Thread 717277929

You DEMANDED and spammed non stop about some shitty initiative trying to force vidya to be even more regulated by the government, why? well not becuase any of you cares about some shitty EA Car game, or Anthem, or Concord.
But because whatever youtuber you have a parasocial relationship with told you to care about and none of you can make an actual opinionof your own.

You chose to vilify anyone against your initative you didn't even careabout yourself. And what comes after? You getting sweet,sweet Karma having the government take away all your garbage p*rn games.
Woah turns out government regulation... IS LE BAD? Turns out asking for more censorship and game devs to have to constantly answer to the government is not a good thing?

Almost like if you didn't like a game being perma online, you shouldn't have spent money on it instead of asking daddy government to get involved.
You reap what you sow.

Visa/Mastercard are private companies.

>>717278036

They run the government.

>>717277929 (OP)
I don't see how the two are related.

>>717277929 (OP)
Multiple governments are suing Visa and mastercard though.
What they're doing is going to push for more laws and regulations.

>>717277929 (OP)
Fuck off, itch is already fixed so we got what we wanted

>>717278319
First I've heard of this.
Suing them for what?

>>717277929 (OP)

Didn't read. You lost, now commit suicide.

>>717277929 (OP)
>visa and mastercard are the government
kys retard.

>>717277929 (OP)
its beautiful isnt it?
fast forward 5 years from now there will be just three online games because of SKG

>>717277929 (OP)
>heh you wanted companies to stop fucking you in the ass
>well another one fucked you in the ass
I don't think that's irony, I think that's called anal sex

>>717278319
Good. Private companies and organizations shouldn't be allowed to impede 1st amendment on anybody. Disallowing companies to do so isnt just good for Gaming but society as a whole

>>717277929 (OP)
I didn't read all that, you're a sad sack of shit who wishes he was pretty enough to be raped by billionaires.

>>717278724
Based
Same with financial transactions since it's already proven in court that money is speech.

>>717278724
>companies and organizations shouldn't be allowed to impede 1st amendment on anybody.

Yet you want videogame companies to be stopped from making online games :S

>>717278685
>there will be just three online games because of SKG
we can only hope, holy shit.
that sounds amazing.

>>717278972

You guys hate online games becuase you're friendless losers with nobody to play
You despise anything that offers a cooperative or multiplayer experience because it reminds you how lonely you are.

>>717277929 (OP)
You're like the dumbest fucking retard imaginable if you think SKG is in anyway related to Payment processors fucking moral fagging and over reaching with their censorship

>>717277929 (OP)
It's Visa and Mastercard that did that, not the government. And there's current bills being passed in the government to prevent them from doing exactly this shit. Retard.

>>717278965
Double based
Can't support a product? don't sell it asshole.

>>717279053
> REEEE MY PEDO CHILD PORN INCEST RAPE GAMES ARE BEING CENSORED
>> HA! You want to make an online game? PFFTT NO CHANCE! I'M GONNA CENSOR YOU :)

You guys are so stupid, it fully makes sense why you get your opinions from youtubers.

>>717277929 (OP)
>You DEMANDED and spammed non stop about some shitty initiative trying to force vidya to be even more regulated by the government, why?
Because I want to own the things I buy.
>well not becuase any of you cares about some shitty EA Car game, or Anthem, or Concord.
So how many good games have to die in order for it to become a problem worth doing something about?
>You chose to vilify anyone against your initative
Nah, you lot did that yourself when you literally spammed child porn in order to try and kill discussion about the movement. You can't pretend your side has any sort of moral high ground after that.
>Woah turns out government regulation... IS LE BAD?
But this isn't 'government' regulation. It's corporate regulation, exactly the sort of thing SKG seeks to end.
>Turns out asking for more censorship
Not something SKG is about.
>and game devs to have to constantly answer to the government
Not remotely to related to censorship imposed by private companies.
>You reap what you sow.
And games will continue to get fucked by corporations and you will continue to own less until you decide to stop being a good goy and choose to stand up for your own rights.

>>717279189
>Can't support a product? don't sell it asshole.

> Buy Disneyland tickets
> Use them
> WTF WHAT DO YOU MEAN I DON'T OWN THE PARK NOW

Retard :S

>>717279037
sure

>>717279273
That's a rental analogy, retard.

>>717277929 (OP)
Visa and Mastercard aren't the government.
and there's bills in congress to regulate Visa and Mastercard to not be able to do what they're currently doing.

>>717279273
> Buy Disneyland tickets
>"oops sorry disneyland closed today, get out"
>"we're not giving you a refund or letting you use those tickets on another day or anything"
>"um actually this is legal because we wrote takesies backsies on the ticket, that's 100% legally binding so you can't do anything about it neener neener"
>"whoa wait what are you doing is that a lawyer STOP NO DON'T ACTUALLY TAKE US TO COURT HELP I'M A POOR INDIE DEVELOPER YOU'RE LITERALLY CENSORING ME RIGHT NOW THIS IS COMMUNISM HELP STOP AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"

>>717277929 (OP)
>REEE REEE REE WHY YOU GUYS COMPLAINING THAT PRIVATE COMPANIES ARE DESTROYING VIDEO GAMES?!
>REEE REEE REE WHY ARE YOU GUYS NOT COMPLAINING THAT PRIVATE COMPANIES ARE DESTROYING VIDEO GAMES!?
There is just NO winning with you faggots is there?

>>717278965
Individuals deserve rights.
Organizations aren't individuals.

>>717279520

That literally never happened though.
If Disney was closing and you chose to buy the tickets the day it closed it's your problem

Nobody who bought the crew in 2013 wasn't allowed to "ride it"

>>717279646

Game developers are individuals.

>"corpos are destroying games"
>yeah
>"we should stop them from destroying games"
>yeah
>"the government is the only one with authority in this regard"
>yeah
>"in fact this kind of consumer protection is explicitly one of the main reasons to have a government at all"
>yeah
>"so you should sign this petition"
>NO FUCK OFF THAT'S COMMUNISM AND CENSORSHIP
>"if we don't sign it then corpos will continue to do what they want"
>yeah
>"meaning you will own less and have less control over the products you buy"
>yeah
>"for example these corpos have now decided that you're not allowed to buy certain games"
>THIS IS YOUR FAULT SOMEHOW

>>717279793
if that was still the case, the industry would be a lot better right now

>>717279793
That will happily sign away their rights to work at Shekelstein's Game Slop Factory.

>>717278369
Violating anti-trust laws

>>717279825
>The vidya industry is being destroyed because the Crew and Anthem closed

If you want to save vidya why don't you start an initiative that bars women and transexuals from being game developers instead of claiming "the west has fallen" because Concord flopped?

>>717279713
>If Disney was closing
Did they state that The Crew was closing when it was being sold?
>um ackshually if you read the fine print and visit websites that no normie would ever go to then you would hear that it's always-online and know what that means in terms of game longevity-
Irrelevant when it comes to consumer protection laws. Did Ubisoft make it clear upon purchase that this was a limited window, that there would come a time when you would be entirely unable to play the single-player video game that you're purchasing?

>>717278965
No one stopping companies from making online games, people want the games that they paid for to be playable even after the companies stop supporting those games. It's like your car that you bought suddenly stop working because the companies stop supporting that particular model

>>717280019
>when it was being sold?

In 2013? No.
A literal decade later? Yes, you were told several months in advance "It's gonna close forever, don't buy the game, we'll even stop selling it in our store".

You colossal idiot.

OP willingly acts like goycattle for free as an epic troll attempt, imagine being goycattle like OP

>>717277929 (OP)
>corporations shouldn't be able to take your games away
Is this a pro-SKG or anti-payment processor statement?
That's right, it's logically consistent with both stances.

>>717278125
Entire wall of text essay carefully crafted by OP invalidated, and reduced to a meme statement by the simplest form of scrutiny

>>717280014
>the Crew and Anthem
I'll ask again: how many good games need to die in order for this to be a problem worth considering?

I'd rather just skip the whole song and dance where I list game after game that has been rendered unplayable due to this bullshit and you respond with variations on "well that game sucked and nobody cares anyway and people who say they care don't count because reasons". I just want to know: how many good, hell not even good, but great, incredible, once-in-a-generation genre-defining irreplaceable masterpieces of games need to become completely lost forever before you decide that it's a problem we should work to prevent? Literally how bad do things have to get before you decide to get up off your ass and admit that your house is on fire?

>>717277929 (OP)
That's not what SKG is about LMAO you sound like some scared game dev false flagging
to stop support

SKG was either the devs providing single player support for the game
or they are not allowed to take down private servers

the later is the preferred option, but the game company knows that's the worse alternative
so they are essentially being forced to create a single player version

or risk a Dota2 scenario happening to their IP

anyway I don't think SKG will happen, too much money on the line

>>717280131

That's fucking retarded and a huge restriction. You'd be forcing MMOs,MOBAs, etc. to have an entire balance hidden plan just for retards like you who want to keep playing a dead game. And i say WANT because you won't ACTUALLY do it, nobody who supports SKG cares about Anthem, Concord, Redfall, Crew, etc.

Now if an indie dev wants to make some new League of Legends daddy government will come and say "DOES YOUR GAME HAVE AN ENTIRE SYSTEM DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE TO UHHH HOST THEIR PRIVATE SEVER? NO?? OFF TO JAIL WITH YOU!!"

>>717280019
>um ackshually if you read the fine print and visit websites that no normie would ever go to then you would hear that it's always-online and know what that means in terms of game longevity-
Isn't there already a law that make term and condition invalid if they are too complicated to read by the consumers?

>>717280140
>In 2013? No.
Case closed, I accept your concession.

>>717280264
>how many good games need to die in order for this to be a problem worth considering?

One. Now go and find me a good game that died.

>>717280338

Are you stupid? You made a fantasy scenario in your mind of your disney tickets being rejected when that will never happen in real life.

You lost.
You had a decade to play the crew yet you chose not to becuase it's a garbage game and nobody cared it closed.

>>717278036
Thread should have ended here.

>>717280276
name 20 independently developed and published live service games right now or i'll shove my dick up your goycattle ass and you will love it

>>717280276
If I paid for something with the explicit intentions of owning it, it's common sense that I should keep my ownership of the thing even if the company stop supporting that thing.

>>717280487

That's your problem little bro, you're not owning shit. If anything all you want is for Steam to change the "BUY" button to "RENT" in case of online games.

You're the one who chose to spend money on a perma online game that required you to have internet connection at all time, required you to follow the EULA and lose your copy if you said the n word, required you to wait in queue to find other players, etc.

You buy a piece of shit, you get a piece of shit, you don't get to tell the government to come bail you out because of your poor life choices.

>>717277929 (OP)
>having the government take away all your garbage p*rn games
It's not the government, it's corporations with too much power. If anything I'd love it if government told them that they're just utilities that can't tell people what they can and can't buy with their money, but I suspect they see this as a mutually beneficial system. This way they can have censorship without technically violating freedom of speech since it's okay if it's a corporation doing it.

>>717280264
>I'd rather just skip the whole song and dance
of course you would. you want to rule the market instead of letting the market decide for itself.

>>717280320
>Isn't there already a law
Yes, everything that publishers are doing that SKG is fighting against is already technically illegal, but nobody is stopping them.

That is why these faggots who screech about SKG "giving the government more power" is completely retarded. They already have that power. This falls directly within their scope of responsibility. They are simply not fulfilling their responsibility. Faggots like OP are scaremongering and hoping you don't understand this. The problem isn't that the government has or doesn't have the power, they've had it for a long time, the problem is the government SELECTIVELY choosing when to wield that power. Even if SKG is completely killed by the government coming out and stating "yes we approve of corpos scamming you out of what you paid for eat shit", that is still a victory because it binds them to a ruling, which can then be definitively challenged and overturned in the future. They are only currently getting away with it because there is a giant void of vague legalese that everyone in power has been deliberately avoiding. SKG forces them to actually address the problem.

>>717280635
sorry goycattle, you didn't name 20 indie live service games like i asked you and replied to another post instead, now bend over and take my dick, retard golem

>>717280320
>if they are too complicated to read by the consumers?

How the fuck is it complicated for you to know games like Marvel Rivals, WoW, League of Legends, etc.are perma online and not playable offline?

>>717277929 (OP)
>stop killing games forced a privately run payment processor to remove games from storefronts via the government
that makes a lot of sense

>>717280835
The law stated that the term and conditions that most games made you sign at the start doesn't really have legal power.

>>717280346
>One.
The correct answer is zero, but I'll take it. Now, how long do you think it'll be before that happens, if it doesn't happen already?

>Now go and find me
I already said I'm not doing that dance. You can look up the list yourself. Maybe there'll be a game on there you concede is good, maybe not. The point is that such a game WILL be on there eventually. Maybe today, maybe tomorrow, maybe many years from now. It WILL happen unless there is law to prevent it enacted NOW.

>>717280410
>You made a fantasy scenario in your mind
Yes, that is how hypothetical scenarios work. You already conceded the point, move on.

>>717280730
You didn't answer the question.

>>717280993
> Your honor, when i bought Concord, a permaonline shooter, i had no idea it was permaonline! And despite the huge refund window, all the internet information about it and the game information itself, i am still ignorant!

You know at some point you're gonna have to act like a man and stop playing victim, it's such a female behavior.

>>717280835
OK now ask that question for single-player games like The Crew.

>>717281138

Lots of games can be played single player but still require perma online connection, game devs do it to make it near impossible to crack. Like Diablo,Anthem, etc.

You just want games to be easier to crack

>>717278036
FPBP OP is retarded

>>717278319
>>717279942
Based and correct. Keep calling.

>>717280635
Then I will just create my own private server

>Hurrr that's not allowed daddy government help the game company

See me and the game company are the same

Company wants daddy government that I don't make private servers
and I want daddy government to make company have offline options

it's fair

>itt OP pretends to be retarded by saying stupid and inflammatory things for “teh lulz” and people feed him like the faggot he is
I haven’t been here in a while, but it’s almost kind if comforting to see some things never change.

>>717281245
> No no you see me trying to force game devs to alter their product is the same as me stealing it and offering it to others for free

>>717279825
>corpos
lol stopped reading there, grow up

>>717281086
>> Your honor, when i bought Concord, a permaonline shooter, i had no idea it was permaonline! And despite the huge refund window, all the internet information about it and the game information itself, i am still ignorant!
Yes, and?

You have to accept this person exists. In fact, there are many of them. Somewhere out there, an absolute legion of tired parents are looking to buy their kid a video game. They don't know the difference between an always-online vs. offline game, they don't know what the fuck "the internet" thinks about it because to them "the internet" is their friends and family posting retarded political takes on facebook. And they are being taken advantage of when they choose to buy a product that is designed to become non-functional at the whim of the publisher.

Why is it wrong to advocate for consumer protections for people like them?
Why is it important that we live in a world where we HAVE to research every single game we buy or risk getting scammed?
Why are video games the only product where there is somehow a moral imperative to allow them to secretly become non-functional when that would rightfully be called fraud if it were from any other industry?

>>717277929 (OP)
>issue A exists
>movement A started to challenge issue A
>issue B popped up
>movement A was and is never about issue B
>faggot cries on an online forum about movement A instead of starting a movement B to tackle issue B
NIGGER
NIGGER
NIGGER

>>717281558
>You have to accept this person exists.

And it doesn't deserve legal protection.

>>717281214
>game devs do it to make it near impossible to crack.
So then it shouldn't be an issue for them to make an end of life plan for those games then, right?

If the only objective is to prevent piracy, then when it's no longer worthwhile to keep the server active to prevent piracy, surely it's no longer worth continuing to prevent piracy, so they can make it playable offline.

>>717281661

Why should they want you to keep playing something you didn't pay for?
>Ha! you closed your amusement park? Then it shouldn't be a problem if i break IN and use it anyways, HA!!

>>717279037
Yeah, this, GaaS users are known to be social butterflies with thousands of friends. Also girlfriends! And great bonds with their their relatives!

>>717281382
>trying to force game devs to alter their product

No I'm not, that's the option if you want to stop private servers

in fact I'm not actually asking daddy government to impose rules but rather remove rules

if you are not providing that service anymore
then somebody else should

it's only fair

>>717281531
Do you think corpos aren't real? Or that it's bad to call them that?

>>717281641
>And it doesn't deserve legal protection.
Why not?
And what about my other questions?
Why do WE have to continue to be in the position of NEEDING to check if every game is going to be always-online, or contain some other kind of scam?
Would you want to live in a world where supermarkets were legally allowed to sell rotten meat?
All you would have to do in that world would be to spend the extra time and effort to check that the food you're buying isn't spoiled. Which isn't even really hard.
But nobody wants to take that chance. Nobody wants to have to put in the effort, even if it's a relatively small amount of effort.
Everyone wants to live in a world where they don't have to worry about being scammed.
So why is it that video games are seemingly the only exception to this?
What is special about video games that makes it so important that sometimes consumers should not be allowed to get what they pay for?

>>717281771
They don't. But by law they have to, like everything else. Cars companies want customers to buy the latest model but they also can break your old car to force you to buy it. Phones companies want you to buy their latest phones but they can't brick your phones to force you to do so. What all of those things have in common? You already paid for them and they're your.

>>717277929 (OP)
>Do you really not see the irony
No, mr shill. Hope you're getting a fat check for posting here

>>717281912
>if you are not providing that service anymore
>then somebody else should

Yet it's not pirates the ones altering the game code to host private servers, you're literally telling daddy government to FORCE game devs to add a single player mode or a pirate server option.

>>717281771
>Why should they want you to keep playing something you didn't pay for?
But I did pay for it. And now I want to play it.
>>Ha! you closed your amusement park? Then it shouldn't be a problem if i break IN and use it anyways, HA!!
If it's shut down permanently? Then yes actually, why SHOULDN'T it be a problem? At least from the perspective of the company. If they've given up all attempts at making the park profitable, if they've abandoned everything that's inside, why shouldn't anyone be allowed to take or use it? This is how copyright law works, things pass into public domain if they're not regularly used by the copyright holders.

>>717282184

You're not entitled to other people's property becuase you bought a ticket for $5 USD once anon.

>>717282367
And why is that?

>>717282413

Because you bought a ticket to ride the games for a certain period of time, you didn't buy the deed of ownership of the park

Are you stupid?
Or worse, underage?

>>717282514
So? I’ll do whatever I want.

>>717282174
>you're literally telling daddy government to FORCE game devs to add a single player mode or a pirate server option.
Yes, and?

I run my own business. I am required by law to keep records of most everything I do in my business. I have to do a substantial amount of work almost every day in keeping those records up to date. Nobody looks at those records, and it's likely nobody ever will. I still have to do it.

That's the way the world works. If you go into business, there are going to be regulations on that business. You have to do a bit of additional work you'd much rather not do in order to abide by those regulations. Most of the time abiding by those regulations is going to seem silly and pointless, but it's in the public best interest that everyone continues to do them, just in case. Nearly every single adult with a real job has to accept this.

So yes, this means that devs will have to do a bit of extra work. Boo hoo. Literally grow up, put on your big boy pants, and do your fucking job like every other functioning adult in society.

>>717282174
>you're literally telling daddy government to FORCE game devs to add a single player mode or a pirate server option.

LuL no I'm not, WoW has private servers and they never made a pirate server option it was all reverse engineered by randos

It's simple you can either add a single player option to your game and if you don't want to do that then that's completely fine
but when the game ceases operation, if someone runs a private server of it you are not allowed cry to daddy government for help because you have refused to provide that service

it's fair

>>717282367
>You're not entitled to other people's property becuase you bought a ticket
Except... yes, I am. That's what buying a ticket means. I'm entitled to use of the product/service according to the restrictions when I bought that ticket.

If I buy a ticket that gives me access for an hour, I get the hour.
If I buy a ticket that gives me access for a day, I get the day.
If I buy a ticket that gives me access for a weekend, I get the weekend.
If I buy a ticket that allows me to take some merch home with me, I get that merch, and it becomes my property.

>>717282772

Your comment is so stupid.
If it's no big deal and you pro pirate hackers can just turn any online game into a private or single player game, why start a whole youtuber drama cringe campaign to FORCE game devs to HELP you make those private servers?

if you're so competent and you can do it yourself what's stopping you ?

>>717277929 (OP)
very schizo and incoherent OP. Very funny

>>717282514
And what’re you gonna do about it? Gonna cry? Gonna shit yourself?

>>717282909
you live to serve jews

>>717282837
>I'm entitled to use of the product/service according to the restrictions

And where did your crew ticket say "You own the game forever and you can play it whenever you want" to the point the devs are not allowed to just close the servers when it has 0 players left?

>>717283019
Where did it say I didn't?

>>717277929 (OP)
I hate Ross and his little gay club but these issues are not related, schizo.
There have always been social interest groups targeting videogames from every angle because it is easy since they are toy manufacturers at the end of the day, hell, even Hasbro has a little more fight in them but vidya is mostly an independent industry with only a few important participants and those are not large enough to have the plaintiff of lawyers needed to fight most of these groups so they have to concede at the end of the day.

This is why all these groups, grifters, NGOs and youtubers attacking the industry are dangerous because they are most likely to win.
I agree that involving the government is asking for trouble because the issue could be politicized and backfire horribly and Ross is quite frankly playing with fire and his little sect is too retarded and underaged to understand that.

As for the payment processors business, first time?
Kiwi Farms could not fight it.
R18+ could not fight it.
Gab could not fight it.
I care enough to have participated and sent Visa and Mastershit an angry letter and a phone call demanding to cease this at the expense of admitting I am a coomer but that is all I can reasonably do, while these interest groups have the "GREATER" good argument, it is what it is.
But that is what happens when you put a spotlight onto the industry.
Digital Media operates in a grey area.

>>717283019
>And where did your crew ticket say "You own the game forever and you can play it whenever you want"
When it said "single-player" on the box.
Actually, to be more precise, when it existed as a game to be bought in the first place, rather than something like a website that's free to access.
>but ackshually if you had used the internet to look up the EULA online BEFORE buying the game and then scrolled down 20 pages of legalese you would have seen that they wrote in "takesies backsies" so that means that you ackshually agreed to having it get taken away from you!
Cool story, but decades of legal precedent says you're wrong.

>>717279646
>Organizations aren't individuals.
They are a multitude of individuals, retard

>>717280273
>pepe picture
>Not what muh cult is about
>Mentions a game that won't be affected by SKG
Fucking imbecile

>>717283364
>Cool story, but decades of legal precedent says you're wrong.
Name 5 cases

>>717282909

>why start a whole youtuber drama cringe campaign to FORCE game devs to HELP you make those private servers?

Because you get sued by daddy government if you do, so why does daddy government only help the corpo?

so all that's being proposed here is that either daddy government helps both of the corpo/consumer
or daddy government doesn't help either

if corpos get protection for games that they no longer provide a service for
I should get protection for games that I have paid for

it's fair

>>717283373
>>Mentions a game that won't be affected by SKG
m8 did you even TRY to read what was being said, or are you just scanning for game titles and throwing a bitchfit automatically when you see someone mention a game that isn't directly related to SKG?

>>717283498
>do my homework for me
No. If you want to be uninformed then you can sit down and shut up while the adults save your hobby.

>>717282514
Who are you going to run crying to? Surely not big daddy government? You aren’t a little bitch, are you?

>>717277929 (OP)
>Don’t you guys see the irony here?
>Y’all asked for the government to prevent game companies from killing games
>AND NOW an entity outside of the government is demanding payment processors to kill more games!!
What?

>>717285164
>yall

swing from a rope ape

>>717285308
I’m quoting OP (superfaggot)

>>717277929 (OP)
Good legislation = Company X is not allowed to do this (reject payments based on anything other than illegality)
Bad legislation = Company X is forced to do this (run gachashit servers forever)

you can tell that skg is an eu initiative because only yurostanis with their slave mentality would cry to the government to ban other people from voluntarily spending money on something. if "corpos" are killing games it can only be because people are paying them to do it. instead of petitioning the government to make laws banning live service games why don't you petition your fellow gaymers to stop playing them?

>>717278036
Op homosexual effeminate shill btfo
With a simple sentence

>You getting sweet,sweet Karma having the government take away all your garbage p*rn games.
Nice of you to reveal you don't really care about video games