Fuck the EU.

I reply to put you in your place. You're a shitposter who tries to move the goalposts when you realize you can't actually defend against the point being made. The conversation was about Steam. You're the fucking moron that tried to turn it into something else and getting worked up when I don't give a shit about what you want to talk about.

I don't get it, isn't western world supposed to be capitalist? Is France communist?

>got worked up
>still sperging
I remained calm user.

Attached: 1541612703097.jpg (384x395, 19K)

There are people who literally think that a company can straight up murder you if it's in their EULA. They can't comprehend that EULAs have to follow the law.

That is capitalism. Sales are final and exhaust rights. Steam is selling you a licence, and now it's yours, and you ought to be able to do what you want with it. Including resellig it.

Using worksafe language doesn't mean you're calm. You're still replying to someone JUST because they don't care about what you want to talk about. You agree with me and my point about Steam but you're still replying because you haven't gotten over that you were called out for correcting the wrong person.

i sell my attila total war 1€
mp id interested

Doesn't it mean steam will be fined $3,000 a day until they allow people to sell their games? That's only like 1 million a year Steam could easily take that hit

Attached: 1494895410244.jpg (454x453, 52K)

Goverment interfering doesn't feel like capitalism too me

At first I was just making you you understood my point.
Now its just because were both still here.

>Is France communist?
yes

it's a corrupt market distortion but how the fuck is it communist?
communist government would be like epic paying for all the developers to make their games and giving them away to the public for free.

>uncut penis

this is forbidden in america you are going to be banned

Valve will probably make a marketplace like the one for items, and take a cut.
Government interferes with capitalism all the time. You can't have a legally enforceable contract without government interference. Here, government just ensures that companies have to follow the market rules.
Now go and look up what communism actually is before you keep making yourself look like a total retard.

You know you can run a country without going full blown capitalist or communist. Why is it so hard to grasp this concept?

Then you literally dont know what capitalism is

cause I can only think in 2 extremes

I think the main point through is that this has been running since 2004 and just got it's first appeal. Even if they lose in the end this will still run for years.

Market should make the rules themselves though, goverment making and enforcing the rules makes it not a free market which capitalism is based on?

But what are they basing this ruling on? Are you allowed to resell licenses under French Law? Or is this a thing they just came up with to sting the games industry and unfairly damage their business? Serious question.

Your point has fuck all to do with me or my post. It's why you're being disregarded. Next time don't try to act so haughty when you can't even follow the conversation you're replying to. Dumb ass.

>Or is this a thing they just came up with to sting the games industry and unfairly damage their business?
They gotta pretend they are doing something, fuck actually doing things that matter tho

I'm good thanks.

Rules are only rules if they are enforced, and enforcement requires a higher power. You can't have rules without a government body to enforce them, and you can't have a functioning market without reliable rules that ensure trades can happen as intended.
Under EU law, the first sale doctrine is also extended to software licences. Steam claims they're just selling a subscription, not a proper licence, and the court now said that no, it's an actual licence they're selling, and thus they exhaust their rights to the licence.

>You can't have rules without a government body to enforce them, and you can't have a functioning market without reliable rules that ensure trades can happen as intended.
So capitalism is as fake as communism?

>both end up with some asshole taking all the rewards from others work
You tell me

The ruling was based on 2 EU directives from 2001 and 2009.

You really need to look up what communism actually is.
As for a market not bound by any government, this is only possible between sovereign players, i.e. nations. You'd need a proper anarchy to implement it between people, and anarchy is an unstable state for society. Power always finds a place to rest its head.

You’re allowed to sell your car, house, clothes, physical copies of videogames etc. so why shouldn’t you be allowed to resell your digital videogames?

>snot nosed kid with "Whats your offer"

that brings me back to tf2 trade servers, I just wanted a chieftains challenge but everyone wanted a wall street larp

>Are you allowed to resell licenses under French Law?
Technically, under European law per a 2012 ruling. Which is just a precedent, not a law
>Or is this a thing they just came up with to sting the games industry and unfairly damage their business?
This is just the application of the above. Its not a law and its not made up to damage the games industry. It started as something completely different.

What part of the concept of law do you not understand? We use governments, in our democracies they are technically agents of the people, to make and enforce law. We do not let companies independently draft nor enforce something that is on par with the rule of law, because that flies in the face of democracy.

The market is unable to enforce rules, and that's for the best. The market enforcing rules is how you get those cyberpunk dystopias you see in the books and movies, where people are just biomass waiting to be burned for fuel. We've actually been there in the past, and we're not quite over it yet, but the last thing we need is it taking over completely yet again.

American Laws are set up so that corporations can rape you and not the government (usually) while its the opposite in Europe.
Rest assured that someone is doing the raping though

Video game licenses aren't goods, as stupid as that is.

>Or is this a thing they just came up with to sting the games industry and unfairly damage their business?
No, it's consumer protection you fucktard. see

The part where someone makes a business selling things that are not hazardous to anyone's health but the government says it's not ok. It's people's choice whether to buy videogames on the steam platform, no one is forcing them, so they should be able to make a choice.

>its okay for gamestop to rip everyone off but FUCK CONSUMERS WHO WANT TO RESELL

It literally is ok, no one is forcing you to buy from gamestop

So its only okay for corporations to make money off used goods, not consumers.
OK

I'm not defending Gamestop. And why are you letting them get away with living in your head while paying zero rent?

Depends on the type of goods but sure why not

>French thinks growing hair cures diseases

Sorry you disgusting frenchies, armpit and public hair is gross and smelly. Nothing is going to convince the world otherwise.

So Gamestop resells used digital licenses?

>Power always finds a place to rest its head.
Glad we agree

>muh buzzwords
kek
I dont even care about gamestop and havent used them in ages but they are one of the few retailers thats instantly recognizable to everyone on the board that deals in used games.

>hurrr rent free cuz you used a popular example
The state of your mind

>it dunt count cuz its digital
Keep licking those boots

>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T FORCE MY FAVORITE MULTI BILLION DOLLAR COMPANY TO MAKE PRO-CONSUMER CHANGES! MUH SALES! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO GABEN HELP UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Attached: 1557399677891.png (785x1000, 261K)

No they're living rent free because Steam sells digital licenses and Gamesatop sells physical game disks. You may as well make a food analogy for all the good that comparison is doing.

It's a completely different product.

You can buy diugital goods from gamestop buddy. The fact that you are so inclined to think that because its digital you cant own it just goes to show how little you care about consumer ownership and rights.

Friendly reminder that the vast majority here unironically thinks like this.

Attached: 1559136295844.png (1203x1594, 171K)

The corporate drones are out in force at all times. Nothing new.

>the Yea Forums demographic

Attached: eternal mutt.jpg (777x777, 94K)

>buying used goods is practically stealing
lmao

>buying used goods is practically stealing
That's one of the reasons why planned obsolescence is a thing

Not according to customers who use them identically.

>tfw valve stopped selling cheap games a while ago
Why did they have to nuke their big sales into the ground?
Shits awful and years old games hardly go on sale like they use to

Base prices for games have also remained stagnant and high because they're counting on people buying them when they're 50% off which only reduces them to $30, when realistically 2 years after launch the game should already be at $30 by default and a sale should be reducing that further.

>as long as valve is at the top im going to get my games cheap
i wonder if this brainlet has seen the error of his ways in the past 6 years

>buy game for $60
>finish and sell for 50
>finish and sell for 40
>finish and sell for 35
>finish and sell for 30
>etc
>total money for publishers:
>$60, minus tip, and any customer support cost
While I'm all for more money in my wallet, I see this as potentially bad for future developers

>Reading this thread

American Boomers have really gone too far this time.

They will just sell licenses that last for one year or some shit

So exactly like physical games which actually cost money to produce the discs for take shelf space in actual physical stores you have to drive to.
Why is it okay then when it costs FAR more to produce physical goods?

>far more
No it doesn't you retard, the actual disc costs are negligible compared to the actual development cost

>the only part of selling a physical game is the disc
kek

If they don't think their business ventures will be profitable they're more than free to seek a different line of work. Nowhere are they guaranteed a right to make a living working on something they enjoy. Customers should not give up their rights just to keep people employed.

yes, distribution costs don't count as producing costs

Oh so your purposely ignoring the fact that I had brought up multiple parts of selling physical goods just because I made a slight err in wording.
Gotcha

So now paying $60 will only let me play the game for a year? Might as well switch to a subscription
Physical goods can be physically damaged and that's a risk when you buy used, and yes I've gotten games that were scratched beyond playable.
Also, I have a physical copy of bulletstorm that I can't play because of DRM, games for windows live, so even physical reselling has limits.

It's not being compared to the development cost. The development costs are identical in either scenario. What is being compared is physical and digital. You can resell physical copies of games (or at least you used to be able to back when people owned games) but despite this the video game industry still survived and grew. Being able to resell digital games should impact the industry even less than physical games did because you can make and distribute digital copies for the costs of electrons which no matter what you think will always be less than the cost of putting data on plastic AND SHIPPING IT ACROSS THE GLOBE.

>and that's a risk when you buy used
You can return damaged goods to any gamestop user. If it doesnt work they cant sell it to you.

>muh development costs
you mean 75% of the bloated budget being wasted on advertising to retards just so bobby kotick and friends can pocket most of the money and barely put enough back into the devs to make a half-finished sequel so they can do it all over again

>So now paying $60 will only let me play the game for a year?
I mean it's that or "You can only install this on one computer" license stuff, doubt EU would do anything to fuck with the actual software industry and not just video game one

Truth, howevee business will do anything to get your money.
They can stop the reselling of their digital goods by putting fatty DRM on the game, which is bad for everyone.

I mean it makes sense. Cryptocurrency is 'liquid' why shouldnt legitimate products be? Especially when you buy something thats a horrible disappointment?

>You can only install this on one computer
That would mean you cant resell after initial use which goes against the entire point user

>no free games
are you retarded?

>French thinks growing hair cures diseases

It said keeping hair PREVENTS infections. It's also true.

But you could be wilfully ignorant if you want.

Pretty sure software as in programs do it to this day and I don't see anyone being pissy about it

>assuming I bought it from a retailer

because it's also more difficult to resell physical products, the reselling alongside refunding gives the most immediate feedback signal available to physical retailers that they shouldn't re-stock which gives the signal to producers they shouldn't pay for another duplication run.

in digital, retailers dont need resell feedback signals because they dont pay for stock and could care less whether it sells or not and the producers dont need resell feedback because they have direct access to sale/refund numbers, analytics, user reviews, etc.

Which will invite even more litigation and regulation if it gets out of control. If a precedence is set that customers own digital copies of the games then DRM that obfuscates the data or prevents access to the owned software itself may be found to be in violation of the concept that people own the product. If the product can be rendered inoperable or made to become worthless because of a decision made by anyone but the person who owns that product then that might be considered unacceptable.

yes, that's where most of the money goes, not to discs

Because instead of selling photoshop for $1000 once you can rent it for $40 a month, will games do the same?

my first thought as to how to deal with this if i were releasing a game would be to only have one save file available and you can't erase it and it's tied to your license.

Software is already being sold for limit time only, they can start doing it to games.

>will games do the same
Ye, why wouldn't they

I don't think you're following what I'm saying. I know what is already happening. I'm talking about what is possible to change.

>how to get your game pirated

Because I'm tired of most big titled games having loot boxes and I don't want that shit to extend to indie games.

Just wait and see. Maybe they haven't noticed they're loosing yet. That happens when a monopoly loses a huge market share after a competition that hadn't existed before, so Steam's CEOs aren't even noticing why they're losing money.

I doubt indie games would actually get into the legal bullshit

Ragnarok Online pulled their french server offline permanently because they refused government demands

The Frenchmen can legally sell games to other citizens in other countries and completely break the market if steam doesn't bend over and allow France to fuck them in the ass.
If steam tries to resist, french citizens can destroy them by legally selling their games to EVERYONE (not just other frenchmen) for 1 cent and completely break the economy of the games, and there is nothing steam can do about it.

You really shouldn't doubt autism.

youtube.com/watch?v=9pWC-4dx3Q0

>buy game for $60
>get to level 3 and sell for 50
>get to level 7 and sell for 40
>wanted to start from at least level 4 and resell for 35
>finish and sell for 30
>buys and sees pic related when loaded

Attached: tumblr_n2jz4pKOJC1rrftcdo1_500.gif (500x446, 17K)

Yeah! Lets show Valve by buying their product at full price and selling it for pennies!
I mean, I know what you're getting at, but that's not what's going to happen.

All right. RO is a game.

Can't wait for developers to rent out games, that will be fun and really good for the consumers

>Only way to start a new game is buy buying game officially

Could work

Attached: jenny_2b_by_angeliccmadness_dc3refh-fullview.jpg (1024x1456, 64K)

I think we've got it covered.

Attached: Cheat Engine.png (512x512, 79K)

>more online only shit
This is how you breed even more piracy

the ones that would have the willingness to sue just decide to use another storefront
the ones that don't decide to use another storefront also don't notice how they're being fucked

indies are self-selecting not to sue. it either has to come from a AAA or like in the case of french one, from frothing steam fanboy users who got jilted and who's response is an immediate GAMERS RISE UP *fucks the industry even harder for gamedevs while barely scratching steam*

I don't give a shit about game developers. I'm a fucking customer. I care about what is beneficial to me. That's my prerogative. It's up to the game developers to look out for themselves. If they can't hang in a changing market then they deserve to get ground to a pulp.

This, but ironically, this law will just make shit even worse

Things will have to get worse before they get better. This industry will not regulate itself. Clearly. Greed has taken root and it will not stop until it is forced to stop.

if that's your attitude you can't really complain when gamedevs decide it's best financial practice for them to grind you to a pulp before you do it to them.

having an adversarial relationship with devs is going to ruin games faster than anything else.

I am of a view that it will get better just to get worse. Like there will be brief period where you can sell your games but then the companies will fuck us over even more with time based licenses or some other concept that's not illegal but worse than no reselling

They fucking started it you moron by trying to take my rights as a customer away. The fact that they've gotten away with it for decades and gotten fat from the profits is not my fucking concern. If they want to get back into my good graces they need to start treating their customers with equitable respect by endorsing equitable trade. The money I give them is not restricted, but what they give me in return is extremely restricted. This is not equitable.

That is the worse I am describing because that will elicit more regulation.

I don't get it.
Just use a Russian IP address and buy on GOG at a price Steam won't ever be able to compete.
I only buy on Steam for some good exclusives with online features.

Attached: Logo_GoG.png (350x350, 118K)

Yes and then companies will get past that regulation making shit worse and worse or government just won't win everytime

>he thinks he deserves respect
Your a tiny number on a spreadsheet, nothing more.

Shut up you ignorant slut. It's not a perpetually downward spiral into chaos. A homeostasis can be achieved where everybody reaches a compromise. Right now customers are getting fucked over back to back, over and over, with no end in sight. Regulation is coming.

>Physical goods can be physically damaged and that's a risk when you buy used, and yes I've gotten games that were scratched beyond playable.
Digital goods can be lost with the account they're tied to.

Attached: no.jpg (960x960, 492K)

>A homeostasis can be achieved where everybody reaches a compromise.
Ye, there was one until the government ruined it. Customers will just get fucked even more.

Your post has nothing to do with my points. These companies only exist because customers are willing to give them money. Companies that are good at convincing customers to do this are successful. Fucking over your customers so much that they stop giving you money is bad for business.

That was not a homeostasis. These publishers have been steadily encroaching for years because they do not have limits set upon them to what they can and cannot do. Movement in any direction by any party means a homeostasis did not exist.

You couldn't resell digital games since they started existing, nothing was changing.

Imagine unironically defending a multibillion dollar industry just because the industry happens to be about making flashing lights on LED screens.
Video games should be made purely for the love of it. You should make NO money making a game as a developer. If rulings like this destroy AAA faggot games, then it's only good for everything.
Fuck Corporations, Fuck valve, and fuck you.

Which in and of itself was an encroachment!

>You should make NO money making a game as a developer
needing to work a wageslave job just to support yourself while making games will only cut into the quality for passionate devs.

Boo hoo. No game is worth the bullshit they're making customers deal with.

Ye I wouldn't say it was a process of encroachment it just happened. Since nothing was changing it lead to the status quo where that's the norm, which the France government now upset.

The kind of person who buys a $60 game day one is the kind of person who buys a $60 game riddled with DRM is the kind of person who buys a $60 game that can't be resold.

Then don't say fuck corporations, just say fuck everybody, because that's what you're getting at.

It actually started with CD-keys.

And you're using this as justification that publishers can continue this kind of bullshit?

If you agree that it's bad for customers then just say that you agree. If you're going to take the stance that nothing can be done to stop it you're a moron.

CD-keys were a method to prevent theft. You could still sell a game with a cd-key because the authorization to install the game was included with the game itself.

>microsoft store
they have a store?

>Fucking over your customers so much that they stop giving you money is bad for business

The thing is is that that doesn't happen anymore. The only way that happens is when they're boycott and goys are too shit scared to do that because it means they have to do something they've LITERALLY never had to do before - sacrifice something that actually means something to them and not what means something to someone else, like they usually do.
Unless you're going to rewire their coward brains then nothing can be done to stop it.

what are you talking about?
what did some 28yo indie developer ever do to you?

They probably don't even play video games. People who post shit like that are usually /pol/ incels trying to fite da joos by ruining everything for everyone else and not harming the jews in the slightest.
Fuck trannies and fuck /pol/

Fucking based. Finally

Of course DRM is bad for customers, same with being unable to sell/refund purchased games.
But companies don't care about that and will do everything they can to keep you coming back. It's not so much that "might as well do nothing" as it is "companies don't care."
But you can make them care by not buying their products and get OTHER PEOPLE to stop buying their products.

Unless the person you bought it from didn't include the key as it usually was in the game manual.
Or the person still has the game and now you can't play when they play.

This doesn't destroy AAA games, this destroys everything except for shitty microtransaction games or subscription based games which ironically are mostly by AAA devs, it's more like everyone but AAA devs would be fucked by this, maybe that's the game industry you want to see but then you have really shitty taste

>Valve is appealing it
>They're not going to do shit once the appeal is over
>And even if they can't appeal it, they'll just stop selling in that country
>Implying something this disruptive would fly in any other sane country
>Willing to destroy the very industry you love just so you can make a quick buck on games people collectively don't want

I don't care what mental gymnastics people do to rationalize this--if this actually becomes a thing, this will destroy digital distribution period, not just for video games but any piece of fucking software. Digital distribution would effectively be dead as companies circumvent it anyways, if not reverting to physical media like discs and flash drives.

Leave it to gamers to ruin entire industries.

Attached: 1299235335110.png (469x493, 304K)

>Um excuse me the billionaire corporations earned this money fair and square, they should be able to make the rules if they want to #MAGA #VALVE #DOTA2

Attached: soy3123.jpg (243x234, 18K)

>hurr they just wont sell in france
lol no
they are already getting sued by the EU for being scummy fucks and yet again they have lied in THREE grand jury courts
you are a child
sneed.

You're the ones that have been using indies as a reason to justify corporate anti-gamer cancer.
Indies are the same in vidya as they are in music, wrestling and movies: a mere afterthought.
If the AAA, AA, A and B budgeted entries suck, whatever the indies do doesn't matter one fucking bit.
>b-but they make the only games worth playing
Debatable and if that was the case it's all the more reason to hope for a complete collapse.
You want to keep corporations raping customers because one of a thousand indies being worth half a shit? Who the fuck cares.
To put it in perspective: I have to let Square be as shit as it has become because you like Underturd?
Are you an indie dev? Are you an indie dev wannabe? Do you have money riding on the indie train? It's inexplicable otherwise. Cuphead ain't worth all of this cancer.
lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5a8275ef-7320-4557-a97a-7fc84af56ca1
They will follow, and that hopefully will be the death blow to the entire industry.
If to see EA, Activision, Sony and Microsoft dead and fucking gone I have to lose Nier Automata 2, so be it.

It's not my concern at all whether poor people allow themselves to be assravaged by big corporations, why should I lose the only good games which come from indies just to make life better for the common retard who allowed the situation to get this bad in the first place, and will allow it to happen again?

You're a fucking idiot if you sacrifice your own well being for the sake of the ignorant masses.

So basically you want the entire industry to be fucked beyond repair, if you don't want to play games why don't you just stop playing games.

Doesn't the EU have retarded policies anyway?
Isn't that the same entity that considers it a crime to withhold your password and wants backdoors in everything?
I'm not going to pretend that the US is any better, but at least we're not saying
>Hurr durr I want to sell my MP3 collection

Fucking retard

Attached: 1300180216403.png (178x187, 47K)

the eu is suing valve over regionlocking
valve lied, said regionlocking doesn't exist and lost another case

valve was sued by the australian government, they lied, said they never sold games in australia, lost again and now has a permanent trampstamp FUCKEDBYAU on the australia store page forever

valve yet again lies to the france court saying they are a subscription based service
they will not win the appeal

honestly that would be a best case scenario. completely ruin digital distribution crashing the creative industries such that consumersheep finally connect the fact that they should be supporting the creators not the distributors/platforms when the eventual reset comes.

but given the clownstate of our universe, what's actually going to happen is that distributors/platforms will be further entrenched as they become the only way to digitally model an old boomer concept of distribution all at the expense of creators and every indie-AA style creator in every industry gets completely pushed out of being able to make a living and the majors make slopbucket stuff to secure the thin margins as we slide back into cultural mediocrity.

Inb4 valve decides that it is cheaper to just leave France than deal with their retarded shit.

Lmao
>buy game
>play it for a while
>if its single player sell it
>if its multiplayer, get banned for hacking/exploits etc
>sell game to another user
>some schmuck buys it
>wtf im banned from online play
>2nd hand marketplace becomes a hotbed of banned from online games that no one will touch.

NOOOO VALVE WAS GONNA MAGA AGAINST CHINA WITH DOTA HOW COULD THIS FUCKING HPAPEN

Attached: zxcv.jpg (206x244, 10K)

Too bad thats not how Europe works
>personal ownership is a bad thing
Only on 4chin

>valve yet again lies to the france court saying they are a subscription based service
Will they be a subscription based service in the future and blame it on France

There comes a point where there's no longer a way to fix something, that something is so damaged that the only way to fix it is let it die, and hope something else resurfaces that isn't as terrible. At this point they will not stop, it is going to get much much worse, the only way to fix this is to completely scorch the system.
What the masses do dictates what everybody else does.
Remember how the Jrpg genre completely died because a bunch of gooks on trains decided to buy their titles on a fucking portable PS1 the Nintendo DS and that was a short-sighted move that completely destroyed the entire japanese market and led in part to the gacha cancer since that's where all the devs went after all the companies shit themselves being unable to keep up the pace with HD gaming? Good times.

blame it on their garbage law team who thinks lying through court works in any court that isn't local

This wouldn't fix it, this would destroy it beyond recovery

>hurrr they won't sell in France
Valve doesn't own the games.

If I'll have to pay money to use my steam library I'll blame it on EU and especially France

They just need to make something like a game specific season pass for their platform. If somebody buys a used license, he will have to pay the steam server fee to download the game and use the associated steam functionalities like saving the game on the cloud or the chat. They can make this server fee 33% of the game base price which would then only make a loss for the game publisher.

>ill blame EU for steam being greedy kikes
top kek

>What the masses do dictates what everybody else does
It's great you know that but you're not offering any alternative. All you're suggesting is complete destruction of the gaming industry

>valvecuckolds so lost in sunk cost fallacy they wont blame valve for losing a case any other company would win
LMAO

go back to spending hundreds on dota cosmetics you fucking loser

Yes? I would rather not be able to resell games than pay a subscription or not being able to resell the games cause they are a subscription

>trusting the company that sold out to chinks harder than epic games did
no thanks

Devs didnt do that user.
Publishers and storefronts owned my massive corporations did.

Devs wouldn't disappear, they would have to restructure differently.
You, and everybody else, seem to miss where the root of the problem is:
Corporations are out of control because they demand endless growth.
They got bad, they got worse and then much worse.
You said it wouldn't happen, that one dev cutting the ending of Tomb Raider Underworld and selling it for like $10 bucks (5 bucks an hour) was no big deal. Look where we are now.
What makes you think they will stop at the shit we have now?
The next logical step is games as a service as a standard.
You will have to subscribe to everything to have access to your rented titles, that's what's gonna happen.
Physical is going away for good, but you won't save money, you will pay more, because the point of digital was never convenience, was not giving you a chance to push back.
If that's the way you wanna go, do it. I hope they all fucking die.

back in 2004 no one fucking liked having to install steam to play half life 2 on pc and here you guys are bending your back for it
fuckign cringe

>they would have to restructure differently.
aka they would have to do it for free

Attached: shitpost.png (1371x229, 149K)

>Digital products and distribution is an abstract concept
>The idea of selling something that could otherwise be duplicated and infinite amount of times

Riddle me this Batman, what has Valve done to warrant such ire? I feel like half the shit they get punished for was stuff people exploited int he first place.
>Allows people to buy and activate CD keys on their platform
>People take advantage of lower prices in other countries
>"UM EXCUSE ME, DON'T REGION LOCK OUR GAMES!"

God, I hate the future. I feel like this could have all been avoided if people weren't such greedy assholes, both business and consumer alike.

Attached: 1294218446007.jpg (300x300, 65K)

>Look where we are now.
Having more games than ever for the same price as 20 years ago? Having more games giving expansions and DLC out for free to keep players playing?
Yeah what a travesty that inflation hasnt assraped our market like every single other one.

This is literally all on valve user.
They are the ones in control of their policies, no one else.

>Having more games than ever for the same price as 20 years ago? Having more games giving expansions and DLC out for free to keep players playing?

While everything appeals to the lowest common denominator, the target audience for almost every game has become drooling retards and most of AAA isn't worth playing at all.

Games have gotten way, way too fucking big

>didnt play games before and thinks he can talk shit now
You described every single generation in gaming retard

This feels like a deja vu, except you were probably not here since that earnest enthusiasm about modern trash makes me assume strongly about your age.
Back in the day, we had literal shills here screaming hard like this:
>YOU DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CUT CONTENT AT LAUNCH, THEY HAD A SEPARATE TEAM
>That separate team is still part of their team, that part was ready at launch, should've been in the game
>NO, IT WAS MEANT TO BE SOLD SEPARATELY
>it was deliberately omitted from the game
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
It feels like walking down to hell, one step at a time. Every time you take one step down, the amount of dumb shit you hear increases and gets louder.
No, every gen had absolute masterpieces writing history of gaming forever, some good games and then endless trash.
This gen and the one before it is painfully average and forgettable. Everything is playable, nothing is memorable. It's almost as like we're on the netflix/hollywood era of gaming. Whoops.

you are retarded
you can't even fucking read

bs, stop posting nonsense

this whole thread is cancer, both sides are equally retarded
>pirate gang

Attached: 1530091977110.png (917x599, 46K)

>artifact
>all these lawsuits
>dota dying
>Tf2 dying
>underlords dying
yeah im thinking valve is dead

>every gen had absolute masterpieces writing history of gaming forever
Because video games were a new market and technology was rapidly advancing both in hardware and in software. The games then were still focused towards the lowest common denominator

No, you weren't able to explain about every game with a simple comparison with other.

It's telling when someone does something that is actually somewhat new and successful and suddenly you have a gorillion copies of it.

See: mobas, battle royale and card games.

Because software companies kind of realized the resale is stupid for them to allow. So they made this thing called a software license. They aren't selling you a product, they are trying to say they are giving it to you for free and that you bought the RIGHT to use it. This lets them skirt outside of resale laws, because you can't resell a right. Courts are finally catching on that this is bullshit, but it's slow going fighting against this because of corporate lobbiest bribing lawmakers into not questioning it.

>except you probably werent here
Guess being an old man has paid off now that I can seemlessly blend in.
I've been here for over dozen years user. I'm fucking 30.
I was around for every generation after nintendo made the NES and guess what.

Most if not all "AAA" titles were garbage licensed shit. You act like games then werent disigned specifically to take you longer to beat due to cheap mechanics because they inherited that shit from arcades.
Same goes for the ps1 and its fucking mountain of shovelware like the endless barbie games. Only the GBA topped it before things like xbox live and PSN came out.
Same goes for the plethora of consoles before nintendo and sega moved in.
You literally havent been around long enough to realize and if anything games are cheaper to buy now than they use to be.

This is going to set a precedence though.
Imagine people trying to sell their MP3's
Imagine all companies devolving to physical media again.
Imagine opening a drawer, and having to find the flash drive with your favorite Waifu simulator on it
>Imagine companies reverting back to blurays for fucking Photoshop or AutoCAD

Legit question, what does this mean for licensing? I keep coming to the fact businesses--not just Valve, aren't going to take this sitting.

And again, this is all over people wanting to sell their precious video game collections for pennies.

you mean epic store is dying and fortnite is going to fold because of lootbox crap

Do we need to have this thread every single day?

Wait until the appeal has happened before you go and shit the bed.

>there were no mega man clones I promise
>there werent a pile of shit mario knockoffs i swear
Its like your rose tented goggles was never forced to sift through the endless shit when deciding what you should rent.

yes

i think fortnite is trash what are you on about
>if you arent a valvecuck you must be a epic drone!
dota, tf2, underlords are all seeing players drop
infact dota and tf2 lootboxes are the second worse lootboxes around, first being nba

>Imagine people trying to sell their MP3's
You can already idiot.
>he never sold mixtapes and collections to his friends and their parents back in the day
Thats on you.
Too bad it has nothing to do with whats being talked about which is allowing the resell of digital licenses not bits on a flash drive dipshit.

The simplest thing to do is to make all the things you buy on Steam be bought with playtime tokens.

You won't be buying games, you'll be buying tokens that you can exchange for game playtime.

But in reality all the ruling said is that Steam can't ban people that sell their accounts.

>french court

Attached: 1568216467770.jpg (600x537, 38K)

The benefit with this is of course that you can get things cheaper, the downside is that you have to keep putting coins in the slot.

tf2 is a 15 year old game, dota 2 numbers are not dropping, underlords is the same as other autochess games, there is less interest
so much for your idiotic shitposting
in reality fortnite is seeing massive player drops
infact epic is absolutely going to have to close their game in the coming few years because it's only making money off of it with lootbox sales that kids buy
minors are not going to be able to access it because it's gambling according to the dcms committee, it's going to be barred from minors playing it first in the uk and then in the eu

fn doesnt have lootboxes in the free game

>dota 2 isn't dropping
look at the steamcharts you dumb fuck
its barely reaching ti3 levels of players
>hurrr steamcharts is cherry picked
>literal official player stats
seethe

Except you can't
You can't buy an MP3 from say Apple, and then sell that right to another person.
>Mixtapes
Don't you have something better to do Gramps, like dying.
Mixtapes is technically stealing anyways, but no level-headed person gave a shit. Just like no sane person cares about selling their video game collection.

I mean, wasn't this the same board that used to give people crap about reselling their old SNES games? Oh the times have changed.....

Attached: 1266104403965.jpg (243x287, 10K)

>agrees with me
>but is a way that makes him more right
Never change Yea Forums

fortnite has no lootboxes for the battle royale
meanwhile in dota, actual casino shit with astronomically low rates to get people to gamble in the chance they get the 0.00001 percent baby roshan or whatever the fuck

Attached: rylai.jpg (1280x720, 73K)

you can tell this post is some 18 year old who has nostalgia for f2p tf2 or some garbage and can't let valve go

There really weren't, not to this degree.

Imagine Nintendo releases the first Mario game and in response, Sega, Capcom and Konami all respond by making games featuring pretty much the same things with a focus on the same things, only slightly different mechanics.

So Sega makes a mario clone with hitpoints, Konami makes a mario clone that is multiplayer and Capcom releases a mario clone that has a leveling system. That didn't happen then because the market had room for different games and you didnt all have to cater to the same markets looking for that one big thing that gave you truckloads of cash.

But I am
And that's what irks you

Attached: 1274145744292.jpg (481x319, 27K)

I'm not sure why you fags only think it will only affect valve when it will affect every single digital distribution portals including consoles, mobile, and productivity software.

That did happen.
Just because you didnt play the games didnt stop them from existing dipshit.

It just wasnt the big companies because they all had proprietary tech to make their software work how it did so the same game on two different consoles might not have even been the same simply do to hardware limitations.
There were indeed clones out the ass of all the popular franchises and youd have to be blind to now see that

valve is the only one people give a shit about on Yea Forums
that's like asking a mcdonalds employee why a new min wage will affect mcdonalds employees when itll affect everyone working min wage

please enlighten me on how I am wrong compared to you despite us saying the same thing friend

Not related to the lootbox shit but I just want to remind people that they're also selling what is essentially P2W shit
>won't allow model and textures mods because "people will use it to get an unfair advantage"
>meanwhile they sell this shit for 20$+

Attached: LMxxGdi.jpg (796x772, 60K)

>and then sell that right to another person
Thats literally what I said user.
here ill even spoonfeed you

>Too bad it has nothing to do with whats being talked about which is allowing the resell of digital licenses not bits on a flash drive

>The french courts

QUICK

RUNDOWN

Attached: BOG.jpg (495x640, 72K)

>friend
Stop saying shit you don't mean

Attached: 1271196543260.jpg (264x256, 43K)

>It just wasnt the big companies because they all had proprietary tech to make their software work how it did so the same game on two different consoles might not have even been the same simply do to hardware limitations.

Come on now, that's just not true.

Plus there is no need to make the game 100% the same, and even if it happened to a degree we can agree that the relevance of those copies is laughable compared to what is happening today.

Attached: Somari.png (256x240, 6K)

So those countless zelda clones dont exist.
Gotcha