>"you would be surprised but some games built for always online functionality do not require as much server communication as these companies claim. For example the assumed lost anthem I was able to get in-game and play s single player mode with only a few server calls that were only anti piracy checks. The return data was the same every time and only 10 bytes. If not for denovo this game would be fully playable offline"
This is going to be brought up in the future Australian court case against GAAS

Stop asking questions and just buy our new games.

>>716048372 (OP)
i'd try a singleplayer anthem. hope the courts slap bioware down

>>716048372 (OP)
OK you've convinced me to turn on this, Anthem really does need to die forever

>>716048372 (OP)
Jeet bros, our response?

Careful champ, that narrative is not allowed.

>>716048780
DO NOT REDEEM BLODDY BASTARD BENCHODE

oh no how will i be able to play the shit game that nobody apart from a venezuelan who spent his yearly salary buying wants to play?

>>716048858
>it's okay when corporations destroy your property because it just is okay?!

>>716048372 (OP)
Why do people think they are entitled to keep playing a game after the service ends?
You agreed to the terms.

>>716049298
If you make another post in this thread you agree to me raping your mom

>>716048959
they stopped making cars without seatbelts? fucking 1984

>>716048372 (OP)
Always online shit in otherwise SP games was always ALWAYS just an anti-piracy DRM. Nothing changed, other than slimy wording.

Zoomershit spermatozoa don't remember that this was literally the type of DRM Ubishit tried passing all the way back with AssCreed 2. They were more honest back then and people told them to kys and they removed it.

Fast forward a few years and the new rat spiel became "le online functions are actually le very crucial for these games" and the subhuman zoomercattle swallowed it.

>>716048858
Skin americans alive desu

>>716049606
Ok.
And why do you think you are entitled to keep playing a video game, after the service ends according to the terms (that you agreed to).
Go ahead.

>>716049818
Brb raping your mother. You agreed to the terms

>>716048372 (OP)
That's crazy, they take the game offline but keep requiring piracy checks. Like if the game is fucking offline and not being sold anymore why are they still requiring piracy checks to run the game? It is clearly intended to lock legit players out of the game they paid for.

>>716049640
>but what about this [completely irrelevant thing]????
they sure aren't sending their best

>>716049298
I've altered the deal, pray that I don't alter it any further.

>>716049916
fugg i stand no chance versus ur combined armies of retards and niggers

When you purchase a license to playing a game you sign a contract that says your license can be revoked at any time and for any reason

Don't like it? Play another game
Y'all acting like you have to play a game that was so bad it was taken offline or you'll die
Holy shit what a fucking first world problem to have

>>716049298
terms of service aren't legally binding outside of boiler plate legal stuff, it's to protect the company against liability, not give them special rights to fuck you over
you're such a fucking cuckold, I hate you

>>716050336
>what a first world problem to have
>Says the guy who's problem seems to be people wanting to own the things they buy
you literally don't even need to be upset about this, just fuck off and die if you don't care

>>716050336
Okay cleetus we understand all the words are hard to read and you enjoy getting a raw deal but civilised people would like to have rights.

>>716050336
>Y'all
Rape americans

>>716050336
they can't read, they can only consoom

>>716049298
>no you ned to pay me a milion dollars
>it says right here in this super small print that you signed while drunk
>you agreed to the terms

>>716050336
If you make another post itt you agree to me raping you

>>716050336
>Don't like it? Play another game
believe me, everybody did

>>716049896
A lot of people don't realize this. DRM is meant to pull out games from the people who piad for them. It is there so a company like Ubisoft can kill the game you bought. If a game is not on GOG DRM free, do not buy it.

>>716050097
Imagine siding with corporations and PirateSoftware, jesus.

pls help me take back my game account please

>>716050912
So why are you crying that you can't play a dead game?

>>716050336
>When you purchase a license to playing a game you sign a contract that says your license can be revoked at any time and for any reason
not in the EU
honestly this initiative is, more than anything, there to tell game developers "yes, the law applies to you too" and make them obey existing digital licensing law

>>716049883
Okay.
And why do you think you are entitled to keep playing a video game, after the service ends according to the terms (that you agreed to).
Go ahead.

>>716050360
>terms of service aren't legally binding
You'll have to provide evidence to support this claim.

>>716048372 (OP)
I guarantee this was because he didn't try to call any content.
You dumb fags think you're IT admins or something.
When you buy a live service game you should expect it's gonna go away
but NPCs don't think they just spend and squawk when something happens they didn't expect
now reply to me so I can gather your seething and coping in one place ;)

>>716051871
>When you buy a live service game you should expect it's gonna go away
Not anymore soon

>>716048372 (OP)
>claim without any source
>you see Fortnite doesn't really need any servers

i'm glad this change is happening, but i wish it were just that people collectively did not allow themselves to be ripped off, rather than needing a government to protect them. we do we put up with so much? in a better world it would be that people informed themselves on what they were agreeing to and all refused to buy games that could be stolen from them in this manner. why can't we have that? before anyone asks, i have never purchased an online only game.

>>716051959
>you can easily host a 250 player battle royale using peer to peer with the host being in India, saar
the balded freak has spoken

>>716051871
>When you buy a live service game you should expect it's gonna go away
the point is to make it so this is no longer allowed
and what's bad about that?
I'll preempt the most typical answer: I don't like it when my countrymen are fleeced by con-men, even if I do think they're stupid for getting duped

>>716051981
>protect them
...from their own stupidity

>please goberment, label sockets that it's le bad to stick your fingers in, especially when you took a bath before
>PLEASE
>we will pay extra for these labels
>otherwise you see these EVIL socket companies will KILL US ALL
>STOP KILLING US

>>716051831
>You'll have to provide evidence to support this claim.
You're doing this shit again? Hahahahaha fucking retard
Maybe you should give us a compelling reason why terms of service are legally binding or whatever your position is; you never make it clear.

Stop shitting up the video game board with your slacktivism

>>716052147
wow great post fag

>>716052217
>needs socket labels
>also needs a label to not eat a rotten sandwich
WOW
THE FUCKING FOOD INDUSTRY TRIED TO KILL MEEEEE
YOU SEE THIS SANDICH IS ROTTEN IT ALMOST KILLED MEEEEE

>>716052052
Honestly though, people have come up with amazing uses of peer to peer technologies for science or piracy. A little pressure to have an end of life plan even for multiplayer games could revolutionize video games (because they've stagnated lately.)

>>716049298
The terms will be changed, by law. They agreed to follow the law. Now it's their turn to get fucked

>>716052292
outstanding. keep it up.

>>716052294
>I do not understand that the bandwidth is simply not enough to do that
STOP LIMITING US ISPs
GIVE ME A T3 LINE NAOW
FOR FREEE!!!
EU!!!

>>716052292
i think consumer protection laws are good
when companies hurt the average person it isn't just going to kill them and remove them from the gene pool; it instead makes them poorer which puts a strain on the entire system
this is not desirable

>>716052310
>the WEF will arrest the WEF
nope

>>716051831
Raping ur mom

>>716052134
>the point is to make it so this is no longer allowed
Why shouldn't it be allowed?

>>716052165
Sure, after you provide evidence for your claim. I did ask first, so it's only fair.
Go ahead.

>>716052439
how does banning online games help protect consumers?

>>716052439
nope, they are retarded
if you are so stupid that you drink rotten milk, you deserve to die.
you don't need a label.

>>716052310
>The Law will be changed
In every country, at once? I don't think so.

>>716048858
nice nigger edit, contrarian zoomer fucking nigger falselfagger
get cancer

>>716052512
from the ebil violence and guns

this reminds me of the BS that Epic was sued for.

>yes, yes I bought that skin
>BUT IT WAS IN A COLOR THAT I DON'T LIKE!!! THAT MAKES IT DECEPTIVE!!!
>YES, I PUT MY CREDIT CARD IN THERE AND LET MY RETARDED 5 YEAR OLD KIND BUY ALL SKINS FOR 3 WEEKS, *BUT* YOU SHOULD HAVE STOPPED ME FROM DOING THAT (<-- single mother)
>GIBS ME MONIES BACK

>>716052529
but you don't die
you throw up and don't make it to work or have to go to the doctor and are made poorer by it
it simply lowers the quality of your life, as does losing access to a game you paid for
it just makes the average person's life worse to the materiel benefit of the corporation who sold them a bad product
i care a lot more about the well-being of the average person in my country than the bottom line of a corporation

i liked anthem, told my family member to petition the movement. i will sue ea

>>716052712
>you can't die from food poisoning
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3232990/

>>716052573
name one person who wants to play anthem

>>716052482
You're being a very disingenuous fag who spams every SKG thread with
>source for this?
>erm you need to provide a source for your claim.
And then when people cite EU directives you stop replying and for what I can safely assume don't even read the law. Enjoy getting ur mom raped btw.

>>716052376
Stop being poor and pay for something better than dialup.

>>716052376
I'm sorry your infrastructure is shit usaian

>>716052712
you can even die from drinking too much water.

>NOOOO
>EU
>PUT A LABEL ON WATTER BOTTLES
>MAKE IT SAY DO NOT DRINK MOAR THAN 5 LITRES
>I WILL PAY EXTRA
>THANKS DADDY

>>716051798
It is surprise mechanics not gambling so no, the law doesn't apply.

>>716052845
your picrelated, nigger zoomer kike

>>716052697

That's not what epic was sued for you retarded bootlicking faggot.

>>716052908
DSL won't help you
fiber won't help you either
you need a juge upload bandwidth, which you don't get, because ISPs don't want you to host juge multiplayer games or send out tons of copyrighted material

and if you get these specific business plans, internet gets really expensive.

>>716052838
no fucking shit you can die from food poisoning, but does the average working adult drink spoiled milk and keel over?
>>716052482
>Sure, after you provide evidence for your claim.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?from=FR&uri=CELEX%3A52019XC0927(01)
>"Member States shall provide that unfair terms used in a contract concluded with a consumer by a seller or supplier shall, as provided for under their national law, not be binding on the consumer."
— Article 6(1), Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts

>>716052862
>can't provide any evidence to support his claims
Then you lose. Concession accepted.

>>716052573
>contrarian zoomer
only zoomers are spamming this eceleb garbage

>>716053040
And these are counted as "unfair terms"?
You need to prove that as well, or this isn't legally binding in our specifici case.
Go ahead anon.

>>716052985
bloody bastard banchode, name one anthem player saar
do not redeem signatury mother bitch fuck

>>716053009
yes, they were

>muh the button was the wrong color
HOW DARE YOU
https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2023/01/fortnite-video-game-maker-settles-ftc-privacy-deception-claims-for-record-$520-million

>you have a countdown for shop reset!!! HOW DARE YOU
https://sportslitigationalert.com/epic-games-faces-lawsuit-alleging-deceptive-countdown-timers-in-fortnites-item-shop/

it's full on retardation by single mothers.

>>716053075
hello jason

>>716053040
>no, you can't
5 minutes later
>of course you can

>>716053178
case in point

>>716053158
incredbli newnigger respond

>>716048372 (OP)
out of all the loot shooters I've played, Anthem was unironically the best one.

>>716053243
ur a niggernigger

>>716053159
>da voice chat was on by default
(own team!)
>my poor child was bullied (by his own friends)
>buhuuuu gibs monies

>>716053075
lmao projecting newnigger cheeky bastard

>>716053230
sure, ross thread dweller lover. ross is loved while jason is HATED(you)

>>716053418
as believable as Michael Jackson lawsuits
>yes, you see my child got raped
>but if you give me a million, I will shut up about it wink wink

>>716050336
>Y'all
you're on the internet nigger

Genuinely can't tell if all these people against SKG are just retarded contrarians, paid Benchod shills, or a little bit of both, before this whole thing exploded even the biggest retard would've just said "yeah I guess this is a good movement we shouldn't get fucked by ubisoft/ea/whoever this hard", now every thread about this has their stench.

>>716053618
I could take it seriously, if I demanded companies like Nintendo and Snoy to keep old games available for purchase (easily done)
PLUS mention Steam at all

but he doesn't.
This shows me that he's either retarded or some weirdo with other objectives.

>>716052553
That is the basis of EU directives yes. Once the EUI says so each individual country than implements it within their legal framework.

>>716053618
you may be genuinely retarded

Sign my petition
https://eci.ec.europa.eu/045/public/#/screen/home

>>716053618
>Genuinely can't tell if all these people against SKG are just retarded contrarians, paid Benchod shills, or a little bit of both,
Worse, they're pro SKG.
They make idiotic posts to herd people like you to the cause and draw attention away from valid arguments.

>>716051005
You’re talking to a literal corporate shill.

>>716048372 (OP)
>Removes game from you're library
What now, kiddo?

>>716048817
Nice purposeful mislead. If he was banned for that post then the thread would be deleted. Guy probably just cheated and spammed elsewhere.

>>716053898
done

Honestly the only games I care about preserving are old titles which won't be effected anyway since these laws wouldn't work retroactively. I couldn't give less of a shit about upcoming GAAS sloppa.
Still signed of course, having rights is good. Just wish it actually did anything for me personally.

Pirate Software did nothing wrong
Hes right, youll get all you asked for, but nothing you wanted

>>716048372 (OP)
Some games deserve to die

>>716054037
>Still signed of course, having rights is good
>signed a petition that affects rights negatively
????

>>716054037
>pls gib rights
>I will giv money to you in return (if I don't you force me)

>>716052845
Your only argument to allow companies to kill their games is that it's fine for bad games to die?
It's only a matter of time when something you like, dies
Why are you so against people owning their purchased games?

incredible anti retard skg bullshit made up movement and jason cock sucking

>>716054204
>signed a petition that affects rights negatively
elaborate

>>716048858
Hope someone strangle you and kill your family i promised slash your throat rape your mom and stab your dad with knife in the ass then use your credit card to buy loli hentai game

>>716054037
you cannot care about unreleased games

>>716053618
>both
This, but most of them are contrarian (You)famers and other sharty niggers because paying for a full on shill team here after they lost the battle against signature collection would be a pointless waste of money.
The ones that keep arguing until archive (like the ToS faggot upthread that keeps deflecting every time he gets btfo) are the benchods that use chatgpt to to fake a facade of "i know what i'm talking about, honest!". The rest are the (You)famers are shartyniggers that just want to make 4chan a worse place.

>>716053802
The EU can't change the law of "every country" retard.

>>716054298
it died because not one person on the planet wants to play it

>let me tell you why ownership is actually bad for you

>>716054298
>I purchased the servers
no, you didn't.
>I want to play
won't happen when zero player are playing, see PS3. Online is free, tons of games still have servers up BUT THERE IS NOBOOTY

inb4
>nooooo
>EU
>force people to play all the games I want to play

>>716054570
>let me tell you how I purchased the whole server infrastructure and source code and server code by only paying $20

I buy a game, I get to play it for the rest of my life, simple 'as. Give me a legal option or I'll do it illegally.

Don't like it? Get fucked faggot.

>>716054570
ownership of what? Ubislop's The Crew and Anthem?

>>716054683
Sounds like a great deal to me.

>>716054559
It can within the EU. That's what that guy is talking about. Every EU nation needs to implement whatever EU puts on the table.

>>716054687
>I'll do it anyway
okay, so the petition is useless.

>>716048372 (OP)
I want Denovo to suffer

>>716054756
>fucking take these migrants (illegal invaders) NAOW
>yeah, they rape children, SO WHAT
(you)
>wow, they will help me with my bing bing wahoo

>>716054770
If Ubisoft/EA/whoever doesn't want my money that is fine. I'm sure codex wouldn't mind me seeding a bit.

>>716048372 (OP)
Anthem's gameplay was pretty fun, so it really sucks it's going to die without reason

>>716054037
>Just wish it actually did anything for me personally.
But it will. Both for future games and because there's a reasonable chance it could end up being retroactive, to one degree or another. A good chunk of what SKG wants to accomplish is already law, it's just not enforced because it's a legal grey zone that hasn't been tested yet.

>>716054401
The poo didn't say whose rights get affected negatively.
Spoiler: It's not the consumers.

>>716054770
>okay, so the petition is useless.
Clearly not, as corpo shills are in full panic mode

>>716049298
Not enough, you need to destroy your games.

They don't want you to own anything. They're shitting their pants on how fast SKG is now gaining support. They're trying to turn this into another gamergate and I'm afraid it's actually working.
Game journalists are making Asmongold and Pewdiepie the face of the SKG movement.
>Many developers are now urging #StopKillingGames organizers to take a firmer stance against hate groups and clarify the movement’s values. “Preservation without protection is meaningless,” said Aviv Salinas, co-creator of Blood Nova. “We need to preserve games and the people who make them.”
>As the campaign approaches legislative milestones, its ability to remain inclusive and principled will determine whether it becomes a force for good or another flashpoint in gaming’s long-running culture wars.
That article is a load of fucking sjw sludge.
They're really playing dirty now, how the fuck do we stop them?

>>716054826
Unironically yes, they will in this particular case

>NOOO I NEED TO BE ALLOWED TO PLAY MY VIDEO GAME FOREVER BECAUSE I PAD FOR IT
>WAAAH WAAAH WAAHH
Some things are ephemeral for a reason. Like a beautiful sunset after a rain.
Learn how to let go and stop being so obsessed with consumer culture.

What the FUCK is wrong with him??

>>716050336
30 year old franchise, suddenly I need permission to play. I know you are farming flame but someone might actually believe you.

>SKG = Renewable energy, Vaccines, gay rights and Communism
>Anti-SKG = Fossil fuels, Real men, freedom and independance, Capitalism
I know which side I'm choosing

>>716054683
>let me tell you how I purchased the whole server infrastructure and source code and server code by only paying $20
>NOOO A MULTIBILLION WILL BE INCONVENIENCED STOP STOP STOP RIGHT NOW!!!

>>716054770
If the petition is useless, you should have objections to letting it run it's course while you get to laugh at the sideline.

>>716055163
It's a good I paid money for in exchange. I own it now.

just
dont
buy
the
game
if
you
dont
like
their
practices

no need to legislate a luxury good you fucking morons
Just learn some fucking self-control and vote with your fucking wallet.

>>716055163
>Learn how to let go and stop being so obsessed with consumer culture.
Sure, will do it after the companies learn to let go and refund me after they kill my game.

>>716054770
If the petition is useless, you should have no objections to letting it run it's course while you get to laugh at the sideline.

>>716055291
This

SKG fans claim to fight for justice, but there’s no justice in demanding indie devs work for free, release IP, and maintain servers forever. That’s not preservation, it’s exploitation wrapped in gamer entitlement.

Modern 4chan really is just sewer trash. You'd defend Nestle buying up all your country's water if it meant you got to be le ebin contrarian.

>>716055163
If you want to make ephemeral videogame, that's fine. But kindly label it so. Trashing things just because they're old is peak consumerist behaviour.

>>716055098
Fuck off demoralization shill, they're running scared and the EU has a hard on specifically for fucking corpos exactly like this. It's a slam dunk and you paid faggots going into overdrive with this
>OH NO BROS WHADDA WE DO NOW!!!!!
Is just the icing on the cake. Tick Tock bitch

>>716055365
cope

>>716055340
Yes. Seems like that's exactly what he's doing

>>716055291
I can play Gran turismo 1,2,3,4,5,6 without internet. I need uninterrupted internet connection to play Gran turismo 7 a single player racing game. This shit is cancer and it will not go away because corpos are fucking retarded.

>>716055163
Some things aren't about padding your returns. Sometimes you just need to make something for the passion of it.

Learn how to let go and stop being obsessed with Mr Shekelstein's bottomline.

>>716055365
It's literally paid shills

>>716055365
My country has too much water for Nestle to buy.

>>716055431
With what? Winning? I just wish your lot realized already that you're too late to intervene.

>>716055406
>But kindly label it so
That's what the agreement says. It's asking if you agree to your game being a revokable license.
If you don't agree, you don't get to play.
Simple as.

>>716055171
It's incredibly funny seeing the left, who calls themselves anticapitalist and anti establishment fall for every single one of their tricks time and time again.
We can already see the context shift happen in real time, it's so fucking sad.

>>716055291
>Just learn some fucking self-control
I have self control.
It's the retarded normalfags that are the problem, funding greedy corpos and ruining the industry.

>and vote with your fucking wallet
Why shouldn't I vote with my... vote as well?

>>716054015
Indeed. It's always because other reasons. Kinda the same with Ross and skg, he is just another gamergator nazi who doesnt play games, right?

>>716055519
>Why shouldn't I vote with my... vote as well?
What are you voting on?

you guys dont play your favorite dead games in your sleep in ur dreams?

>>716055364
>indie devs work for free
They get paid from the sales.
>release IP, and maintain servers foreve
none of them are required

>>716055420
It's a literal spambot. Those 3 posts get nuked when reported as such.

>>716055229
>fossil fuels over renewables
This is the biggest psyops and moneygrab left made with exactly zero pushback or repercussions.

Fucking hell the amount of contrarianism is off the fucking charts, its a video game board and people actively try to not be able to play video games... I know its ragebaiting but its so fucking retarded its almost funny, its like people on /tv/ would argue that its actually good that Netflix can disable your tv.

>>716055364
What is it like to be an unappreciated Ubisoft intern desperately defending your broken dreams?

>>716055463
Exactly. And often those games become hits like Star Dew Valley, Tetris, A Short Hike, Undertale, etc. Zun went back to self-publishing his Touhou games because he hated working for Bandai and their corporate environment.

>>716053065
https://legalclarity.org/can-a-contract-supersede-federal-or-state-law/
Why would a company's arbitrary contract allow you or them to break laws governed by the country you're residing in?

>>716055434
Funny, could've sworn it looked like he was here fighting tooth and nail against it. You know, instead of watching from the sideline with a tub of popcorn.

>>716055578
>What are you voting on?
The petition? To get it seen by the EU lawmaker cunts?

>>716055646
I don't think anyone is arguing that it's "good".
People are just saying that if you don't like it, why are you agreeing to it?

Whoever it is that keeps reposting stuff, I want him to die immediately.

>>716055646
it reeks of astroturfing

>>716054560
It died because EA is a greedy fucking corporation
They kill games the moment they stop being profitable, not because of lack of players
I played battleforge in 2009, I bought the game, multiple times in fact for the in-game currency to buy packs
The game was turned F2P and microtransactions multiplied, it still wasn't profitable enough, so they shut down the servers.

Same happened with Dawngate. I was playing the game and they shut down the servers with the servers buzzing with players, people loved the game, but it didn't bring enough money, it was F2P from the start and only things you could buy were skins for the characters. I bought a skin for my main, Voluc, and like a couple weeks later, I couldn't play no more. But they did refund all purchases made.

Games don't die because there's no people playing, they die because they're not profitable and there's a cost to keeping the servers up. Still no reason to brick an offline possibility.
>>716054614
I purchased a game, and I expect to be able to play that game for as long as I want.
If you pay for something and it's taken away from you, that's quite literally a fucking scam. If you bought a car and month later they tow it away and tell you how the "deal was altered", you would go to fucking court with that bullshit, how are video games magically different? There's a clear difference when you're renting something and buying something, and if buying isn't owning, then it's a scam.

Servers are not needed to play a game, a PLAYABLE STATE is all that is required. A single-player game shouldn't need an online connection, if you didn't read OP, Anthem would be playable single-player offline without the anti-piracy checks. Funny how they battle against piracy, but someone who owns a copy of the game can't play it either.
>force people to play all the games I want to play
Nobody has said this and this doesn't maky any sense. Let people play the games they own and paid for you fucking retard, that is all.

>>716055490
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/unfair-treatment/unfair-contract-terms/indexamp_en.htm
Clauses 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 17. If you dont like it you can always just not sell here you know

>>716055696
Okay. But are these contracts we are talking about ITT illegal? Or are they asking you to break the law? I don't think there is any evidence to suggest they are.

>>716055697
You're just seeing what you want to see. I don't see anything of the sort ITT.

>>716055291
Name one time voting with your wallet worked

>>716055698
>He thinks signing a petition is "voting"
LOL, it's not.
You're just signing a petition. No votes were cast.

>>716050336
>intentionally word everything so its as confusing as possible on top of it being several pages long
Here's something easy to understand for you and isn't several pages long

IF BUYING ISN'T OWNING
THEN PIRACY AIN'T STEALING

>>716055893
Everytime, just not in the good way 99% of it

>>716054683
Be honest. Do you actually even care?

>>716055930
Interesting. And yet there's so much propaganda against it, almost as if someone was worried.

>>716050336
>When you purchase a license to playing a game you sign a contract that says your license can be revoked at any time and for any reason
Ok? That's an extremely Jewish thing that devs have no reasonable justification to implement and thus should be abolished. Thanks for giving me more reason to support SKG.

>>716055593
no I run my own personalized isekai

>>716055930
>LOL, it's not.
It's way more similar to voting than "voting" with your wallet.

>>716055843
Did you reply to the wrong person?

>>716055858
that's the literal and entire point of the petition

>>716055843
I am European, at this point i really just want some of those corporations to fuck off out of Europe. They keep themselves alive by tricking people who are new to gaming and don't know anything. This can't continue. We need this corporate cancer out. They make slotmachine videogames and aim them at children. They groom a new generation of gamers that are like gambling addicts.

>>716050336
>you sign a contract that says your license can be revoked at any time and for any reason
And it's okay for such a contract to exist?
Ohhh, but you accepted the terms and conditions to let us have 90% of all of your worldly possessions, your firstborn child, your left kidney and half of any future income you might garner, should've read the fine print!!!!!

Yeah, fuck you corpo bootlicker

>>716055364
SKG fans claim to fight for justice, but then they swatted Thor twice

>>716055965
>>716056004
It's not a vote.
Why do you think it is?

>>716056097
is there a scrap of proof of this

>>716055858
>Okay. But are these contracts we are talking about ITT illegal? Or are they asking you to break the law? I don't think there is any evidence to suggest they are.
The problem is that it's not well defined. There are several EU articles that could be argued that this violates the law and more clear regulations should be provided to prevent this behavior: https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000007_en#

The bottom line and point of this initiative, as stated by Ross, is to "get answers" regarding what you have access to and if you should continue to have access to it.

>>716056054
Then it should be easy to prove that the contracts are illegal.
Go ahead, I'll happily wait to see this.

>>716050336
Please go destroy your old games, consoles and PCs please.

>>716050336
Don't like the new law? Seethe and comply

>>716054683
It was called the 90s and 2000s, shoulda been alive then

>>716048372 (OP)
anthem bout to change the law

based

>>716055291
>vote with your wallet
If microsoft started doing nothing but AAA games with 200 million budget it would take them 20 000 games to go bankrupt assuming there is not a single person that purchases these games and that the government dont bail them out. They have 40 studios, asuming EU slop shat out at maximum possible rate, it will take around 1000 years of continuous wallet voting to get them out of business
>b-but they will become more consumer friendly way earlier than that!!!
This spring ubisoft was on the edge of collapse. It never became more consumer friendly for some reason, neither before nor after

>>716054826
well yes that's how the EU works.

its just trolling and shitposting at this point

and a bunch of terminally online teens who care about some shitty eceleb drama more than the legal issue at hand

>>716048692
it's already single player. the online stuff is annoying

Why do shills pretend that companies will be forced to run servers forever. Just make the game peer to peer before you abandon it. Or are they just retarded.

>>716052147
>>716052292
Yes retard, many products have safety labels for that reason and they weren't written because corporations care about the consumer, they were forced to do it by law otherwise they would probably advertise how tobacco and alcohol are good for your health.

>>716048372 (OP)
That's very disappointing.

>>716056173
>petition is specifically to get the EU to address these types of "contracts" and their legality, and, ideally, clarify that they can no longer allow publishers to remove access to games you paid for on a whim
>"well it should be easy to prove the contracts are illegal"
are you an idiot

>>716048858
anthem is a part of history and many people in the future will want to play it to see why bioware died

>>716056296
>Just make the game peer to peer before you abandon it.
What if I don't want to do that with my game?

>>716056173
See >>716055843

I like this in concept, but what games (that released in the past 5 - 10 years) would this have saved?

>The Crew
>Anthem
What else?

>>716056296
If you haven't noticed over the past decade, handing a retard a microphone to shout enraging lies works insanely well to motivate stupid people into your grift.

>>716055474
Remain ever vigilant for deceit and treachery.

>>716056285
But American libertarians are dumb and inconsistent in real life.

>>716055171
>look up dev
>cashgrab indie pixelshit
Every single time

Reminder that we won and corporate cucks are eternally btfo. Shills are seething because there's nothing they can do about this initiative anymore. Swaying public opinion is entirely futile now.

>>716054683
You can do this with a lot of game on GOG even in 2025.
>you get a DRM free offline installer
>you go to the community GOG forum and there is the server software
>most old games you can also play trough Hamachi
>or hotseat
>or splitscreen
Maan i still remember me and the boys playing HoM&M3 hotseat in our college dorm 25 years ago.

>>716056374
then release your server architecture code so people who paid you can host their own servers

>>716056347
So they are not illegal? Thanks for confirming.

>>716056374
Then don’t release it in EU or be prepared todo it after a threat of generational dewealthing

>>716056389
Nevermind, I see they have a list.

https://stopkillinggames.wiki.gg/wiki/Dead_game_list

>>716056389
Wildstar

>>716056309
There was in fact a huge wave of marketing advertising tobacco as good for you.

I am getting very sick of seeing these fucking e-celebs on the board 24/7. Can't wait for this shit to finally end.

>>716052292
Imagine you're buying baby food. It looks like mashed apples and some vegetables so seems fine to you. Two weeks later, your child has a horrific reaction and has to be hospitalized due pesticides and filler agents not disclosed on the label.
By your logic, you should have done ample research with expensive machines and specialized knowledge. The company isn't at fault.
Current state of China btw

>>716056435
What if I don't want to do that either?

>>716056309
>probably
they used to

>>716056389
No one gives a shit about those games, this is about making the big devs stop with the live service, online only single player games.

>>716056374
Then don't make your game. There are a lot of things you can't legally do even if you heckin want to.

>>716055365
Corpos are the new houses of the techno feudalistic era. Shills are just one of the many classes of landless serfs that run under their banners.

>>716056605
It's not illegal, why do you think it is?

>>716056532
then die

>>716056643
If it becomes law you have to sell a product as a product instead of a service masquerading as a product, it will.

>>716056095
>wife dies from food allergy on disney resort because chefs fucked up
>actually you can't sue us because you signed the EULA for a disney+ subscription
Yeah this is the dystopian shit companies are trying to pull on you and why we need to start a pushback

>>716056643
You've made it back to the start. Welcome to the point of the petition. Please sign here: https://eci.ec.europa.eu/045/public/#/screen/home

>>716056705
Okay. But why would anyone want this to pass?
I don't see the issue with these contracts, as long as it's disclosed at purchase/boot (which it is).
You guys just hate reading or something?

>>716056389
Not quite the same as "unplayable" but
>Demon's Souls online is completely dead
>Dark Souls online is completely dead without using a third-party client on PC
Which is pretty fucked when the online components are a core experience of the games.

>>716056643
In the configuration you want to make it it is(or rather will be) illegal. See how in most countries if you are considered an adult you can legally drink and you can legally drive, but you can’t legally drink and drive

>>716056784
because we don't want games we like with online functionality to be shut down the second the publisher considers it to be not profitable enough

>>716056801
>>Demon's Souls online is completely dead
I feel like this initiative shouldn't bother with console games.

>last thread failed
>Spam another one
Yikes

>>716056784
These contracts are unfair to the consumer and should be ignored under EU law: >>716055843
Until now it was not enforced, it is high time to start doing so

>>716056491
Remember this? People brought it up in a previous thread. Remember when a cigar company marketed their new filter as the best and apparently this filter was a type of ASBESTOS?????

>>716051005
I don't side with corporations or PirateSoftware. I side with people having the right to maintain control and autistic integrity of their creations. Gamers are always yammering about games are art yet the second these artists do something they dislike they throw a shitfit over it. If someone wants to destroy their art piece that's their right. You payed to view the exhibit not to own it.

>>716056857
>>>716056784 (You)
>because we don't want games we like with online functionality to be shut down
Too bad.
If you don't want that, don't click 'I AGREE TO THE TERMS AND SERVICES".
Is this whole petition just retards and ESL's who are too scared to spend 5 minutes reading something before they sign it?

>>716056784
>why would anyone want to keep the product he paid for?
You're still retarded, even if you think you're just pretending.

>>716056784
Because they aren't actually obeying service or product regulations in most cases and are horribly anti-consumer.

>>716056978
More asbestos! More asbestos!

>>716056978

>>716056951
Which parts of this are relevant to the discussion? Please copy paste them, my internet is terrible.
Thanks!

Have you guys noticed you can't do anything anymore without some faggot coming in with his demoralization and calling you either a

>jew
>third worlder
>spic
>tranny

>>716056992
Oh, are we at the point where you start pretending you've ever bothered to read a EULA?

>>716056991
>games are art
They aren't, they're entertainment products and should be regulated as such.
In the same way that "gacha" titles are legalized gambling.

>>716056992
No, it's people who want to change something they don't like instead of just sitting there like a bump on a log passively accepting every bad thing that happens.

>>716056410
"you dont own your games" are not lolbertarians
and everyone here just argues cause bored

Cmon guys, sign the contract! You accept the terms and condition, right?

This is also a simplified version, normally it would be buried under 30 pages of jargon.

>>716048372 (OP)
Yeah but who gives a shit about Anthem, really? SKG is only there to save like 3 shitty games nobody wants. It's a pointless movement.

>>716057106
>movies are entertainment
>books are entertainment
>still art is entertainment
>3d art is entertainment
>any combinations of those is NOT art tho

>>716053126
Pretty sure that "We can destroy what you bought at any time" will be considered unfair terms if presented to any judge.

>>716056801
technically DeS multiplayer works on rcps3

>>716057186
see >>716056474

>>716057109
So why do you think literally every game should be forced to do this?
I think if someone wants their game to end, without you being able to play it again, and you both agree to it, there's no issue.

>>716056978
Yep. There are people who legitimately want to legalize scamming and grifting just like this. That's every "wowww you guys want GOVERNMENT to get involved??" retard ever. They love their pump and dunp crypto rugpulls, indian scam call centers stealing your grandma's savings and monopolies. Because they either want to scam and grift themselves or are getting paid by people who already are.

>>716056784
You're the sort of retard that thinks it's ok for any company to alter the TOS at any given time.

>>716057208
a book publisher can't walk into your house, punch you in the face, and take your copy of 1984

>>716057227
Correction;
>We can revoke your access to the service you paid for whenever we like...As long as you agree to this.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me, why don't you think it is?

>>716057261
I actually didn't give about this until I saw Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp was saved and turned from a 7/10 game into a 10/10 one. It wasn't because of SKG, but if SKG can do the same for other games, that's a bonus for me.

>>716057297
The original ToS said they can change it to anything at any time and you agreed :DD

>>716057331
Correct so why should publishers have that right?

>>716057297
I never said that. Please try and stay on topic.

>>716057336
Except I am not paying for a service, I am paying for a functioning game. You can split hairs and add as many smarmy connections as you like, but the supply of software is supply of goods and not services.

>>716057265
Because that isn't how selling a product in a marketplace works. That's a service. And services have defined periods of operation for what you pay for, not nebulous ones.

>>716057336
Because nobody consciously agrees to it, you dishonest vipers.
Games are bought with the expectation that you'll be able to play them. The mere idea of "shutting down a central server" is very new in the grand scheme.

>>716057265
because games are art, and game preservation is important, and game preservation necessarily means the game must be playable

>>716048372 (OP)
Who in the fuck wants to play Anthem in 2025?

>we MUST make sure that if Concord happened again it would not be allowed to be killed in a week again because... WE JUST DO OK

>>716057425
>Except I am not paying for a service
You are. Read the terms and conditions.

>>716057451
It's how selling games as a service works, correct.

>>716057393
they don't, but video game publishers seem to think they do

>>716057063
>get-out clause in favour of the trader
>one-sided compensation for cancellation
>one-sided cancellation
>cancellation at short notice
>hidden terms
>one-sided changes to contract
>one-sided changes to product or service
>not honouring statements made by the trader’s staff
>one-sided compliance with obligations
>limited rights to legal action
Any of this makes a contract unfair and renders it void in eu. For definitions and examples load a page and read through it like a good corpo cuck you are.

>>716057358
And in your mind that is ok, and as a consumer you'll gladly take it up the ass, even when the people doing this have a majority position in the market and can manipulate legislation and prices in their favor.

>>716057553
Your terms and conditions are irrelevant. The sale of software on the territory of European Union is a sale of goods. More over, your services and conditions are absolutely illegal and only exist to obfuscate the real rights of European consumers. You will be made to heel.

>>716057482
>Games are art
Okay. So what about Vlambeer's game, Glitchhiker, that was made to expire?
It's not art unless it dies. Why are you forcing them to ruin their art?

>>716056784
Why do you not want to get rid of always online crap?

>>716057516
>it's okay when people I don't like get scammed
I'd love to send your grandparents numbers to india

>>716055948
Name that 1%

>>716055843
>Potentially
>may be judged
you will have to prove it in court, good luck
>case instantly dismissed for small claims and being out of jurisdiction

>>716057574
>Any of this makes a contract unfair and renders it void in eu.
Yeah? Where does it say that?

>>716057553
I know you're just be a deliberately obtuse contrarian, but the literal point of the petition is to get companies to stop selling games solely as a service, and to disallow using the terms and conditions to remove access to a purchased product.

>>716057557
We're on the same side then. I am for SKG

>>716057674
EU courts have repeatedly found EULAs to be unenforceable

>>716057693
At the top of the page provided

>>716057619
>More over, your services and conditions are absolutely illegal
Have any evidence to support this claim? Didn't think so.

>>716057674
>instantly dismissed
The class action lawsuit over removal of The Crew has been ongoing for over a year now.

>>716057553
No. You pay for a service of a defined length of time. You know exactly how long and what you will get for your service. That's why MMOs with subs, Netflix, etc are just fine and won't be impacted. You pay for an amount of time and you get that amount of time. If you don't, and aren't fairly recompensated, you have grounds for a lawsuit. If you want your artsy fartsy game to be a service, you let players know how long the service is lasting upfront. "I can shut it down whenever I want" doesn't fly.

>SKGers got piratesoftware's game heartbound wikipedia page removed
When will this targeted harassment end?

>>716057802
Please quote the exact text, copy and paste it into your next reply.
Thanks!

>>716057719
And I'm asking why it's an issue, if both parties agree. And you can't give me a single reason why it would be an issue, despite insisting that it is one.

>>716048372 (OP)
>eceleb cancer movement
LEMAOOOOOOOO troglodytes actually fell for this shit

>>716057815
>Under EU law, standard contract terms used by traders have to be fair. This doesn't change if they're called "terms and conditions" or are part of a detailed contract that you actually have to sign. The contract is not allowed to create an imbalance between your rights and obligations as a consumer and the rights and obligations of sellers and suppliers.

>>716048858
>Free pass because I don't like this particular game.
>*game faggot enjoys ends service*
>W-where do I sign p-please

>>716057941
Go work on your game, "Thor".

>>716057261
>including f2p games when the movement cannot save them
>online components of single player games
That's such a disingenuous way to inflate your list

>>716057815
That contract is unfair, therefore illegal. Next you're going to ask me what makes that contract unfair and I'll point at granting the supplier of goods the unilateral right to destroy the goods you purchase at any given moment and you'll say that "You agreed to the contract" and I will say that the contract is unfair, therefore illegal and next you're going to ask me what makes that contract unfair.

>>716057950
This has not defined what an "unfair" contract is, like you previously said.
Want to try again?

>>716057516
there is kind of a preservation argument in it but it's mostly about consumer protection
as for concord I think they recalled all the physical copies and issued refunds which is a bit of a different situation

>>716057815
See >>716055843

>>716058038
see >>716057574

>>716058020
>That contract is unfair, therefore illegal.
Define "unfair" in legal terms.

>>716058076
>>716058082
Those do not say define "unfair" anywhere. Post the literal definition. Quote it.

>>716057915
>Under EU law, standard contract terms used by traders have to be fair.

>>716057915
>And I'm asking why it's an issue, if both parties agree. And you can't give me a single reason why it would be an issue, despite insisting that it is one.

You know, people used to sell the "rights" to the Brooklyn Bridge, and a contract was signed, should it be valid?, since both parties signed it?

>>716057992
>heh you are a fanboy of the other cancerous eceleb, I'm so smart unlike you!
you are a total retard, don't bother replying im out of here.

>>716058149
Not my problem you can’t read, definitions of unfair contracts are provided. ignorantia juris non excusat.

>>716058213
>dodges the question
Cute.
I'll answer you when you answer me.

>>716058038
Take a class in law dumbass. Unfair contracts = contradict a country's law and aren't enforceable.

>Point gun
>Gimme 1 mil or I shoot you
>My contract was totally legit and he signed it.

The real world doesn't work like an Ayn Rand wet dream, thank heavens.

>>716056991
You are a moron. If you understood that games were art you wouldn't take this peasant brained position. Games are art BECAUSE we should have full control over our own experience with them, the same way we do with literally any other art.

The guy who said they aren't sending their best really had a point, Jesus.

>>716058149
>EU rules contain a list of specific terms that may be judged unfair. If specific terms in a contract are unfair, they are not binding on you and the trader may not rely on them.
>Here are some situations where contract terms may be judged unfair under EU rules:
>[the list posted]

>>716058250
Have fun in the corpo boot licking mines

>>716058020
But it's not unfair because a good isn't being destroyed, but rather, a service is being terminated. It's not illegal for service providers to cease service.

>>716055782
>"I'm going to play Anthem someday!!"
This is why no one takes you SKGroids seriously. Even if it does have offline mode eventually, you jellybeans are just going to wait until a crack is available.
Even Ross never played the Crew 2, the pretext for all this in the first place, why should any of us care what you idiots think?
I don't even think you guys even play videogames, just coasting off the coattails of a movement, no matter how superfluous it is.
Go back to KiwiFarms, at least they're sanctimonious enough to believe your bullshit.

>>716058149
>“to promote the interests of consumers and to ensure a high level of consumer protection…to protecting the health, safety and economic interests of consumers
>“Consumer protection requirements shall be taken into account in defining and implementing other Union policies and activities.”
>“The Commission, in its proposals envisaged in paragraph 1 concerning health, safety, environmental protection and consumer protection, will take as a base a high level of protection… Within their respective powers, the European Parliament and the Council will also seek to achieve this objective”
Defining "fairness" is akin to defining "reasonable" but since you asked:
Fair

fair adj
1 : characterized by honesty and justice
: free from self-interest, deception, injustice, or favoritism [a and impartial tribunal]
2 : reasonable as a basis for exchange [a wage] [a valuation]
3 : consistent with merit or importance [ and just compensation for the injuries]
4 : conforming with established laws or standards
: being in accordance with a person's rights under the law [ judicial process]
fair·ly adv

>>716058279
You don't have any brains or understanding about basic law and should be ashamed of your genes.

>>716058262
>>716058283
>Refuses to prove his own claims true
>Again
Then you lose.

>>716058287
>may be unfair
That doesn't mean it's always unfair, like you previously stated. Lrn 2 Read.

>>716058329
>one-sided changes to product or service

>>716058369
Not a legal definition. Not what I asked for.

>>716058381
Why are you so upset?

>>716058413
>ignorantia juris non excusat

>>716058353
>Even Ross never played the Crew 2, the pretext for all this in the first place, why should any of us care what you idiots think?

>heh you voted with your wallet and didn't play game doing thing that you aren't supporting?
>guess you don't even care about it lol

>>716057821
>potential class action lawsuit

you cant even stop clearly illegal shit like Adobe
charging money for CANCELLING subscription
you have to sue and wait years

>>716058149
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1993/13/oj

>Article 2
>‘unfair terms’ means the contractual terms defined in Article 3

>Article 3
>A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
>A term shall always be regarded as not individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term, particularly in the context of a pre-formulated standard contract.
>The fact that certain aspects of a term or one specific term have been individually negotiated shall not exclude the application of this Article to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of the contract indicates that it is nevertheless a pre-formulated standard contract.
>Where any seller or supplier claims that a standard term has been individually negotiated, the burden of proof in this respect shall be incumbent on him.
>The Annex shall contain an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.

>>716057181

>>716058353
> you jellybeans are just going to wait until a crack is available.
Ok when's the crack for the crew coming out?
Ross had a list of other games he did play that did die out. The Crew was chosen because of the timing and had legal grounds to stand on because it was happening in real time; not because of his passion.
If you really think any legislator cares about how much you played a game you're advocating to keep alive, you're retarded.

>>716058413
Unwillingness to explain how gravity works to a retard doesn't make the theory untrue.

This is fucking riveting. The absolutely desperate pilpul. They really are shaking.

>>716058329
Good, then print "SERVICE, WE CAN REMOVE AT ANY GIVEN TIME" in the front of the game.

I'll agree with that when they do this, and not shove it in ambiguous terms and in minute letters somewhere inside the EULA.

>>716058479
Define "legal definition"

>>716058250
>wait, is that eceleb going against corpos? Wtf I love corporate cock now! Please fuck my wallet harder daddy corpo! Deny me any of my consumer rights, get owned eceleb!

>>716058549
Okay. So that proves that my example is not an "unfair" contract.
Thanks for doing the legwork for me

>>716058598
Being unable to prove your own claims to be true means you lose the argument.

>>716058537
Yes, which is why people are legislating against this bullshit. Not to be dragged through the wringer every time this happens. Decades have been spent trying to play nice with corpos, but they refused to listen. So now the government has to be asked to slap them down.

>>716058649
They cant do that in EU kek

>>716058610
At this point, any big idea that I have, I post here to see what kind of reaction it garners.
Typically, if there's a bunch of bad faith shills and malicious misinformation, that means it's a good idea.

>>716058692
Prove that you provided a "fair" contract

>>716058649
Saying it plainly doesn't actually make the practice suddenly consumer friendly bro. That is still not following service regulations.

>>716057181
>tears the bottom off and signs before you can stop me
hehe i'll be taking my gorillion dollars now thank you

>>716058005
F2P games are certainly included under the umbrella, since people do spend money on them.

Singleplayer games with online components are basically the root of the entire issue. Carving out an exception for games with a seemingly innocuous online component leaves a very large loophole for less scrupulous companies to leave a tiny fragment of the game playable offline, while disabling the large majority of the game when official support ends.

>>716058697
You're correct, anon, but don't use the forbidden G word around libertarian morons, all they can see is their lolicon porn being taken away from them in that future instead of the real progress it would result in.

>>716057228
It also works on PS3 by simply setting a custom DNS setting. You literally just change one setting on your ps3 and multiplayer works, it’s a perfect solution.

>>716058692
It absolutely is unfair, since it creates conditions detrimental to me as a customer and is also not in a position of parity, since I stand to lose everything defined in this contract, while you lose nothing. It revokes my functional good from me whenever you so desire and offers me no recourse, nor ability to retain its functionality. As a pre-negotiated contract and in defiance of good faith, it is by the very defined definition illegal.

All you've been doing so far is going "nuh-uh" in response to the law being cited back at you. This won't work in the court of law or in the European Parliament, you should tell your masters that next time they speak with you. If they even deign to do so. You are not doing it for free, are you? That'd be stupid. You are not stupid, right?

>>716053126
>Service can end whenever the publisher says fuck you, every service has a proper end date
>Service can be revoked for the vaguest of reasons, even reasons not within the hand of the service provider
>Service has no refund option, wich is required whenever the terms of service are to change
If publishers want to sell games as services they should follow service laws

>>716048858
>DA TROOONS
Obsessed freak

>>716057621
I just looked up the game, nothing in the sales blurb says it's going to expire. Heck, it's still for sale. When does it hit EoL?

Just because some corpo writes a contract that says they get to break the law and violate your rights doesn't mean it's legally binding. I can doo it too, see?

Upon reading this post, I am allowed to break into your house and destroy whatever I want. You agree to these terms by signing your name here: _________________________
Go ahead Anon, do it.

>>716058665
first of all, what do you mean by "define"

>>716058535
>"HEY, WE'RE DOING THIS FOR YOUR OWN GOOD"
We never wanted you SKGroids intervening on our behalf.

>>716058582
The Crew 2 is getting an offline mode after OTHER groups demanded it.
SKGroids circumventing the chain of protest running straight to daddy-government is the ultimate "Karen" tactic.
Did Ross ever go to Ubishit to request an offline mode? Of course, because he never cared for The Crew 2, a game he never played.

I legitimately know he only used the Crew 2 because that's the only relevant live-service title he knows that isn't a shitty phone game.
We both know you clowns fluffed that pretentious list with non-games.

>>716058692
Holy shit. If this is any indication of what Ubisoft's legal team looks like, this is as good as passed.

>>716058610
Its funny because there is nothing shills can do now, its got the signatures already. Getting kicked in the crib and stalling for almost an year until Ross finally addressed pirate's faggotry causing it to explode ended up being a master move
Corpo shills first thought it wasnt getting anywhere and then they had no time to punch back even after a lobby group rushed the fuck up to try arguing about it, with their response even having a typo on the title lmao

>>716058789
it's not paper, it's digital
have you ever tried to inspect element a legal document, change the values and print it out? That's very illegal

>>716058886
I'm a libertarian and i agree with this initiative, consumers are just an interest group as corporations.
My rights end where others begin etc etc

GAMERS

>>716059035
They are not sending their best...

This reminds me of that lawyer of Amber Heard that would just respond with "Objection, hearsay" to whatever was being said, even the things his defendant had stated prior.

>>716048372 (OP)
>For example the assumed lost anthem I was able to get in-game and play s single player mode with only a few server calls that were only anti piracy checks.
This is corporate genocide, how isn't this man locked up yet?

>>716059020
>Of course
*of course not, but what games did Ross actually play that is shutdown live-service slop?
>It was uhhh, MAG!

>>716058975
Define the letter "d"

>>716058665
Fair in legal terms means I as a corpo get full control over you and the product you purcha- I MEAN licensed haha

>>716059020
>The Crew 2 is getting an offline mode after OTHER groups demanded it.
Cool good news for al then.
>SKGroids circumventing the chain of protest running straight to daddy-government is the ultimate "Karen" tactic.
Actual buzzwords while stating that a governing body is incapable of governing corporations but asking nicely will
>Did Ross ever go to Ubishit to request an offline mode? Of course, because he never cared for The Crew 2, a game he never played.
He did and reported that it was in the works. He wasn't sure if it was something he had influenced but was happy it was happening anyway. Again, The Crew was chosen as an example as a game he attempted to play but found was shutting down in real time. It became an easy target with publisher's caught red handed. He has plenty of other games he did play and watched die. He has a whole series on it.

>I legitimately know he only used the Crew 2 because that's the only relevant live-service title he knows that isn't a shitty phone game.
>We both know you clowns fluffed that pretentious list with non-games.
Yea Diablo and HellDivers are shitty phone games. Fuck you moron

>>716058918
>If publishers want to sell games as services they should follow service laws
How about no, commie.

>>716059020
see
>>716058537
>>716058697
people are tired of each little injustice requiring years and years of individual legal action to rectify.

>"NOOOO WE CAN'T SUPPORT GAMES FOREVER THIS IS ANUDDA SHOAH!"
>People actually asking for them to patch their shit so they don't need their "support".

fuckin seppos

>>716055229
>butplug software
>real men

>>716059303
Dev time and platform validation are free amirite?

>>716059191
Yea reminds me of

>>716056991
>If someone wants to destroy their art piece that's their right.
No it isn't. If you buy a painting the artist can't just show up to your house and set it on fire whenever they feel like

>>716055229
>>Anti-SKG = Ferret fuels

>>716059371
You already got paid lots, you can afford to patch your shit.

>>716048372 (OP)
I forgot Anthem exists. Thank you Moldman for reminding me it does.

I hate when the service of a game ends and I have to destroy my disc. I signed the contract when I clicked agree so I know I have to but it doesn't make it easier. I just feel really bad having to take the hammer to the box and cd and throw it away, like I know I have to but it just feels like it's a waste. But I signed the agreement. Anyways, any tips to make this easier? I tried listening to happy music but I realized my fave bands aren't around anymore and I had to smash those CDs too because I can't remember if I agreed to destroy them when I bought them or not but I don't want the possibility of whatever corporation holds the rights to their discography to hit me with a lawsuit for not having destroyed it and bought their spotify subscription to listen to it between ads instead, but all the ads are for games and it just makes me more and more sad...

>>716059348
Your continued existence is paid for by us :^)

>>716059371
Uploading your server architecture code is effectively free, yes.

>>716059371
no, that's why they need to be forced to do it

>>716054015
>LORD GABEN CAN DO NO WRONG!11!!!

>>716059424
You're not buying the painting. You're buying the ticket to see the painting. Keep up kid.

>>716057782
first you have to go to court to prove that its illegal case by case
all those "maybes" mean nothing without a case

>>716058262
you are the one who cant read, when its says "POTENTIALY" in big font, there is nothing defining
so stop reposting it and go read it

>>716059371
Realistically the more time devs have the more likely they are to spend it on adding troonie flags to the game so you better get patching, codeslave.

>>716058610
>[Shut it down intensifies]

>>716056517
Curiously you only get upset when it's about consumer rights.

I want to play the old mechwarrior and tom clancy's rainbow six rogue spear games again, with full lobbies. people would fucking love it, it was a GOAT'd time

>>716059550
>bought my ticket
>show up
>painting isn't there
Sir? I paid to see the painting?

>>716059583
He’s a Sonicfag. They’re the penultimate anti-consumers.

>>716059595
I think you can connect to MW4 servers via direct IP. I don't know about others.

>>716059567
It isn't covered in UE tutorials so it is utterly impossible.

>>716059632
sorry, we changed the terms of service last night, you can't see the painting anymore. No refunds.

>>716049298
me responding to you means you automatically agree to my terms of service which state that you are a retarded low iq moron and you must kill yourself.

newsflash retard terms of service are just words they are not a contract or defined or have any legal pull what so ever

>>716059632
You paid to see the painting. You saw the painting. Years later the painting is gone. It's a simple concept to understand. Do you think buying an annual pass to Disneyland also makes you the owner too? You're allowed to visit so long as it's there but they have no legal obligation to keep it running purely for you.

>>716059676
MW3 and MW4 have working online but barely any players because to be honest with you they pretty much suck PVPwise, funnily enough for entirely different reasons. Living Legends is still holding on too but only on hyperautist community nights and you will get farmed.

>>716059553
>The contract is not allowed to create an imbalance between your rights and obligations as a consumer and the rights and obligations of sellers and suppliers.

>>716059779
>buy annual pass to Disneyland on January 1st
>Disneyland shuts down permanently on March 2nd, with no warning
>no refund is offered because you agreed to the terms ;)

>>716059779
Sir I bought a ticket that said my explicit viewing times to see the painting

>>716059280
>Nitpicking
Fuck off with that trickery
No, Ross didn't protest straight to Ubishit at all, or else he already would have. Have you considered he may be lying?
"I was going to do that" is 100% bullshit from a public figure lmao.

Diablo 1 and Helldivers 1 are still playable right now, but you just wouldn't understand, because you never played those games, but you should definitely update the list if you incorrectly think they're shutdown.
Diablo 1 is p2p.

>>716059779
>they have no legal obligation to keep it running purely for you.

hey guys look another retard who is too lazy to read whta skg is actually about and is just imagine things that it would be about is completely wrong and still shits out his uninformed wrong opinion! wow you retard switch off your ego and start READING what it is about

>>716051831
>anon agrees to raping his mother
Contractually this continues into the afterlife

>>716058840
>since people do spend money on them.
That is completely irrelevant, they're not paying for the game, they can't claim ownership. The money spent on f2p games is not for owning anything, it's for in-game conveniences.

>>716059970
at this point they all know what they're saying is incorrect, but it's the company line so they need to keep repeating it

lets say the worst case scenario for a game, MMO no pve, expansions, microtransaction shop, backend is all run on 3rd party cloud data centers
what's the solution if SKG is implemented? give away their proprietary tools to host private servers?

>is that... is that a law forcing corporation to not steal my money?
>AIEEEEEEE FASCISM IS ON THE RISE! I'M LITERALLY GOING INSANE! HELP ME NIGGERMARX! THE PROLES NEED TO BE SUPRESSED MORE! EVERYONE, LET'S LICK THE CORPORATE BOOT HARDER YUM YUM YUM
why are leftoids and liberals like this, without any exception?

>>716059779
>they have no legal obligation to keep it running purely for you.

newsflash for the dumbest assholes in here, they dont have to keep it running what is actually demanded is that they give the option that players can host/be the server (so you know.. no running cost for the dev) you know the thing that has been standard for decades in borderline all multiplayer games until recently and is the easiest to implement multiplayer.

>>716049298
Here are some thing you agreed to when you decided to sell in Europe.

Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD)
>Prohibits businesses from using misleading or aggressive commercial practices.

Consumer Rights Directive (CRD)
>Requires clear information about products and services before purchase and grants consumers rights, such as a withdrawal period for contracts.

Digital Content Directive (DCD)
>Governs contracts for digital content and services, including video games, with rules on conformity, remedies, and modifications.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
> Protects consumers’ personal data and privacy.

e-Commerce Directive
>Sets rules for online services, including transparency and information obligations.

And more.

tl;dr- tell your boss he's fucked

>>716059970
Being wrong is the point. Being wrong in a way that sounds vaguely plausible to a passerby retard is THE GRIFT that people have used since the dawn of fucking time to get people to support things against their interest for the gain of another. Being retarded IS the point.

Say adobe, when do I lose access to your software?
>when your subscription expires
Say blizzard, when do I lose access to world of warcraft?
>when your subscription expires
Say Netflix, when do I lose access to all those films and TV shows?
>when your subscription expires
Say EA, when do I lose access to Battlefield?
>go fuck yourself

>>716058415
Which happens all the time, such as people getting banned due to ignoring the rules of service and streaming platforms introducing ads

>>716059779
Providing the option to host games for players means the devs have literally no running costs and can shut down all their servers and even go bankrupt and the multiplayer would still work.

>>716060030
I see your point, but this again opens up loopholes for publishers to continue killing games. They sell a game for full price, but once the time comes to shut it down, they start offering it for free for a few months before announcing the shutdown. Since it is technically a F2P game, they are under no obligation to ensure its preservation.

Either everything must be included, under no ambiguity, or corporations will find ways to weasel their way around it.

>>716057181
When do I get my money?

>>716060212
EA here, we changed the terms of service 1.034 x 10^-12 seconds ago which means we will need you to hold a gun up to your temple and pull the trigger. You agreed to the terms. No refunds btw.

>>716050336
This argument works for multiplayer and specifically for the official servers. If I'm playing a game that I never interact with other people on why the fuck do they get to decide when the game is unplayable?

THINK OF THE POOR INNOCENT MULTI-BILLION DOLLARS COMPANIES

>>716060162
>direction-brained retardation to try to shift discussion to political shitflinging
not today, Ranjesh

>>716060328
Changing from a product to a service like that isn't some little trick you get away with. Adobe can't do shit about you owning old pre-service products. You can't change the terms of a prior agreement on a whim. That is completely illegal.

>trans rights trans rights!
>uh... a tranny wants to keep playing HIS game but the gaming company shut the game down? strip HIM of all HIS rights, NOW! FUCK EVERYONE WHO DOESN'T BOW TO CORPORATIONS!

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32019L0770&qid=1751082587493
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/771/oj/eng
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01993L0013-20220528
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1986/653/oj/eng

https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?lgrec=fr&td=%3BALL&language=en&num=C-410/19&jur=C

>>716060148
Pretty much.

Just because a corpo says a contract is legally binding doesn't mean it actually is.
This may come as a shock to you, Anons, but they're capable of lying, and really, REALLY love doing it.

>>716060162
Uh, good attempt I guess, got me to (you)

>>716060384
Sounds reasonable Lord Vader.

>>716060240
EU judicial system is not precedental sadly. There were successful cases of people getting full refunds after bans in vidya

>>716060497
>heh
>trannies
Very normal

This is the gayest larp I've seen from this website so far. Congratulations for being exemplary faggots.

>>716060481
>, the leftoid squirmed as he sucked on the corporate boot harder. today was a special day for him, because he found a few shit nuggets stuck on the sole. his masters should be absolutely pleased with him today. fuck those nazi gamer chuds. he would lick the boot extra hard today just to show them.

I don't understand how you can even begin to think that a policy of pure de-regulation and consumer responsibility is viable. At what point were you just living your life and thought "you know, the real problem is that the government is stopping businesses from doing whatever they want?"

the only framework where it makes sense is if you just think that everyone who is exploited deserves it, and not only that, but everyone who is taken along for the ride by people who accept being exploited. And for what?

>>716060148
>give away
They will still be licensed and protected under law, so if anyone starts fucking with them to profit off their use, the companies will have a right to sue for damages.

>>716060486
it is, but I guarantee every EULA you "agree" to has a clause to the effect of
>The terms of this contract can be changed at any time, for any reason, with no obligation of notification.
and they get away with it all the time because no one actually bothers reading EULAs (which is why EU courts repeatedly find them unenforceable)

>>716060692
It's called being born into the machine which exploits and it being normalized, or an otherwise desire to be the exploiter because of any number of reasons usually based in fear and hate

>>716060572
Leftoids who lick the corporate boot clean are extremely easy to bait. Finding them is so easy, it's insane. Little proto-fascists, kek.

>>716060692
temporarily embarrassed billionaire syndrome

>>716048372 (OP)
So, where is this thing actually going?
A massive scam where people runs away with everyone's money? Or privaste servers full of pedophiles and groomers?

>>716058743
Sure. It doesn't do anything in your list of "unfair contract" definitions.

>>716058908
How is it unfair to
>Sell a Game
>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
>Users agree to the terms
Go ahead.

>>716058918
What are "service laws"?

>>716055291
too many consoomers are retards, so no. Laws need to be made.

>>716060486
Not if they're services to begin with

>>716060692
It's a weird mindset completely disconnected from reality or logic where regulations are the only reasons companies are scummy and doing awful shit to boot out competition, and removing said regulations would somehow make companies magically act nice and their race for profit would somehow affect society positively.
There's a reason everybody laugh at lolbertarians.

>>716059958
>No, Ross didn't protest straight to Ubishit at all, or else he already would have. Have you considered he may be lying?
He never once said he would and I agree why bother even attempting? It doesn't stop Blizzard from doing the same.
The fuck is your argument? "If you were just nice to publisher and developers, they would have done this"? You don't think it's possible that a petition with 1.4 million signatures asking for game preservation ALSO influenced game makers?

>Diablo 1 and Helldivers 1 are still playable right now, but you just wouldn't understand, because you never played those games, but you should definitely update the list if you incorrectly think they're shutdown.
Diablo 3 and 4 are at risk
Helldivers 2 is at risk
Hell Let Loose is dead
Feel free to peruse the list of "only mobile games" yourself: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1at1k7qIo5dgPp6K1aCrYIyAgNOjY-IhF/edit?gid=1774166863#gid=1774166863

>>716060847
>>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
but they don't do that

>>716060798
Leftists who lick the corporate boot is a new one. I've never seen someone call leftists corpos before. What?

>>716060951
They literally do. Read your ToS sometime.

>fellow comrades, we should help the working class!
>OH SHIT OH SHIT IS THE WORKING CLASS DEMANDING A LAW TO PROTECT THEM FROM GREEDY CORPORATIONS? NOOOOOOOOOOOO HOLY SHIT UNITE EVERYONE WE NEED TO FORM A PROTEST AGAINST HATE NOW!

>>716060842
>Or privaste servers full of pedophiles and groomers?
(((Their))) favorite tactic to delegitimize and dismantle whatever threatens the status quo. I wouldn't be surprised if something like this pops up out of nowhere.

>>716060983
rightoids see corporations trying to pander to the gays at pride and think all leftists actually love that and support corporations who slap a rainbow on their logo

>>716060842
Corporations getting graped HARD

>>716060847
>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
They never do, it's always obfuscated as a single within an encyclopia worth of EULA.
You could say it's the user who need to read the EULA, but ultimately it's done that way specifically because they know nobody read it, which is shitty.

>>716060910
Services have contracts you agree to, chief among them being outlined lengths of time the service is accessible as you have agreed to. Changing that agreement with no recourse is, also, illegal. Buying 10 months sub and not getting 10 months of what you paid for requires fair compensation/refunding of the period of time your contract was invalidated.

>>716061058
Oh, so they're idiots. Got it.

>>716061021
No, they say
>The service CAN be ended at any time
not
>The service WILL be ended at some undefined point in the future.

>>716056291
you cant play it offline

>>716060983
Oh, you were born after covid and never got to witness the leftoid marches that popped up to counter working class protests every single time, all around the western world? Never thought I would be talking to a 2yo on 4chan lmao

What if killing off old games is part of their plan, so that you buy their newer, shittier and pricier games?

>>716061021
>They literally do. Read your ToS sometime.
You'll have to provide evidence to support this claim. Please quote the exact text, copy and paste it into your next reply.
Thanks!

>>716061165
That is literally their plan, and that's called Planned Obsolescence which is either frowned upon or outright illegal depending on the country.

>>716061147
You're conflating government regulation with corporate anti ethics, meaning you don't even have the political acumen of a 2 year old because you've never read a book. I'm sorry to have replied to you twice already.

>>716060847
>It doesn't do anything in your list of "unfair contract" definitions.
Let me break this down... A fair contract, to you, is anything that >>716058549 doesn't do.
And there is a legitimate argument being made that GaaS violates that definition.
What is your response to that? "lol no"? Do you have an actual argument or are you wasting time?

>How is it unfair to
>>Sell a Game
As a good.
>>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
With no understanding of when. Could be tomorrow or could be 10 years from now
>>Users agree to the terms
After purchase.And terms are able to be overruled based on local laws
>Go ahead.
There. Your turn

>>716061165
>What if [incredibly obvious thing]
gosh do you really think

>>716061165
>what if
Anon, that's literally the primary reason they all do it. Stop thinking about old thing, buy new thing.

>>716060847
>Sell a Game
You are not selling a game, you are selling a perpetual license that enables me to make use of a good. A transferable, resellable license, protected by and guaranteed by EU law to be such.
>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
You did no such thing, you used obfuscating terminology that says that the "service" can end, but within the context of this contract, this means nothing in particular, since goods and services are separate things and your service agreement in regards to software and its operation, by statement of its cessation does not necessarily mean cessation of function of the good.
>Users agree to the terms
Me pressing "I agree" to start the game doesn't actually mean that I do agree to those contractual terms, since they are are represented in an unfair pre-negotiated contract that tries to pass off selling of goods for selling of services, which is fraudulent. In these three lines alone you have already committed enough fraud to ensure your imprisonment if you were to have been prosecuted.

>>716061110
>They never do
>it's always obfuscated as a single within an encyclopia worth of EULA.
So you're agreeing with me, that when you read the document, you are told this fact? Thanks for confirming.

>>716061130
>game says it can end
>be surprised when game ends
Why?

>>716061201
Sure. Suppy some ToS for a game you have and I'll read them to you like a baby.

Apologize to YanDev. NOW.

>>716061165
This guy might've just invented planned obsolescence...

>>716054683
What part of that is a bad deal? Otherwise your post is a complete non-sequitur in response to the other guy

>>716061245
You haven't specified how exactly this would be "unfair".
Please stop squirming and answer the question.

>>716061058
no, rightoids form protests like the trucker or farmer or anti-covid-control protests, which are always heavily attacked by leftoid counter protesters. attacking the working class is the number 1 goal of all leftoids. every time a working class movement gets formed, leftoids IMMEDIATELY try to attack it for their corporate masters like good little dogs. no exceptions.

>>716061330
"Can" and "will" are in fact two different words with two different meanings. And like >>716061110 and >>716061245 said, it's not "up front," it's obfuscated within a EULA that you only get access to after purchase, and are obligated to agree to if you want to access your purchase. It's the literal opposite of how contracts actually work.

>>716060919
at the end of a day on a personal level, everyone has to save themselves. I understand that if you've ever dealt with a person who just refuses to do that coming away thinking that everyone has to be self-responsible and face the consequences.

But applying that thinking on a societal level with the absurd gulfs in power and influence involved? retarded. This isn't about your bum sibling refusing to get a job, this is about the only employer in your town making you inhale asbestos because he doesn't feel like taking the effort to change things. It's about every manufacturer that builds the cars that you drive to get to your job using leaded paint. Just doesn't make sense to me to refuse to acknowledge that sometimes you don't have a serious choice but to get screwed over and regulation is the obvious cure.

>>716061330
>Why?
Unfair contract is allowed to exist in european union

>>716061243
>leftoids attack working class
>THAT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT THO! THIS WAS ANOTHER WORKING CLASS THEY ATTACKED, OK?
lmao this line of argument is why the leftoid party in germany reach new record lows, while right-wing is becoming the strongest party. you are a clown, part of a clown movement for the biggest retards the state and corporations could find. well done kek

>>716061550
>game says it can end
>be surprised when game ends
Why?
>game says it will end
>be surprised when game ends
Why?

>>716061330
It's been ruled before that if a EULA is considered to complex or vague, it cannot be enforced.

>>716060481
fucking prescient

>>716061637
>EU says you can't just end game
>have a sad
Hwhy?

>>716061165
Yeah man. Good job on figuring it out. Why do you think Xbox wants gamepass? Why do you think they wanted to kill used games? Why do you think Nintendo doesn't have persistent eshops? Because they want the only way anything they've ever made to be accessed is controlled by them, so they have the right to monetize it endlessly as far as can be allowed. Unchecked capitalism is literally the game of doing whatever you can get away with to monetize your goods. If they can legally delete your games the second you finish them and make you buy them again to play them again everytime, they would fucking cum everywhere. But you can't flip a switch to that point, you push the bounds one step at a time. Oh, it's live service, they update it with skins every few months and tweak some game modes, of course it is a temporary experience you can't own and replay. It's offline now but hey, buy the sequel that's basically the same!

The amount of shilling for corporations in these threads is astronomically insane and has always been in literally all threads about SKG that I've stumbled upon
I see very well that you are very afraid, your apparatus is failing and will never work on 4chan
I WILL own my vidya, and I WILL be happy

>>716061607
How is my example "unfair"? Not one of anon's definitions of "unfair contracts" applied to my example.

>>716061672
Oh yeah? Please link to this.

UPDATE
>UPDATE
UPDATE
>UPDATE
UPDATE
>UPDATE
UPDATE
>UPDATE
UPDATE
>UPDATE
> The industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQN_ZA5WRpo

New 'ross
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQN_ZA5WRpo

>>716061462
farmers should stop protesting over retarded shit like their right to make wild wolves extinct and the right of the absurdly rich top 1% of farmers to not pay taxes

>>716061717
>>EU says you can't just end game
Literally never happened.

>>716061724
It imploded tenfold ever since SKG hit the million and the vidya corpo lobby became aware of it, I'm sure you can guess why.

>>716060328
But you can't include F2P games in a movement about ownership because you can't claim ownership of games you didn't buy and you'll have China pushing back against it because of how many chinese games operate on the f2p model. And if it gets through, they're likely going to pull away from the EU and screwing millions of mobile retards, for better or for worse, but also defeating the purpose of the movement to begin with.

>>716061806
Not yet!

>>716061806
Actually EU laws already lean in that direction, now they're just gonna finalize it
Enjoy
>>716060185

>>716061426
It is considered unfair based on: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1993/13/oj

It:
>causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract
>has certain aspects of a term or one specific term have been individually negotiated shall not exclude the application of this Article to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of the contract indicates that it is nevertheless a pre-formulated standard contract.
>has standard terms regarding an expiration are entirely vague and not well explained to the user

Your turn

>>716060942
>You don't think it's possible that a petition with 1.4 million signatures asking for game preservation ALSO influenced game makers?
It could have but it doesn't change that Ross never went to Ubishit first, very big difference.

>Diablo 3 and 4 are at risk
>Helldivers 2 is at risk
But they're still accessible
>Hell Let Loose is dead
No one just isn't playing it anymore, you're certainly not, but I do know the devs are really passionate about their game, and it'll be safe for the near future. People are still renting servers, bet you didn't know that.
If the Diablo 1/2 and Helldivers games are still going, why would the sequels be at risk for shutting down?

Moreover, I don't need to look at your list (already seen it, a lot of it is misinformation like ITT), why should I do the work for you and prove myself wrong?
Good grief, you're in a cult, nigger.

>>716057269
not choosing to continue endlessly supporting a game isn't scamming/grifting or poisoning people with asbestos. if it's so important to people then it can be used as a point of advertisement or a feature.

>>716061750
>farmers should just cease to exists and all food production should be handled by big corporations, like Nestle!
leftoids, everyone. the biggest bootlickers of the world.

>>716061726
>One-sided changes to the product or service
>Get-out clause in favour of the trader
>One-sided cancellation

>>716061724
You don't see this on any other chans either. It's common knowledge 4chan is both a federal honeypot as well as corpo shill/psi op grounds. Don't know why everyone bothers trying to discuss SKG here, all you're doing is flinging shit back and forth with an enemy that won't back down.

>>716061919
My example doesn't do any of those things.
Why do you consider it "unfair" legally?
Your turn.

>>716060341
Thank you John.
We are en route to your house. To make it easier for the collectors, leave your house keys neatly at the front door and if there are any burglary alarms, provide the code in a sheet of paper.

>>716061834
And yet, you must.
>China
you're saying Chinese corporations should be able to sway European government through threats of economic withdrawal? Apple already got cockslapped by the EU over their chargers, and they didn't stop selling in Europe like the demoralization tactics would've had you believe.

shut the fuck up it's about ross now. gtfo zoomers

A friend of mine bought this for 10 bux at a record store on a whim and was absolutely furious when he learned exactly how the online is being handled. He agreed that laws need to be made stopping Always-Online being possible if the game isn't explicitly sold as a subscription platform.

These corporate cretins are gaining new enemies daily because of just how egregious Always-Online is.

>>716061956
They don't have to endlessly support it you dipshit, they have to design it to be reasonably maintainable by consumers when they are done with it, or they need to actually obey service regulations in regards to service expiration.

>>716061726
>Eichstädt, Timm; Spieker, Stefan (2024). 52 Stunden Informatik: Was jeder über Informatik wissen sollte (in German). Springer Fachmedien. ISBN 978-3-658-41838-0.
>Mezei, Peter; Harkai, Istvan (2022). "Self-Regulating Platforms?: The Analysis of the Enforcement of End-User Rights in the Light of the Transposition of Article 17 of the CDSM Directive" (PDF). Public Governance, Administration and Finances Law Review. 7: 109. doi:10.53116/pgaflr.2022.1.8.

>>716062157
>they have to design it to be reasonably maintainable by consumers when they are done with it
What if they don't want to?
Seems like this directly conflicts with IP protection laws, which simply put means
>If you don't protect your IP, you might lose it.

>>716062091
Don't like e-celebs? You must be a ubisoft shill.

>>716061974
i didn't say that non i said farmers should stop protesting retarded things that hurt themselves and the planet at large because they're huffing the "i'm self sufficient and so i'm better than other people" copium

>>716056991
You're a worthless piece of shit
kill yourself

>>716062053
Please restate your example in context to that language. "My example doesn't do those things" is far to vague and I'm not arguing your point for you.

>Why do you consider it "unfair" legally?
It:
>causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract
>has certain aspects of a term or one specific term have been individually negotiated shall not exclude the application of this Article to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of the contract indicates that it is nevertheless a pre-formulated standard contract.
>has standard terms regarding an expiration are entirely vague and not well explained to the user

>>716054683
>he's not even licking the boot
>he just shoved the whole boot straight into his mouth
>funniest shit I've ever seen

>>716061740
>the industry filed false claims against the "Stop Killing Games" initiative
THEY ARE AFRAID

It's crazy that Ross actually managed to do it.

>>716062165
Could I have a link please?

>>716062252
>Please restate your example
Sure.
How is it unfair to
>Sell a Game
>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
>Users agree to the terms
Go ahead.

>>716062221
>What if they don't want to?
then they would be in violation of the law and would face some sort of penalty, or open themselves to a lawsuit
>Seems like this directly conflicts with IP protection laws
it doesn't, since it's not about giving consumers the right to spin up their own paid servers, and still gives the publisher the right to sue or issue copyright takedowns if such things are attempted.

>>716055171
It's hilarious that literally everything that is even dimly associated with the possibility of a conservative ever liking it is now haram to these people lmfao. They just keep doubling and tripling down lol

>>716061740
>shills are making shit up about Ross because they cannot imagine someone working for free to save the things he loves
This is hilarious.

>>716062157
what 'service regulations in regards to service expiration' are they not obeying?

>>716062376
>it doesn't
You haven't convinced me.

>false claims already
holy shit

>>716062229
anon you know he's just an astroturfer trying to derail the thread to something unrelated, right?

>>716055163
>BECAUSE I PAD FOR IT
Unironically yes, you mouthbreathing retard. If any other industry did this, you'd be calling it theft and planned obsolescence. Don't fucking pretend you wouldn't.

>>716062221
Then you break the law, just like if I'm running a theme park and just don't feel like letting the customers who bought a ticket for that day come in that day and tell them tough shit it's my themepark I don't have to fulfill my obligations as a service provider

>>716049298
We‘re using the powers of collective bargaining, vested onto us by way of democracy.

>>716049298
If the TOS only appears after i purchase and run the game then its not binding, whats binding is the original agreement which was the purchase of the game which now i own because i dont live in a retarded country were people dont own digital goods

>>716062456
Then why should it be law, is my next question?
I think users should just read what they agree to. Simple as.

>>716055171
>I made a video

>>716062420
Defined period of service.

>>716062498
>because i dont live in a retarded country were people dont own digital goods
What country?

>>716062432
So you're retarded? Think of it in terms of a book: an author doesn't lose intellectual property rights just because someone can read their book without personally asking for their permission every single time.

>>716062227
don't like devs? you must be skg supporter

>>716062516
Despite that, unfair contracts should not be tolerated.

>>716056389
Potentially, litterally any MMO. People already wish they could run private servers without risk of litigation.

>>716061735
>>716061740
Did the anonymous accuser by any chance, mentioned working at Blizzard at least three times per sentences while reporting the mold man?

>>716062516
because these "contracts" are inherently unfair and corporations are exploiting user apathy to get away with breaking the law.

>>716062516
Because it is not obeying consumer protections for services or goods. You sell a service, you define a period of time of the service upon payment, and upheld your end of the bargain or - surprise - it's illegal. If you sell a good, the customer owns the product you sold and doesn't need your permission to use it.

>>716062456
a company that does that loses its reputation

>>716062551
is there a current framework that defines minimum period of service or is this something that you want in the future?

>>716061740
>Ross is running a rickshaw business for signatures and this contribution violates the rules
THIS is the best they could come up with?

>>716062642
>Can't argue his original point
>Starts talking about books
Please stay on topic anon. We are talking about video games.

SHUT IT DOWN

The jew fears the gamer

>>716059371
Game devs already got the money, what else do they or you want?

>>716062761
>noooo please don't use an easily understandable analogy, my boss didn't give me a script for that

>>716061740
Kvetchers gonna kvetch. Holy shit.

>>716062803
The industry is so scared, it's hilarious.

>>716062732
But they aren't selling a good. They are selling a service.
Why isn't that allowed? Just read what you are buying before you click the big "I READ THE TERMS AND AGREE TO THEM" button.
I don't see why you need the law changed, when you could just not act like a moron and not sign things without reading them.

>>716062895
you literally can't read the terms of what you are buying before buying it.

>>716062827
Stay on topic anon.
Why doesn't this conflict with IP laws?
Be specific.

>>716062739
>loses its reputation
And is open to legal retribution if the customer is not fairly compensated.

Why do you want to be able to sell a service to someone, taking the money upfront, and be allowed to not provide it on a whim without outlining a contractual period of time you're agreeing to pay for?

>>716062895
Commonly the ToS is not accessible until AFTER you bought the game.

>>716062761
Since you can't understand how it is in terms of video games, you should be capable of understanding an easier analogy
but somethow you failed to do even that
There's a reason fan-made servers are not allowed to start asking money for keeping up the server, because that means they'd be profiting from an IP they do not own. Their sole right is to play their copy of the game, and to do that, they need servers, which they themselves can provide.
It does not violate IP protection laws.

>>716062081
What you're not understanding is that you're opening up the movement to get argued against by including a completely different class of games into the mix, with a lot more power and money behind the people who would argue against it.
There isn't ownership of f2p games and since ownership is the core argument for SKG then including f2p games makes your side weaker.

>>716062895
Funny how the game services I bought 20 years ago are still accessible at will but game services I bought 2 years ago are getting disabled at the publisher's whim.

>>716062974
offline accessibility does not mean surrendering IP rights. They still retain the right to sue someone illegally distributing the game.

>>716062229
>the farmer protests were because farmers wanted to exterminate wolves! WE NEED TO MARCH AGAINST THE FARMERS AND ATTACK THEM NOW!
leftoid rhetoric truly is fascinating. it's like you are talking to a woman - devoid of all logic and reason, and instead relying on purely emotional arguments.
>if corporations can't rip you off, that makes you a nazi! FREE FREE CORPORATIONS! SMASH WORKING CLASS FASCIST HEADS WITH BIKE LOCKS NOW!
like I said, you and your ideology is the joke of the world. every single non-leftist pisses on you.
>>716062446
you wish, but I'm genuine. my hatred for the eternal leftoid who does nothing all day but attack the working class in the name of corporations is a neverending bonfire. I will never be able to put my hatred fully into words tho.

>>716061937
>It could have but it doesn't change that Ross never went to Ubishit first, very big difference.
I still dont get it. Why does it matter? State it right now: do you think sending nice letters to massive publishers would have had a more positive impact on the industry rather than fighting their unfair EULA's with laws?
Why don't you ask John Deere if you can fix your tractor while you're at it?

>>Diablo 3 and 4 are at risk
>>Helldivers 2 is at risk
>But they're still accessible
Ok and what if they weren't by next year? Does that justify losing your ownership?

>No one just isn't playing it anymore
Again, not valid justification.
>People are still renting servers, bet you didn't know that
I did and it's a positive practice but the game still died until the community picked up the pieces. If it weren't for their efforts, it would be dead like Overwatch or The Crew.

>Moreover, I don't need to look at your list (already seen it, a lot of it is misinformation like ITT), why should I do the work for you and prove myself wrong?
Alright how about this then. Is your stance:
>No game worthwhile is left unplayable; community or devs will keep worthwhile games accessible
1. Who decides what's "worthwhile"
2. Why do we need a vocal majority ahead of time to prevent a game from dying forever?
3. Why would every developer even care or agree with this "worthwhile" assessment?

>>716062895
Because you bought it first, and demanding consumers agree to illegal practices to use your service doesn't actually let you do illegal things.

>>716063139
ok Ranjesh

>>716062305
He only did it thanks to piratesoftware

>>716062367
Nope you can google yourself :)

>devs are now accusing Ross of violating EU rules in a bid to get the whole thing thrown out

>>716062946
>>716062997
>>716063195
So get a refund, like the agreement says you can do if you do not agree to the terms. Simple as.

>>716063019
You have not sited a single law to support yourself. Why not?

>>716063135
Do they? Please post some proof of this.

>>716062367
>How is it unfair to
>>Sell a Game
As a good.
>>Tell the users that the game will end upfront
With no understanding of when. Could be tomorrow or could be 10 years from now
>>Users agree to the terms
After purchase.And terms are able to be overruled based on local laws
>Go ahead.
There. Your turn

>>716063336
>go get a refund
Uhoh, but they aren't refunding it. See how it's illegal now?

>>716063358
You didn't say how it was unfair. Again.
Please, go ahead.

>>716063025
if you can pay to access parts of the game (which is the core feature of those Chinese gacha games you think will kill the movement), then you can reasonably claim some level of ownership.

>>716063210
100% white austrian, sorry to disappoint. my hatred for leftoids comes from experience and witnessed their vile bootlicking and hatred for the working class first hand. they will attack and kill working class people on sight, because to them, all workers are nazis and fascists.
all leftoids need to die the most cruel deaths imaginable, because they are the only thing that stands between the working class and the rich.

>>716062991
>Why do you want to be able to sell a service to someone, taking the money upfront, and be allowed to not provide it on a whim without outlining a contractual period of time you're agreeing to pay for?
because ideally you're a company with a reputation you want to uphold and you don't want to tarnish it

>>716063445
Ok
>With no understanding of when. Could be tomorrow or could be 10 years from now
>After purchase.And terms are able to be overruled based on local laws
They can also change the terms on you after purchase and beyond a refund date. These conditions are unfair based on:
>causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract
>has certain aspects of a term or one specific term have been individually negotiated shall not exclude the application of this Article to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of the contract indicates that it is nevertheless a pre-formulated standard contract.
>has standard terms regarding an expiration are entirely vague and not well explained to the user

>>716048372 (OP)
> Genshin is the most multiplayer focused game Hoyo has
> Not really used besides from boring events
> Also the gatcha system requires online because they want your money
Yup

>>716063415
Then you take them to court.
What point are you trying to make?

>>716060692
These people are naive idiots who think regulations exist only because governments want to engage in tyranny and oppression. It literally never occurs to them that
>people are selfish bastards who would genuinely not behave properly were it not for threats of punishment
and
>people are selfish bastards who would gladly oppress those weaker than themselves, even resorting to conspiracy to do so, if they could get away with it.
If you try to explain this to them, they get flabbergasted and confused, almost as if they literally do not comprehend what you're saying. They live in an alternate universe where all humans are perfect little angels and there is no abuse at all, if only it wasn't for the Big Government.

>>716063445
>please agree to illegal practice to use this
>ummm what's unfair about this?

>>716063520
You agreed to that.
How is it unfair, if you read the ToS , understood them and agreed to them?

>>716063495
yes do not to be talking about the video games anymore saar please to be talking about liftids and faarmers

>>716061165
>What if
Anon, the term "planned obsolescence" most certainly does not apply tzo phones and cars only.

>>716063574
>illegal
It's literally not.
Cute cope :3

>>716063527
That is happening, and this movement and proposed regulation is about applying existing regulations to a swath of companies trying to avoid it by failing to follow service provider laws.

>>716063692
Which laws?

>>716063794
Defined period of service upon purchase.

>>716056215
>primitive antique games were just Fortnite

>>716062516
>Then why should it be law, is my next question?
What do you mean "why"? Why would people want to outlaw the practice of taking something away from you at an arbitrary time after you bought it, despite it being media that is completely capable of being preserved? Real big mystery

>>716063495
this is like a 1 in a million incident
i've seen plenty of marvel movies where this doesn't happen

>>716063527
>Then you take them to court.
American hands wrote this post.

>>716063312
The corpo fears the moldman

>>716063336
8 U.S.C. § 2320(b)(1)(A), 2318
7 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(C)
18 U.S.C. § 231, 2319(d), 1831, 2319B(a), 1343, 1341, 1030 and 545
Those are the only articles of law on intellectual property rights and there is nothing that goes against fan servers / servers provided after the game has been shut down. Unless you start asking money for someone else's IP, it's fair game.

>>716063597
>is that... a video game discussion about a movement by working class people but one of them shits on leftoids for constantly being against this working class movement?
>AIEEEE FELLOW COMRADES HELP QUICK! THIS IS AN *EXTREME* LEVEL THREAT TO US! WE NEED TO CALL THIS NAZI A DIRTY BROWNSKIN NOW! THE CORPORATE BOOT MUST BE LICKED CLEAN, NOW!
I wonder, do leftoids ever get used to the taste of shit in their mouth?

>>716063595
>You agreed to that.
>How is it unfair, if you read the ToS , understood them and agreed to them?
1. I did not agree to the good being taken from me. I was told it could or might at some point but that language doesn't agree with my law and is the purpose of the petition
2. I was forced to agree in a shrink wrapped clause which aren't enforceable (see: Klocek v. Gateway, Inc). I've purchased a product and I disagree. That means I have two choices:
- forfeit the money I gave them
- appeal to a refund they don't have to honor
Further, a ToS is not legally binding if it violates my local laws or is too vague.
Finally, if changed after purchase, I still have no control and should be deemed unfair.

>>716063853
Where is that a law? What country? Quote the exact law that states you must do this and provide an example of a company not following these laws, that are operating in said country.
Then I'll belive you.

>>716063448
That's very disingenuous

>>716063907
What is taken away from you?
the local client? it isn't, except Valve removing a PAID Counter Strike GO and putting Counter-Shitted 2 in its place.

>>716048372 (OP)
>new video uploaded Industry ATTACKS Ross

what the fuck man

>>716058535
>Even Ross never played the Crew 2, the pretext for all this in the first place, why should any of us care what you idiots think?
How is that the pretext?

>>716063960
>1. I did not agree
So you didn't click "I agree to the Terms of Service?"
Yes or no answers only.

>>716061740
>they're pissing themselves enough to make false anonymous claims
>some of the VideogamesEurope members actually have no opinion on the initiative
That's hilarious. Makes me wonder who is actually spearheading it. Has to be Ubisoft.

>>716064019
If the local client is effectively destroyed because the myriad of services it relies on go down AND I could be sued if I try to replicate them, I effectively have nothing left of the original purchase and can consider the good destroyed.

>>716063189
You're doing the runaround again, and I don't buy John Deere. You're bad at semantics, but I guess clinging to Right to Repair is you guys' only source of legitimacy.
You don't play these games, you just don't understand, that's why you incorrectly believed some of them are dead. You just had to be there in the first place to get it.

>No game worthwhile is left unplayable; community or devs will keep worthwhile games accessible
Here's my stance-
Videogames are not art, and live-service are not videogames.
Videogames stopped being fun for 15 years, and the only worthwhile titles are not live-service and not in danger of extinction.
SKG is just data hoarders and nothing more. Stop supporting live-service slop in the first place, all you guys are doing is immortalizing shit.

However if you convince me that live-service slop are videogames that deserve preservation, I'll support SKG (pro tip: you can't)

>Corpo's accusing Ross of being a paid consultant because they literally cannot conceive of someone doing volunteer work for free out of genuine belief in the goals of the initiative

>>716063969
I suggest you read the initiative and watch Ross's videos before coming into a thread to discuss the initiative.

>>716064019
>What is taken away from you?
Fucking come on. Stop playing dumb, like you don't know what people mean when they say The Crew was taken from them. Who do you think you're fooling, shill-kun?

>>716064052
I did click agree
>inb4: i rest my case
My local law says otherwise. A ToS cannot bind me or absolve them of illegal activities. This petition ARGUES that they are in violation of consumer protection laws and that more a more clear legal stance SHOULD BE PROVIDED.
>B-b-but there is no law
No. Fucking. Shit. Stop with this cyclical argument

>>716064243
>ANONYMOUS ACCUSER
literally some tranny or thor himself

>>716064297
Because you faggots don't understand what you're aeguing for, huh

>>716064297
because you clearly did you can answer his question and not dance around it like a pussy
so answer it

>>716064082
>Has to be Ubisoft.
Imagine being a Ubisoft exec, realizing you're the one who singlehandedly killed the most lucrative business model your entire industy invented in the last 50 years. I wouldn't be able to look my business colleagues in the eyes.

>>716064168
noipe, still exists
why don't you complain when Valve shuts down computers as a whole?
why isn't the balding guy talking about that?
obsolete computers created artificially.
you don't want to go against Steam, don't you

>corpo niggers literally hire someone to attack Ross and cancel the initiative by calling hm a criminal

we protect Ross at cost bros

>>716059170
>My rights end where others begin
I told a libertarian exactly this once and he called me a communist

>>716064309
The bald man said this would be about multiplayer games.

So what is this about?
All multiplayer games?
All multiplayer games that have zero single player content?
Only games that have online DRM (except Steam)?
Only games that have online DRM (including everything on Steam)?

Which one is it?

>>716063336
Why did you stop replying once actual law articles got dished out?

>>716054683
how does this affect you?

>>716064695
retard does this every thread he pussies out when you cite actual legal documents...
now he's feigning profound mental retardation by asking you to copy paste it into the reply like he can't look it up himself.

>>716064757
i don't like commies, and I think this petition is a farce and a controlled OP.

>>716064667
Yes

>>716064667
>The bald man said this would be about multiplayer games.
Except no, he didn't. That's something PirateSoftware claimed he did. SKG is also about single-player games. Ross has explicitly stated that, so what are you talking about?

>>716064230
>I don't buy John Deere
Could be Kubota next then
>Right to Repair is you guys' only source of legitimacy
Idk I'd say having a good arbitrarily destroyed after purchase has some pretty close similarities here.

>You don't play these games, you just don't understand, that's why you incorrectly believed some of them are dead. You just had to be there in the first place to get it.
Some are dead. Some took years of fans to revive them. I played OW and refused to get OW2 after they killed the servers. I can never play OW again. You feel this is justified because of semantics over what is "dead" on a fucking google sheet?

>Videogames are not art, and live-service are not videogames.
Brain dead take. What is a game but a collection of art?
>Videogames stopped being fun for 15 years, and the only worthwhile titles are not live-service and not in danger of extinction.
Oh your whole stance is just rose tinted glasses and that any form of preservation is pointless because nothing will ever be as good as when you were in your prime. Cool stuff but I don't care. I like games and I want to keep playing them
>SKG is just data hoarders and nothing more. Stop supporting live-service slop in the first place, all you guys are doing is immortalizing shit.
Yea whole lot of opinions there, bub. I think everything you like is garbage and should be destroyed. Would it blow your mind if you suddenly felt compelled to fight against that?

>However if you convince me that live-service slop are videogames that deserve preservation, I'll support SKG (pro tip: you can't)
I like them and you don't get to control what lives based on what you don't like. Faggot.

>>716064828
exactly what I expected from commies.
>it's a surprise.
>we will get you something to eat, you will see
>now just voot for us
result pic related

>>716064825
>le communism
You will never be a CEO or run a Corporation, you will never pull yourself up by your bootstraps and suddenly be in control of a multi-billion dollar company. That ship sailed 100 years ago. You are a worm toiling for masters who don't even know you exist.

>>716064549
>noipe, still exists
When I open the client, I get a win32 popup that says "servers are dead goodbye". That's no longer a game
>why don't you complain when Valve shuts down computers as a whole?
???
Are you talking about minimum requirements?

>My Gamers
>Sons and daughters of Vidya
>For many years, we have been a broken union
>Shunned! Oppressed! And conquered by those we sought to escape!
>Seven years ago, I asked for time. And that time was granted by you. You, the strength in my arm. The holders of my mold.
>Our volunteers embarked, on the greatest civil initiative in history of all EU
>An initiative, for freedom. Vidya became that freedom!
>Our mold changed our bodies. At first, it weakened us. But in fact, we were growing stronger...
>In the time you have given me. I have rebuilt our union. I have rebuilt our strength. And I have rebuilt our pride!
>Our enemies online are being re-educated. We have given them new insights into our cause.
>On this day we stand united once more. On this day. Those driven to defraud us, will hear our voice! On this day, we shall act as one! And we shall be ignored no more!
>DEFENDERS OF THE VIDYA DREAM
>NOW IS OUR TIME

>>716064839
So it's about single player games, but get delisted/banned by Valve?

>>716064874
>I DON'T CARE, BECAUSE I SAID SO.
Then I don't support SKG, and stop spamming the catalog.
Your sanctimonious babble is not an argument.

>>716064757
this is how darkies think
do better

>>716064970
>everyone who develops games is a multi-dollarionaire
commies

>>716061740
>>716062871
Video game industry is gonna contact his classmates from high school to dig up dirt and rumors on Ross next. I loved this comment though.

>>716065035
It's about all games. Is that so hard to understand?

>>716065041
You're entire argument is literally "I DON'T CARE, BECAUSE I SAID SO."
I think Lawbreakers fucking sucked but it should still exist because I believe in choice.
You believe the only thing that should be persevered is what you like.
Fuck you. Stop killing games

>>716064981
so the client still works fine.
Got it.
>????
so you claim that companies kill le games, but ignore when Valve cuts you off your whole library?
Are you mentally retarded, or just dishonest?

>>716064562
What next, theyll try hiring an assassin to do an Epstein on Ross before the due date comes?
The absurd turn around this month sure made corpos shake of fear godamn

>>716065119
This initiative hardly affects indie devs, whom 99% of already have their games run offline out of the box or don't even have online functionality.

>>716065149
so this is about taking down Steam?
Sign me up then.
Why does the bald guy not say a word that it's about taking down Steam?
Fuck Steam.

>>716065208
false, tons of multiplayer indie games, also tons of single player indie games with servers
>well fuck these indies then
fuck you then

>>716065356
>also tons of single player indie games with servers
Why would an indie dev make a single player game that needs to communicate with a home server?

>>716065356
They already have dedicated servers available, so SKG does not affect them. And it is not retroactive. The only indie game that doesn't have such servers is amogus and the community found a way to make them anyway.

>>716065263
Whatever you want, anon. Go ahead and sign

>>716065186
>so the client still works fine.
If you're claiming you bought a "client" that's false. You bought a game. It was advertised as a game. Not access to a game
>so you claim that companies kill le games, but ignore when Valve cuts you off your whole library?
Valve claims that they would relinquish rights and start a transition. Whether that's to be believed is its own discussion.
It's also separate because, in that case, Steam actually only provides you with access to content they don't own. Like Netflix not being compelled to give you every movie on their service if they were shut down.
Publishers own the content and sold that content to you.

>>716065425
for example daily quests
wait, so it's okay that content is gone when the server is pulled, but the rest of the game still plays?
Therefore every CoD is fine, because it has a 2 hour campaign?
So the petition is retarded.

>>716063312
corpos are a disease and penicillin is mold(man)