@@minatokirijio9059 When Digital started. This was literally the excuse game companies made for going digital. "It would be cheaper and it will keep prices lower" Blah Blah blah.
@@minatokirijio9059 Actually, digital is cheaper to put on the market, the real reason why the price is the same is that the company doesn't lose money
@@minatokirijio9059 Many questions we should ask the company. It makes sense that cancelling this costs means that it is cheaper for them, how much? We don't know. My assumption is around 20-22% per item. Should we have digital 20% cheaper? I think so.
@@CeeC_CeeC It's not the same because when you buy something physical, you own it. OP said "own nothing". True that they can make it so it stops working, but usually physical items wear out on their own without the need to design it to fail. However, with the ability to repair the item, you can prolong the item's life. That's why the right to repair is important, and that necessitates being able to get access to good replacement parts at a reasonable price, i.e. companies shouldn't be allowed to make agreements with their manufacturers not to sell replacement parts to third party repairers just so they can charge you more money for a first party repair or make money off of you when you buy a new replacement product.
@@thor.halsli Do you remember when we used to have VHS players? and you could record any movie or show on tv? How did you feel about that? Did you thought everyone doing this should be jailed?
Digital Ownership is you will own nothing and be Happy. The World Economic Forum (WEF) predicted that, by 2030, individuals would own nothing and be happy. Any unhappiness are called hate speech and censored.
Going digital only is the scummiest thing a company can do.. its the downfall of gaming.. no more sharing games.. no more selling them.. if they decide to patch a game on day and censor it like Stellar Blade theres nothing you can do about it.. if theres a single player game you bought online and they decide to remove it from your library in a few years theres nothing you can do about it.. its absolutely ridiculous..
games were always digital. What do you think is on a CD? if you want a copy of a game, use gog instead of steam, and put the offline installers on something like a backup drive. It's not hard. You can even share them if you really need to. gog has been around this entire time offering this but barely anyone uses it because they're too lazy to alt tab from steam
@@moonasha im talking about consoles.. its completely different for Pc.. the prices alone makes it worth buying from steam rather than psn.. plus you can mod them..
@@domino6434 in a real world outside of legalities, by virtue of data, we actually can own media, at least those outside requiring constant internet connection, specially the pirated copies. It's as good as the egg we bought in the supermarket, if not better. Factoring legalities though, yeah, we can't "legally" own digital media.
@@The_Endless_Now Any physical copy made in the last decade is worthless. once the servers go offline, you have a paperweight. Congratulations. Also, for Blu Ray. After a certain amount of time (usually 8-10 years) those blu ray discs will not play on new machines. When that license goes out, your ability to play it does too. Same thing with DVD's. Try to play a DVD today. Its a blast going through dozens of consoles, pcs, dvd players only for it to hit you with an FBI warning and not move. My best friend and i realized out 1000 DVD collection was literally useless when we tried to have an "analog movie night". IE: Setting up DVD players on a CRT and watching old movies. Yeah, they dont work. get a NAS and make copies of everything you own. THEN, you actually own them. Itll work on anything you use. Alcohol 120% is what I have been using to copy my DVDs since Disc Video inception.
Consoles are an L. The only way to really own your games is on PC through GOG. "But my discs" - can you make a backup copy in case you break the disc or it gets destroyed by Disc rot? No you can't.
I try to keep things physical. It’s going to get weird when they stop. I get the feeling the next console will just be digital and basically wall gardened rental boxes. 😅
@@kaytee7607 the Xbox Series S is already doing that. It has no disk drive and has a small storage space, and they made next gen games incompatible with standard external drives.
@@x149teI just walked thru a Walmart electronics section the other day. Have to disagree. It was backed full of games. More games than TV's, Switch games were insane, had like 3 windows. Also there was so much phone chargers and cases locked up in cases but the steel series headset for 230 was unlocked lmao
It should go away. Digital should be what humanity should and will focus on. And therefore we need the US to put out new ownership laws that prevents the mainstreamed license market on the long run (the moment the US puts out such a law then it will even fix many problems within maybe even the same year)
@@loaderboter3026 yup when every game will be a license that companies can pull away whenever they deem, it´s the law now, you don´t buy games you license them. Isn´t that a great feeling?
this means nothing. until companies stop having the right to remove the game from your library and provide a way for semi-live service games to be played offline/locally hosted, the problem wont go away. and no i'm not paying 130/yr for this program.
another person that didnt watch the video i see. this passing gives a profit incentive for companies to sell actual games once customers they see they are buying a license for $60 but a company like gog is selling the actual game for the same $60 and they buy from that company instead
they did it with team fortress 2, i thought i was going crazy. but the models and textures over time just got less of that exagerrated phong lighting on the edges of things. and overall the quality of even weapon viewmodels took a dip. you also needed to get closer to a simple object before it pops into the world for you to see. etc etc. all in favor of continuing to update teh game with more content. i still feel like its a raw trade, since i paid 20 euros for a game at the time, for the product of which i assumed wouldnt look as buttugly as it does now
"finally some good news"? All that changed is that under threat of fines, companies have to tell the truth about the digital content they obviously RENT.
And people WILL eat that shit up. People will now get used to not owning their games. Subscription based singleplayer "experiences" (not games) incoming! Good job epic consumer right advocates. You got played by the suits and bent over every consumer so the suits can screw them harder.
@@anaalkuusk949 As someone who has been pirating since the 1980s "I never owned them to begin with and I will not be 'renting' their titles either in the future."
I’ve been saying it for years. If it’s digitally “owned” they can take it from you whenever they want. Everyone said it wouldn’t happen and now we’re seeing it all over the place.
When did anyone said it won't happen. We just ignore the problems 😭😭😭. Anyways, we still have the 7 seas if they did try it. So not really worrying about that. Subscription game streaming is the real threat. The archivers can't even archive it if they go that route.
@@iGante Actually there are plenty of modern games that are great, God of war, wukong, elden ring, rdr2, bg3, ghost of tsushima, these are some of the best games of all time.
In the past, we switched to digital versions because it made updating games and fixing bugs easier. However, companies now exploit this by releasing unfinished games, removing content from consumers, and limiting their usage.
i feel like this law could backfire on consumers, buying a license to use a product and not a product itself seems like a great way for companies to weasel out of commitments and fuck us over even more.
@ThomasCpp The way it works now consumers will KNOW they are being sold a license. So there is no expectation of ownership. That's an improvement over companies lying with the words buy or sell or own. this way more normies will be awoken to the reality of our plight
This is absolutely useless. I don't want companies to disclaim that I don't actually own my digital product. I want to actually own my digital product. This is solving the wrong problem in the wrong way.
Totally agree. I don't even understand how they call this a victory. If anything this going to just legitimize more companies even potentially steam to go full on on making their library only available online and have the right to take games away when they so decide to...
You're absolutely wrong on this one. Sorry. You think way too much in short-term. The most important thing in this law is the fact that everyone, even people who dont watch this type of content, will get more aware of their rights, or in this case their lack of rights over their purchase. This is just a starting point, saying that this is absolutely useless makes you look like you don't think about your own statements for more than 5 seconds.
yep, what's the point of changing it from just "buy" to "buy license", when you can (fully/(own)"buy" it nowhere? lmao and if at all you know what's going to happen, fully own for a higher price point
@@OBEYTHEPYRAMID the idea is that consumers will read “buy license to play this game, you don’t actually own it”, and get upset as to why they’re only leasing a game. 99% of people don’t know they don’t own the game
Simple solution: don't own anything, pirate everything. If I can't buy to own, I won't buy it at all. I make rare exceptions for things like multiplayer games that can't be pirated, or games with good enough stuff on Steam Workshop, but generally speaking, If the damn thing has a DRM that can potentially lock me out of it someday, I'm staying the fuck away from it.
I agree with pirating everything, but I also kind of like getting "achievements" and having those achievements shown on my public profile heh. Personally, that's probably the main reason why I buy (sorry, not "buy" - buying ng implies ownership, I meant "pay for") games. The only other reason I pay for games is the dopamine hit I feel from 'buying' something. Buying things gives me warm fuzzies for that brief moment of purchase. Sometimes I'll buy a cheap bundle of games because they're on a big sale - and then I'll end up never playing any of those games. (Like, there's a bundle on HumbleBundle now that is tempting - but I know I likely won't play the games, I already have so many that I never play.) I think I give these companies money just for the dopamine fuzzies.
Digital games should be at a lower price because there are no real reason except ''convenience'' to get a digital copy, a physical copy keeps its value and if you choose later you can just sell it to another person. Also don't forget most sites says selling accounts is against their TOS and they could just remove an account that keeps getting switched around the world all the time.
The solution to a product with bad value is to not buy it instead of forcing the seller to sell at an arbitrary value which you are happy with. You are not and should not be entitled to ownership of someone else's property, the owner should always have the rights to decide whether they want to transfer what they own to you.
@@None38389 It's not "their property" anymore when I buy the game. That specific copy should be mine. Stop sucking up to corpos. If we allow this logic to spread, we will eventually find ourselves in a situation where even things like cars are bound by this. Thr free market doesn't stop perverse incentives.
That's why you buy physical. I have an offline Ps5 and you would be surprised at how many games install and play fine off the disc with no Internet required. Just don't expect the big triple A slop to work.
It's actually worse than nothing in my opinion, because now the lack of ownership is officially and directly endorsed by the law itself. That's a potentially huge step backwards.
@@danieltoth9742 It's neither worse or better. Its just an acknowledgement of what was already true. We already didn't own any of it under their current business model. Wishing it was like the past is a self defeating fantasy. They're going to do what they want regardless what we want. Just stop doing business with them or stfu up and be their good little dope user.
3:05 "Private Property Isn't Real" ... In a country without the right to bear arms. It is more complicated than that (e.g. property tax implies you do not have the right to your land in perpetuity), but on a fundamental level your ability to defend your property is what makes it yours.
2:14 we already have seen Sony deleting digital copies of concord. Yes they did at least refund, that doesn’t mean that you will always receive a refund.
This legislation is a trap. It's like GDPR that legalized spyware. This will legalize rented games, even offline ones. Right now it's a grey area, but only for online only games. Offline games is not a grey area. They don't have to supply the game to you forever, but they're not allowed to shut down the game. Why do you think it's happening in California out of everywhere? Because that's where most of the gaming industry is, meaning the most lobbying power. Seriously, do you think they'd support legislation where they have to admit the game is not forever if there's no upside? There's a huge upside in this opening the door for legal time restricted offline games. But this can only be enforced with DRM, which we shouldn't be supporting in the first place.
Rented games is not a grey area at all. Thats exactly what Xbox gamepass is. Gamepass is a recurring rental service that gives you access to a curated library of games. And its not the only one either. Even steam has had time limited demos before. There is no law against a company asking you for 30$ in exchange for access to a games DRM handshake for a pre-defined period of time.
very confusing comment. rented games are not a "gray area", all video game rentals say that they are rentals, you do realize digital video game rentals are already a thing right? how do you think gamefly is in business?
I stopped purchasing games when they decided digital will be as if not more expensive. They don't have to produce anything transport anything or stock anything. They decided to keep all the money. That was it for me.
Maybe I'll finally get through my library of offline games :P Agreed though. I stopped buying games brandnew years ago, and digital only games are on that list too
I remember buying FarCry 3 on PC DVD… Game wouldn’t run without Uplay Launcher. Once added to your account, the key is forever there and the DVD is just a paperweight. This new law is purely symbolic and changes nothing. The EULA already states that. If they wanted to do something positive with state regulations, storefronts should be forced to allow deregistering keys from your account and reselling them.
the new legislation isn't gonna solve the issue but it is a step forward because atleast now the average joe will be informed of what they are "buying". It's a potential stepping stone for real change later on
@@beckyg5952 That's such a dumb take. You assume that the vast majority of players are idiots. They aren't. They are just like you. Everybody knows what "digital" means....And by the way, that kind of take, that's exactly what greedy corps have on their consumers, and when they make decisions based on that assumption, it generally backlashes.
@OBEYTHEPYRAMID of course people know what digital means? When you buy something, the implication is, is that you OWN it, it cannot be taken away. I guarantee there's a good portion of people that don't know this. Maybe for people buying games its more well known, as they are generally younger and more in touch, but this legislation also applies to movies, music, shows, ebooks, etc. It will help raise awareness of what people are paying for, and u cannot sit here and tell me that that is a bad thing lmfao
So funny how UA-cam has this Rental functionality on movies... You either rent the movie for a lower price, knowing they will take it away from you Or you rent the movie for a higher price with only hope that they won't take it away from you.
"But it's not a product, it's a service!" A service can't retroactively change or undo a job that was already completed and paid for. A barber can't shave your head b/c it doesn't offer that style anymore. A mechanic can't take out half the oil from a previous change, and charge more for a full. A dealership can't take your car b/c it no longer selling that model.
service is not defined by what can be undone ( or unburdened by what has been ) . guess what if you hire someone to cut your grass, it will grow back and you have to hire them again
@@solarydays That's not the same as streaming and gaming removing or altering content you already paid for w/o consent. A better use of that analogy is, after the grass is cut, that person comes back, and mows it down further. They're taking back they're end of the transaction.
@@365ral dude, it's digital. I don't know which generation you are from, but since computers became available for the public products and services went in and out constantly. if you don't have enough common sense to understand the real value and lifespan of a digital product, I don't know what to tell you. if you want to own something, you gotta make sure you have a copy for yourself, and you have to maintain it, because the digital tool you store it on will be outdated over time as well. if you can't own it, then you gotta consider if the investment is still worth it for you. I play a couple games here and there, some free, some are a one time payment, but if they get shut down tomorrow, I couldn't care less, my life doesn't depend on it, I would find another way to relax, just like I did before computer games existed
So they are charging you more to rent a game digitally than buy it physically,hopefully the gen z generation who always say digital is the future might take notice of this.
They'll use a word like subscribe that we're used to so it doesn't feel so dirty. A lifetime* subscription sounds nicer than RENT, especially with 70 bucks on the line
The thing I found like stupid was that Thor wouldn’t go and talk with the guy who started the “Stop Killing Games” movement cause of course he is a dev. Like either he intentionally was missing the point or just is actually stupid.
@Lampoluke same. He's intentionally misleading when all ppl want is for them to not stop u trying to keep it going when it stops on their on and the don't have to do anything and can abandon it.
A key and important aspect of digital ownership is what happens to those assets when you die. My father was a huge audiophile. Had he existed in this time period perhaps much or all his music would have been purchased digitally and not on vinyl. What would have happened to said assets when he died? If its like other digital sellers, even accessing them with his passwords would be illegal under current user agreements. This is indeed about property rights. This goes for all the photos shared online as well, not just video games.
Instead of "Buy" or "Purchase" button they'll just walk around the issue and you'll have "Buy*" and "Purchase*" and a small print somewhere that you're purchasing a license not a game.
i dont understand what the good news are so instead of "we dont tell you that you buy things but we still own them" it goes to "we tell you that you buy things and we still own them" so literally the same thing but now people will buy less because they know *from steam
It's good news because it pulls the curtain back for people to see whats going on. It's hopefully the first step to the pendulum going the other way. Regardless if you like owning your games make GoG the first place you buy your games so you can download and backup your offline install files that can't be taken away from you. The more people that support GoG and request gaming companies offering their games there the more gaming companies will do that. Money is everything to these companies.
We need that law for real life home "ownership" too, I only realise after visiting China finding out most non-urban Chinese land is owned by citizens where people earn money in the city then build manson back in villages for retirement, they pay no property tax or council tax or anything for rural house, they OWN it (Fake media lies to us about CCP own all land never mentions that only applies to urban land). Meanwhile back in UK I bought my house yet I have to keep paying council tax, utility fees etc forever or it will be taken away, I do not own my house, I simply rent it from the government!
Yup. Other than perhaps income tax, property tax is the most diabolical form of taxation. Even if you want to be left alone completely, the government will go after you.
Yeah but just how many people do you think are capable of that anymore with the social credit score system? they can’t even rent a property in their 30’s with a bad credit score let alone save enough money to buy a mansion. The trick with communism is to make it seem fair but rig the game.
Actually you own the house, not land. The realestate companies have to pay to extend the contract of the land themselves.When they don’t the government take the land back but not own the buildings on it.If government wants to reuse the land they have to buy the properties from tenants before doing anything.That’s why sometimes you see many houses standing among highways and viaduct, because those tenants refuse to sell.
that's how all countries are dude. US is the only place where you don't actually own the property, since they can take it away if you don't pay the tax
Chinese do not own the land. They RENT the land. At the end of the rent period the property is returned to the government. And because the local governments don't collect rent and only earn money by RENTING land, they are running out of money to operate. Do you think your local government can operate without any income stream? Who is paying the police? The schools? What money is maintaining your infrastructure?
“Private property isn’t real, if somebody can take something away from you then you don’t really own it” The problem with western society in general, if people (primarily men) can’t own anything then they have no incentive to invest in the betterment of society.
So if you buy it, then the developer closes it, you can’t play it anymore? That’s not fair, you paid. This model only works if you are playing a free to download game with in-store purchases.
So to clarify what PirateSoftware said and why hes full of shit. Basically he said companies shouldnt be forced to provide a service. But stop killing games ISNT ASKING FOR THAT. Thor failed to actually read the FAQ of the movement which entirely explains all of his points and why hes wrong. Its simply asking for companies to have an end of service plan which allows players to keep playing the game after the company stops providing the service. Which is extremely fair and doesnt require the company to continue providing anything. Thor is a dev himself and just doesnt want whats good for the customer so hes fighting something about the movement that doesnt exist.
i want the ability to sell my digital games to other people the way i can sell physical copies. the fact that when you buy a digital game it's yours for life and there's nothing you can do about it is scummy. and they could even make money off it by charging a transfer fee.
That doesn’t do anything. If you cant copy the game you own on a physical object, the IP holder can remove the product from online store. So even if you can sell the digital version, if its no longer on a “store” (like steam) or the store goes broke (I think that will happen to the Ubisoft store) than it has no value since there is no way to download it again
Why would they do that ? Between forcing people to pay full price or even on sell, or getting a miserable fee on a product that going to prevent the consumer buying a legit copy...the maths are quick to make...
How about signing a bill that forces the stores to actually sell you the games instead of just admit that you won't own anything? That would be a much better bill.
digital ownership only works if we don’t need the companies permission aka the launcher. if it’s an online game sure you can’t own something that is a shared space.
you should be able to download the game within a certain amount of time of purchase date let’s say 5 years. After the 5th year it is up to the owner to maintain the game files and or to download it before the time allotted is over
as someone who works in a books store. ive seen a big uptake in people buying vinyl records(yes book stores here sell those) those are for new albums and artist as well, with a lot of teen and young adults buying them too. because people wanna own physical media,also a lot buy manga when they could get it cheaper online(or pirate it) and ofc books. so people still want physical media.
thats why im collecting physical copies now for my retirement. remember, "you'll own nothing and be happy" future will be a rental economy. applications are now monthly/annual subscription. there will be no such thing as perpetual license anymore. games will be next. Apple is already doing it you can only play games if you rent digitally.
Been a steam user from day one. With that said I just opened a GOG account. I will no longer purchase any more games on steam ever unless they are exclusive.
@@SneedTechIndustries-gf5hn You know what is even worse? We in Sweden pay a Pirate tax on everything we buy that has a storage... so a harddrive, - pirate tax, a mobile phone - pirate tax... and so on, but we are still not allowed to copy anything, how does this make sense? We have had this since 1999..
I thought this was obvious. If steam goes out of business or something in the future did people expect them to mail them a hard drive with all the games on it?
When it comes to modern games, we don't own most of them, even single player ones. Companies just give us, the customers, a licence to use their product ; basically, they 'let us' play their games like you would let your kid play with a toy. You can just take a kid's favourite toy and he can't do anything about it. That's more or less the same power we have as customers once we buy a game.
No one is asking for companies to keep running their games forever, or give away their code, SKG is just asking for them to keep the games on a playable state, that means as long as you can play offline, then that's enough.
I own an offline PS5 and you would be surprised at how many games can install and play fine with no Internet required. As long as you are not buying EA games or anything with a heavy multiplayer focus. So this narrative that all disc based games don't work is a lie.
@@kcadventures1454 Literally didn't say that, I said they OFTEN need patches and updates, I didn't say ALL games are released in that state. As an example if you have a day of release physical copy of Fallout New Vegas you are stuck with a LOT of bugs if you can't update the game. Don't put words in my mouth.
@@CaptainStardust1988 to me its just that digital copies should be costing way less, since its costing them way less. Especially Nintendo, their carts cost more than disc printing. The idea of digital games I think excited people in the past because they thought it would cost less but it doesn't lol. That or allow transferring of ownership at any time of digital copies just like physical
This also applies to business to business applications. For example a business buys a piece of software from a third party, the other company provides the application and later on removes said product or functionality, with only a vague TOS.
It's a really good direction, but the law need to be more aggresive on this since storefront does indeed sometimes removed your purchased products, but the more common are the publisher and/or developer who decided to shut down and invalidates your purchased product.
When steam came out, I was very skeptical for many years ... but the convenience just took over after some time. I'm still a bit afraid what happens when Gaben is gone.
Claim to ownership for a service, should only be in place while the service is supplied. That way a company has to choose whether they want to keep control of the products or shut down the service.
Stupidest thing I ever did was sign up to GOG with my work email, not really thinking anything of it. Then years later after I left, I tried to log in, and realised my email had been terminated. Everything gone. What a dingbat I am.
I lost my e-mail address to my Playstation account, for 3 years. It took a bit of time but I managed to get it back with a new e-mail address. I had kept all my purchase receipts to prove it with me, and also my playstation still had all the trophies. I am pretty sure you could get your GOG stuff back.
This doesn't change anything it just puts a label on what was already the case to remove liability from the companies. People being happy about this are delusional.
This is nothing. If they just forced lets say steam to change the wording from "buy" to "get key(license)" will it upset users? NO. And then the publisher decides to remove the game from steam library we can't make them liable now because they already stated its only "license" that you own. THIS IS NOT FOR CONSUMERS BUT FOR THE TECH COMPANIES.
So what you mean is that even if users are told directly that they don't own the game, that they will still spend their money anyways with full knowledge they don't own the game? In that case aren't they a 100% willing participant?
Read the TOS, digital media is a service where you essentially pay a fee to rent the media for the duration of that media life. If the company decide the life of the media is now over, then you dont have rights to the media anymore because its not available to rent anymore.
A company can put whatever they like in a TOS, but that doesn't magically make it lawful. A TOS can't supersede consumer protection laws (or any other laws, for that matter). So many people have been conned into believing a TOS is some sort of airtight legal document.
The problem is that the market of video games has not been built on that model and most users are not ok with those changes. We didn't have a say on that and they are playing on the fact that you can't find alternatives anymore. This is just absolutely anti consumerism and should be illegal.
@@paulw5039 I agree its all bs, but if you agree to rent something and accept those terms then you cant later moan that you dont own said something. Consumers allowed this model to brcome the norm, similar to how consumers allowed tipping to brcome the acceptable norm. both things are bs but thats how things are now.
@@nr12345 Where is this stupid logic coming from? What is it with some of you unable to think a thought through to its logical conclusion? "Consumers allowed this to become the norm", "that's how things are now"??!?!?!? So people are not allowed to make mistakes ever? Never be oblivious to a problem? Never allowed to admit or acknowledge a mistake being made? Never allowed to change?
@@Desolator-ny7cb Ever since he started pursuing voice acting, he turned to shilling to make sure he doesn't say the wrong things or have the wrong opinions to get blacklisted. Even if it means not reporting truthfully like the Concord thing.
removing the illusion of owning means they no longer need to keep up the act this will do so much damage have we learned nothing how many times will we cheer on the next chain
If I, as a license buyer, lose access to the license, the company must refund my money! Alternatively, companies can offer different usage rights with restrictions, but these should not cost as much as an unrestricted hardcopy!
wut? that ain't true mate.. most digital games don't require an internet connection with the exception from those who are an online service. I can still play FF7R without the internet as long as it is preinstalled earlier.
Devil's advocacy here - "Well, if we have to say we're just lending it to you, then why shouldn't we practice our rights to revoke it more readily?" I foresee this getting a lot worse.
Just a nothing burger. Will it change anything. Nope. Just one more screen we have to accept without reading. Don't act like this a big win, because the long term affects of this are minute.
I make videos for clicks... not even original content. Funny coming from a reaction channel. I want to instill me thoughts, casually, to make this seem important. It's not. See you in 10 years when it's still the same we just have one more pop up screen saying you don't own this, it is offered as a service and when the service ends, it is over. People will still sign up for it. Because Spotify, once you no longer pay for it, you have nothing.
People drastically overestimate how permanent a physical copy is. Even within my own lifetime I've had to replace games with digital versions because the physical storage eventually became corrupted. I think SSDs and blurays last a lot longer than HDDs and CDs/DVDs but they're still not forever. Even archive-grade storage devices have to be handled properly (climate control, etc.) for them to last. It's like Death Stranding. A lot of data only survives because it keeps getting recopied and redistributed. If it ever stops circulating and gets stuck sitting in one place too long it will decay in like 30 years and be permanently lost.
Archive grade storage devices are handled carefully because the people doing so have the resources to do so, and they want to maximize how long that physical data lasts. They're explicitly out to archive, so they optimize. Not because without climate control they'd automatically start melting or something. Having owned hundreds of CDs/DVDs for decades that have gone through extreme heat and cold, I've encountered 2 cases of disc rot. In all likelihood, this is a result of cheap or flawed manufacturing at certain plants. No one knows how long well made discs will last, since that format is only like 40+ years old, but the general guess is well after 100 years. In other words: not eternal, but stone tablets aren't eternal either.
It's a ledger system my friend, it's not some kind of elaborate high tech stuff. It's already serving it's function perfectly, there is simply not much practical use for it.
@@None38389Plenty of innovation is continuing to happen in the blockchain space. A big reason there isn’t utility has been because the tech hasn’t proven reliable for widely used large scale utility. If everyone was transacting on BTC it would be laughably slow and expensive to do so. Same goes for Ethereum. User friendly, fast, reliable tech is still not something that exists for integration into everyone’s everyday lives. But it’s coming.
Didn't Blizzard do this for ages? Soda wasn't even allowed to stream classic private servers or they would make sure to contact Twitch, and they would have to enforce a ban on you after a warning. This was before the time that anyone thought classic servers would be a thing (You think you do but you dont). The same happened with RuneScape and the 2009 era, but rather than making a private server, it was possible to make a third-party client to fully interface with the live oldschool game. It is now endorsed and approved by Jagex themselves. A great example of how it should be done - You are both benefiting the company and the community. I understand this is a rare case though.
@@dakotahoward2728 its ok Yong still can't speak english properly despite doing it for a living, claiming to be a "voice actor" and claiming english is his first language lol
Next idea to go forward: $50 digital $80 physical $30 DLC Unless its indie, these are the fairest prices people can afford in this godforsaken economy.
Some comments conflate the Netflix model with video on demand. - In the first, you have access to a catalog for the duration of a membership. It's fine to stop it. You knew what you were getting. - In the second, you bought access to watch a movie as many times as you want and whenever you want. Taking that right away without a (partial?) refund is not right.
Dude, why are you kids still making these? People were getting ratioed for being unoriginal and repetitive for this comment MONTHS ago .. Let alone STILL... 😂. 0 personality, just type what you see online.
I've never pirated anything until recently. I used to be a big advocate for paying for what people have made, but companies keep doing things to make that less convenient and secure. It's seems the only way to "own" something digital these days is to pirate it. One thing that really set me off recently is I got Amazon Prime and paid for the ad free version, but they still played ads under the guise of them being previews for other shows on Prime. That shit pissed me off so much. They wouldn't even refund me properly for deceiving me, so I had to take it up with fair trade Australia, and I won. I got my refund because what they did was blatant false advertising, but because it never went to court, they don't have to change the way they advertise the "ad free" level of subscription
The main reason I still own a console is for physical media. I've moved away from purchasing digital content on consoles because many older digital games I "own" aren't playable on newer systems, or are removed from stores like PSN, XBL, and Nintendo, or are updated with content removed in games like GTA, Burnout, or Gran Turismo. Thankfully, owning physical copies allows me to sell them if they're incompatible with new consoles. In which I then use the cash I made to repurchase some of those games I enjoyed on PC. Otherwise, if I see a digital game I'm interest in on console, I now check PC stores first, to either purchase them or add them to my wishlist and wait for a sale.
As consumers, we need transparency regarding what we’re actually purchasing-whether it’s simply the right to access (a license) or ownership of a digital copy. When paying for a subscription, you’re buying access to a catalog that can change at any time. However, when purchasing individual digital media, you should be clearly informed and given the option to download and store it locally for personal use.
This is huge, if they can retroactively force companies to sell permanent digital games to the user. I've recently been buying disks more and more, they may take up a little bit of space but they are at least playable.
It says they cant use the word buy UNLESS they tell you your liscense can be revoked. So theyre just gonna keep the buy button and tell you in the fine print. Nothing will change
And you wonder why some people are still console gamers…this is why. STILL haven’t gotten Baldur’s Gate 3 because I don’t want to just have the digital downloaded version…I want the physical copy!
If they can revoke ownership of a thing that you buy then you're not buying it, you're renting it. You can't get your car revoked after you buy it, but you can if you rent it. If we don't own it then we're renting it, and if we're renting it why indeed are we paying the price for ownership. I miss the days of having an exe file, or mpeg legally. That's digital ownership.
What I hate is that digital copies still having the same prices like physical copies, they should lower the price more if it's only digital
How much do you think it costs them to physically make it. And how much cheaper should digital be. And how much does it cost to sell digital
Alot less then the millions it would cost to ship world wide @@minatokirijio9059
@@minatokirijio9059 When Digital started. This was literally the excuse game companies made for going digital. "It would be cheaper and it will keep prices lower" Blah Blah blah.
@@minatokirijio9059 Actually, digital is cheaper to put on the market, the real reason why the price is the same is that the company doesn't lose money
@@minatokirijio9059 Many questions we should ask the company. It makes sense that cancelling this costs means that it is cheaper for them, how much? We don't know. My assumption is around 20-22% per item. Should we have digital 20% cheaper? I think so.
digital ownership = own nothing and be happy.
nah.
Same as physical. They can stop them from working if they wish to..
@@CeeC_CeeC bulshit a cd has the hole game , you are right if its an online serverside game ,before online gaming was offline gaming
What’s so bad about being happy? 🤔
@@CeeC_CeeC It's not the same because when you buy something physical, you own it. OP said "own nothing". True that they can make it so it stops working, but usually physical items wear out on their own without the need to design it to fail. However, with the ability to repair the item, you can prolong the item's life. That's why the right to repair is important, and that necessitates being able to get access to good replacement parts at a reasonable price, i.e. companies shouldn't be allowed to make agreements with their manufacturers not to sell replacement parts to third party repairers just so they can charge you more money for a first party repair or make money off of you when you buy a new replacement product.
That's why I prefer physical media. But unfortunately, they are extincted in the PC gaming.
Let me translate "digital ownership" to you, digital "ownership" in a nutshell: no ownership, you are welcome.
Then don't buy the game.
@@phillyjones3028 thats the problem. You dont buy the game. You buy an licence
"You will own nothing and be happy."
@@phillyjones3028 That is exactly the argument. We are not buying them so stores should not be allowed to say we are buying them.
It just means youre renting it until Amazon decides you ain’t
If purchasing is not owning then Piracy is not stealing. They just legalized Piracy
Please stop taking drugs.
@@thor.halsli Do you remember when we used to have VHS players? and you could record any movie or show on tv? How did you feel about that? Did you thought everyone doing this should be jailed?
@@thor.halsli nooo not my heckin tech coprorinos! you can't steal from them!!
The logic ain't logic-ing
Ah yes, false equivalence fallacy at it's finest.
Digital Ownership is you will own nothing and be Happy. The World Economic Forum (WEF) predicted that, by 2030, individuals would own nothing and be happy. Any unhappiness are called hate speech and censored.
Yeah, it isn't a statement of how reality would be, but a command to be followed.
YUP
And eating bugs, don't forget to mention that ☝🏼
maybe you should actually read the wef website and stop spreading fake news.
They removed the video containing the infamous own nothing/happy quote. So your point is?
Going digital only is the scummiest thing a company can do.. its the downfall of gaming.. no more sharing games.. no more selling them.. if they decide to patch a game on day and censor it like Stellar Blade theres nothing you can do about it.. if theres a single player game you bought online and they decide to remove it from your library in a few years theres nothing you can do about it.. its absolutely ridiculous..
games were always digital. What do you think is on a CD? if you want a copy of a game, use gog instead of steam, and put the offline installers on something like a backup drive. It's not hard. You can even share them if you really need to. gog has been around this entire time offering this but barely anyone uses it because they're too lazy to alt tab from steam
@@moonashathank god
I never sold nor shared my games growing up so that isn’t a concern to me
Its ridiculous to think that a company should be forced to waste the money manufacturing discs and cases, when 90% of their sales are digital.
@@moonasha im talking about consoles.. its completely different for Pc.. the prices alone makes it worth buying from steam rather than psn.. plus you can mod them..
Digital ownership is an oxymoron.
In a perfect world - not really, in a place where people want to maximise profits and gains - yeah buddy
@@domino6434 in a real world outside of legalities, by virtue of data, we actually can own media, at least those outside requiring constant internet connection, specially the pirated copies. It's as good as the egg we bought in the supermarket, if not better. Factoring legalities though, yeah, we can't "legally" own digital media.
GOG is the only example I can think of that sells DRM free games
"Physical copy" is also an oxymoron.
@@The_Endless_Now Any physical copy made in the last decade is worthless. once the servers go offline, you have a paperweight. Congratulations.
Also, for Blu Ray. After a certain amount of time (usually 8-10 years) those blu ray discs will not play on new machines. When that license goes out, your ability to play it does too. Same thing with DVD's. Try to play a DVD today. Its a blast going through dozens of consoles, pcs, dvd players only for it to hit you with an FBI warning and not move. My best friend and i realized out 1000 DVD collection was literally useless when we tried to have an "analog movie night". IE: Setting up DVD players on a CRT and watching old movies.
Yeah, they dont work.
get a NAS and make copies of everything you own. THEN, you actually own them. Itll work on anything you use. Alcohol 120% is what I have been using to copy my DVDs since Disc Video inception.
Digital consoles are an L
True. Imagine being banned from using the PlayStation store, scary stuff.
Consoles are an L. The only way to really own your games is on PC through GOG. "But my discs" - can you make a backup copy in case you break the disc or it gets destroyed by Disc rot? No you can't.
I try to keep things physical. It’s going to get weird when they stop. I get the feeling the next console will just be digital and basically wall gardened rental boxes. 😅
@@kaytee7607 the Xbox Series S is already doing that. It has no disk drive and has a small storage space, and they made next gen games incompatible with standard external drives.
I like my digital ps5
They don't want to sell a product, they want to sell a service.
They can keep their service, I want a product.
@@MorMacFey-v2g and? you get what they sell to you. and it will be a service
Newsome: our citizens deserve transparency!
Also Newsome: signs law banning voter ID.
Newsome is a real snake in the grass.
Agreed but I do like this particular thing so I’ll say good job Newsome everything else you do fucking sucks but this was a ok first step.
I hate him, but I can't say Everything he does is bad
Voter fraud is a non issue. If you disagree I'd like to see the proof
@@Mariscos420 Sorry, I can't inquire to my dead grandma why she voted for the dems.
Physical should never go away
Too late. PC gaming is 99,9% digital, mobile is 100% digital, consoles is 40-60% digital (nintendo is 30%)
@@x149teI just walked thru a Walmart electronics section the other day. Have to disagree. It was backed full of games. More games than TV's, Switch games were insane, had like 3 windows. Also there was so much phone chargers and cases locked up in cases but the steel series headset for 230 was unlocked lmao
@@x149teok?
It should go away. Digital should be what humanity should and will focus on. And therefore we need the US to put out new ownership laws that prevents the mainstreamed license market on the long run (the moment the US puts out such a law then it will even fix many problems within maybe even the same year)
@@loaderboter3026 yup when every game will be a license that companies can pull away whenever they deem, it´s the law now, you don´t buy games you license them. Isn´t that a great feeling?
this means nothing. until companies stop having the right to remove the game from your library and provide a way for semi-live service games to be played offline/locally hosted, the problem wont go away.
and no i'm not paying 130/yr for this program.
yup. it's just newsom signing another virtue signal law before election
another person that didnt watch the video i see. this passing gives a profit incentive for companies to sell actual games once customers they see they are buying a license for $60 but a company like gog is selling the actual game for the same $60 and they buy from that company instead
@@authenticinari-fox8164 Except it won't. All that'll happen is there'll be a mini-EULA explaining this in legalese that people won't read.
Games will get shadow updates slowly turning all the characters ugly and gay.
Well it time for Asian game ?
Overwatch in a nutshell
they did it with team fortress 2, i thought i was going crazy. but the models and textures over time just got less of that exagerrated phong lighting on the edges of things. and overall the quality of even weapon viewmodels took a dip. you also needed to get closer to a simple object before it pops into the world for you to see. etc etc.
all in favor of continuing to update teh game with more content. i still feel like its a raw trade, since i paid 20 euros for a game at the time, for the product of which i assumed wouldnt look as buttugly as it does now
@@citizenofhyruleit sad to it happening man
So, Is that what Pokemon Go is doing? Lol
"finally some good news"? All that changed is that under threat of fines, companies have to tell the truth about the digital content they obviously RENT.
Corporations call fines "cost of doing business" fines mean nothing.
And people WILL eat that shit up. People will now get used to not owning their games.
Subscription based singleplayer "experiences" (not games) incoming! Good job epic consumer right advocates. You got played by the suits and bent over every consumer so the suits can screw them harder.
It's not rental either. Those at least tell you how long they last in clear terms. This is the worst of both worlds.
@@anaalkuusk949 As someone who has been pirating since the 1980s "I never owned them to begin with and I will not be 'renting' their titles either in the future."
@@MorMacFey-v2g this isnt about you
I’ve been saying it for years. If it’s digitally “owned” they can take it from you whenever they want.
Everyone said it wouldn’t happen and now we’re seeing it all over the place.
not on GOG
Most modern games are actual trash anyway why would anybody care about triple a garbage
You could be saying the cure to cancer for 1000 years no1 cares
When did anyone said it won't happen. We just ignore the problems 😭😭😭.
Anyways, we still have the 7 seas if they did try it. So not really worrying about that. Subscription game streaming is the real threat. The archivers can't even archive it if they go that route.
@@iGante Actually there are plenty of modern games that are great, God of war, wukong, elden ring, rdr2, bg3, ghost of tsushima, these are some of the best games of all time.
Remember when they said that digital only would lead to cheaper games 😂
Cheaper for them😅
it does on steam...
Then steam pays the difference then
In the past, we switched to digital versions because it made updating games and fixing bugs easier. However, companies now exploit this by releasing unfinished games, removing content from consumers, and limiting their usage.
i feel like this law could backfire on consumers, buying a license to use a product and not a product itself seems like a great way for companies to weasel out of commitments and fuck us over even more.
Which is why I think there should be more follow up for that rule
That is already how it works.
And now it's codified in law. Thanks, California.
@@ThomasCpp it's a grey area because it's not explicitly told to the consumer
@ThomasCpp The way it works now consumers will KNOW they are being sold a license. So there is no expectation of ownership. That's an improvement over companies lying with the words buy or sell or own. this way more normies will be awoken to the reality of our plight
This is absolutely useless. I don't want companies to disclaim that I don't actually own my digital product. I want to actually own my digital product.
This is solving the wrong problem in the wrong way.
Totally agree. I don't even understand how they call this a victory. If anything this going to just legitimize more companies even potentially steam to go full on on making their library only available online and have the right to take games away when they so decide to...
Its just "not solving the problem so i can pretend like i did and also campaign on it later" standard politician stuff.
You're absolutely wrong on this one. Sorry.
You think way too much in short-term. The most important thing in this law is the fact that everyone, even people who dont watch this type of content, will get more aware of their rights, or in this case their lack of rights over their purchase.
This is just a starting point, saying that this is absolutely useless makes you look like you don't think about your own statements for more than 5 seconds.
yep, what's the point of changing it from just "buy" to "buy license", when you can (fully/(own)"buy" it nowhere? lmao and if at all you know what's going to happen, fully own for a higher price point
@@OBEYTHEPYRAMID the idea is that consumers will read “buy license to play this game, you don’t actually own it”, and get upset as to why they’re only leasing a game. 99% of people don’t know they don’t own the game
Simple solution: don't own anything, pirate everything.
If I can't buy to own, I won't buy it at all. I make rare exceptions for things like multiplayer games that can't be pirated, or games with good enough stuff on Steam Workshop, but generally speaking, If the damn thing has a DRM that can potentially lock me out of it someday, I'm staying the fuck away from it.
I agree with pirating everything, but I also kind of like getting "achievements" and having those achievements shown on my public profile heh. Personally, that's probably the main reason why I buy (sorry, not "buy" - buying ng implies ownership, I meant "pay for") games.
The only other reason I pay for games is the dopamine hit I feel from 'buying' something. Buying things gives me warm fuzzies for that brief moment of purchase. Sometimes I'll buy a cheap bundle of games because they're on a big sale - and then I'll end up never playing any of those games. (Like, there's a bundle on HumbleBundle now that is tempting - but I know I likely won't play the games, I already have so many that I never play.) I think I give these companies money just for the dopamine fuzzies.
@@CogNoman If you’re playing on steam you can “pirate” achievements with Steam Achievement Manager lol.
After psn crashed the last Days for nearly 10Hours no way they can bring people buy only digital.
Nintendo Wii and WiiU owners can no longer download the digital games they purchased because Nintendo shut down the stores.
Digital games should be at a lower price because there are no real reason except ''convenience'' to get a digital copy, a physical copy keeps its value and if you choose later you can just sell it to another person. Also don't forget most sites says selling accounts is against their TOS and they could just remove an account that keeps getting switched around the world all the time.
I mean, this is better than nothing, but the real solution would be to force companies to actually let us own the games we buy.
The solution to a product with bad value is to not buy it instead of forcing the seller to sell at an arbitrary value which you are happy with. You are not and should not be entitled to ownership of someone else's property, the owner should always have the rights to decide whether they want to transfer what they own to you.
@@None38389 It's not "their property" anymore when I buy the game. That specific copy should be mine. Stop sucking up to corpos. If we allow this logic to spread, we will eventually find ourselves in a situation where even things like cars are bound by this. Thr free market doesn't stop perverse incentives.
That's why you buy physical. I have an offline Ps5 and you would be surprised at how many games install and play fine off the disc with no Internet required. Just don't expect the big triple A slop to work.
It's actually worse than nothing in my opinion, because now the lack of ownership is officially and directly endorsed by the law itself. That's a potentially huge step backwards.
@@danieltoth9742 It's neither worse or better. Its just an acknowledgement of what was already true. We already didn't own any of it under their current business model. Wishing it was like the past is a self defeating fantasy. They're going to do what they want regardless what we want. Just stop doing business with them or stfu up and be their good little dope user.
3:05 "Private Property Isn't Real" ... In a country without the right to bear arms.
It is more complicated than that (e.g. property tax implies you do not have the right to your land in perpetuity), but on a fundamental level your ability to defend your property is what makes it yours.
2:14 we already have seen Sony deleting digital copies of concord. Yes they did at least refund, that doesn’t mean that you will always receive a refund.
This legislation is a trap. It's like GDPR that legalized spyware. This will legalize rented games, even offline ones. Right now it's a grey area, but only for online only games. Offline games is not a grey area. They don't have to supply the game to you forever, but they're not allowed to shut down the game.
Why do you think it's happening in California out of everywhere? Because that's where most of the gaming industry is, meaning the most lobbying power. Seriously, do you think they'd support legislation where they have to admit the game is not forever if there's no upside? There's a huge upside in this opening the door for legal time restricted offline games.
But this can only be enforced with DRM, which we shouldn't be supporting in the first place.
Absolutely true
I’m afraid you may be right
Rented games is not a grey area at all. Thats exactly what Xbox gamepass is. Gamepass is a recurring rental service that gives you access to a curated library of games. And its not the only one either. Even steam has had time limited demos before.
There is no law against a company asking you for 30$ in exchange for access to a games DRM handshake for a pre-defined period of time.
Spyware is already legalised under the patriot act
very confusing comment. rented games are not a "gray area", all video game rentals say that they are rentals, you do realize digital video game rentals are already a thing right? how do you think gamefly is in business?
Like Disney changing or removing movies from their library too.
when physical media dies thats when I stop being a consumer
I stopped purchasing games when they decided digital will be as if not more expensive. They don't have to produce anything transport anything or stock anything. They decided to keep all the money. That was it for me.
Maybe I'll finally get through my library of offline games :P Agreed though. I stopped buying games brandnew years ago, and digital only games are on that list too
I remember buying FarCry 3 on PC DVD… Game wouldn’t run without Uplay Launcher. Once added to your account, the key is forever there and the DVD is just a paperweight.
This new law is purely symbolic and changes nothing. The EULA already states that. If they wanted to do something positive with state regulations, storefronts should be forced to allow deregistering keys from your account and reselling them.
Yea I remember this same exact thing with Battlefield 4
the new legislation isn't gonna solve the issue but it is a step forward because atleast now the average joe will be informed of what they are "buying". It's a potential stepping stone for real change later on
@@beckyg5952 That's such a dumb take. You assume that the vast majority of players are idiots. They aren't. They are just like you. Everybody knows what "digital" means....And by the way, that kind of take, that's exactly what greedy corps have on their consumers, and when they make decisions based on that assumption, it generally backlashes.
@OBEYTHEPYRAMID of course people know what digital means? When you buy something, the implication is, is that you OWN it, it cannot be taken away. I guarantee there's a good portion of people that don't know this. Maybe for people buying games its more well known, as they are generally younger and more in touch, but this legislation also applies to movies, music, shows, ebooks, etc. It will help raise awareness of what people are paying for, and u cannot sit here and tell me that that is a bad thing lmfao
So funny how UA-cam has this Rental functionality on movies...
You either rent the movie for a lower price, knowing they will take it away from you
Or you rent the movie for a higher price with only hope that they won't take it away from you.
I didn't even think about it that way wow
"But it's not a product, it's a service!" A service can't retroactively change or undo a job that was already completed and paid for. A barber can't shave your head b/c it doesn't offer that style anymore. A mechanic can't take out half the oil from a previous change, and charge more for a full. A dealership can't take your car b/c it no longer selling that model.
service is not defined by what can be undone ( or unburdened by what has been ) . guess what if you hire someone to cut your grass, it will grow back and you have to hire them again
@@solarydays That's not the same as streaming and gaming removing or altering content you already paid for w/o consent. A better use of that analogy is, after the grass is cut, that person comes back, and mows it down further. They're taking back they're end of the transaction.
@@365ral dude, it's digital. I don't know which generation you are from, but since computers became available for the public products and services went in and out constantly. if you don't have enough common sense to understand the real value and lifespan of a digital product, I don't know what to tell you.
if you want to own something, you gotta make sure you have a copy for yourself, and you have to maintain it, because the digital tool you store it on will be outdated over time as well.
if you can't own it, then you gotta consider if the investment is still worth it for you.
I play a couple games here and there, some free, some are a one time payment, but if they get shut down tomorrow, I couldn't care less, my life doesn't depend on it, I would find another way to relax, just like I did before computer games existed
So they are charging you more to rent a game digitally than buy it physically,hopefully the gen z generation who always say digital is the future might take notice of this.
This mean steam gonna have to forever change certain games from "BUY to RENT,"
Like the new black ops 6 is for RENT at $69.99. Not Buy for $69.99
Doubt they'll use the word rent.
They'll use a word like subscribe that we're used to so it doesn't feel so dirty. A lifetime* subscription sounds nicer than RENT, especially with 70 bucks on the line
@@SongokuJidai Nah, they will still use "BUY" but with a asterisk. * Buy the license to play the game until the dev pull a bullshit moves.
What you're buying is a license. Not matter digital or physical. You always buy a license.
I doubt it. It's like buying a cinema ticket. You're not owning the movie, you just bought a ticket to get a seat to experience it
The thing I found like stupid was that Thor wouldn’t go and talk with the guy who started the “Stop Killing Games” movement cause of course he is a dev. Like either he intentionally was missing the point or just is actually stupid.
Willfully ignoramt
Lost respect of him for that, I understand where is he coming from but allying himself with corrupt corpos is not really respect-inducing
@Lampoluke same. He's intentionally misleading when all ppl want is for them to not stop u trying to keep it going when it stops on their on and the don't have to do anything and can abandon it.
Gavin Newsom with a rare W
probably his sole W
An unfathomably rare W
hes had many lol
@@Hazelomg😂 you dropped your clown nose
@@Hazelomg He has way more L than W that's for certain.
A key and important aspect of digital ownership is what happens to those assets when you die. My father was a huge audiophile. Had he existed in this time period perhaps much or all his music would have been purchased digitally and not on vinyl. What would have happened to said assets when he died? If its like other digital sellers, even accessing them with his passwords would be illegal under current user agreements.
This is indeed about property rights. This goes for all the photos shared online as well, not just video games.
Instead of "Buy" or "Purchase" button they'll just walk around the issue and you'll have "Buy*" and "Purchase*" and a small print somewhere that you're purchasing a license not a game.
i dont understand what the good news are
so instead of "we dont tell you that you buy things but we still own them"
it goes to "we tell you that you buy things and we still own them"
so literally the same thing but now people will buy less because they know *from steam
It's good news because it pulls the curtain back for people to see whats going on. It's hopefully the first step to the pendulum going the other way. Regardless if you like owning your games make GoG the first place you buy your games so you can download and backup your offline install files that can't be taken away from you. The more people that support GoG and request gaming companies offering their games there the more gaming companies will do that. Money is everything to these companies.
We need that law for real life home "ownership" too, I only realise after visiting China finding out most non-urban Chinese land is owned by citizens where people earn money in the city then build manson back in villages for retirement, they pay no property tax or council tax or anything for rural house, they OWN it (Fake media lies to us about CCP own all land never mentions that only applies to urban land). Meanwhile back in UK I bought my house yet I have to keep paying council tax, utility fees etc forever or it will be taken away, I do not own my house, I simply rent it from the government!
Yup. Other than perhaps income tax, property tax is the most diabolical form of taxation. Even if you want to be left alone completely, the government will go after you.
Yeah but just how many people do you think are capable of that anymore with the social credit score system?
they can’t even rent a property in their 30’s with a bad credit score let alone save enough money to buy a mansion.
The trick with communism is to make it seem fair but rig the game.
Actually you own the house, not land. The realestate companies have to pay to extend the contract of the land themselves.When they don’t the government take the land back but not own the buildings on it.If government wants to reuse the land they have to buy the properties from tenants before doing anything.That’s why sometimes you see many houses standing among highways and viaduct, because those tenants refuse to sell.
that's how all countries are dude. US is the only place where you don't actually own the property, since they can take it away if you don't pay the tax
Chinese do not own the land. They RENT the land. At the end of the rent period the property is returned to the government. And because the local governments don't collect rent and only earn money by RENTING land, they are running out of money to operate. Do you think your local government can operate without any income stream? Who is paying the police? The schools? What money is maintaining your infrastructure?
“Private property isn’t real, if somebody can take something away from you then you don’t really own it”
The problem with western society in general, if people (primarily men) can’t own anything then they have no incentive to invest in the betterment of society.
You never own your land technically the government can force you away from the land.
So if you buy it, then the developer closes it, you can’t play it anymore? That’s not fair, you paid. This model only works if you are playing a free to download game with in-store purchases.
So to clarify what PirateSoftware said and why hes full of shit.
Basically he said companies shouldnt be forced to provide a service.
But stop killing games ISNT ASKING FOR THAT.
Thor failed to actually read the FAQ of the movement which entirely explains all of his points and why hes wrong.
Its simply asking for companies to have an end of service plan which allows players to keep playing the game after the company stops providing the service. Which is extremely fair and doesnt require the company to continue providing anything.
Thor is a dev himself and just doesnt want whats good for the customer so hes fighting something about the movement that doesnt exist.
I'm a fortune teller, every comment section you guys go to under a video about games, there will be comments about how much "better" PC is 😂
i want the ability to sell my digital games to other people the way i can sell physical copies. the fact that when you buy a digital game it's yours for life and there's nothing you can do about it is scummy. and they could even make money off it by charging a transfer fee.
That doesn’t do anything. If you cant copy the game you own on a physical object, the IP holder can remove the product from online store. So even if you can sell the digital version, if its no longer on a “store” (like steam) or the store goes broke (I think that will happen to the Ubisoft store) than it has no value since there is no way to download it again
Oh but it's not yours for life, it's yours until they decide to take it down or until your account gets banned for whatever reason
@balidr not really true. The game doesn't need to exist in a store in order to re-download it(if you already bought it)
That's on a separate server
@@machetevuoi8026 well yes. when i say "life" i basically mean the life of the game itself.
Why would they do that ? Between forcing people to pay full price or even on sell, or getting a miserable fee on a product that going to prevent the consumer buying a legit copy...the maths are quick to make...
How about signing a bill that forces the stores to actually sell you the games instead of just admit that you won't own anything? That would be a much better bill.
They’re 60+ and know nothing about games, they just want them banned but have no power to do so
We don't have to redefine private ownership, its already well defined. This companies are just taking advantage of government inaction.
digital ownership only works if we don’t need the companies permission aka the launcher. if it’s an online game sure you can’t own something that is a shared space.
you should be able to download the game within a certain amount of time of purchase date let’s say 5 years. After the 5th year it is up to the owner to maintain the game files and or to download it before the time allotted is over
if you want forever access to library download then that’s a premium.
as someone who works in a books store.
ive seen a big uptake in people buying vinyl records(yes book stores here sell those)
those are for new albums and artist as well, with a lot of teen and young adults buying them too.
because people wanna own physical media,also a lot buy manga when they could get it cheaper online(or pirate it) and ofc books.
so people still want physical media.
thats why im collecting physical copies now for my retirement.
remember, "you'll own nothing and be happy"
future will be a rental economy.
applications are now monthly/annual subscription.
there will be no such thing as perpetual license anymore.
games will be next.
Apple is already doing it
you can only play games if you rent digitally.
that and pirating, what you pirate is what you keep
I will continue to pirate everything and laugh at you fools.
PlayStation plus, Xbox live? Isn’t that renting
@@Deltaflys i only play offline games mostly. i dont sub to their services.
Even physically copy is useless now without the game service or online authorization.
Been a steam user from day one. With that said I just opened a GOG account. I will no longer purchase any more games on steam ever unless they are exclusive.
Good news:
Nothing is going to change 👍
Gamers having more rights? Thor from PirateSoftware won't be happy
"If buying is not owning then piracy is not stealing"
If you don't even own it and you share it than it's even worse than staeling.
That makes no logical sense, taking things without consent of the owner is stealing.
@@SneedTechIndustries-gf5hn You know what is even worse? We in Sweden pay a Pirate tax on everything we buy that has a storage... so a harddrive, - pirate tax, a mobile phone - pirate tax... and so on, but we are still not allowed to copy anything, how does this make sense? We have had this since 1999..
@@None38389 I don't consent to them taking away what I've bought. If I'm stealing, they're stealing.
I thought this was obvious. If steam goes out of business or something in the future did people expect them to mail them a hard drive with all the games on it?
The guarantee they made was that if they are going to close down they would make all the games you own available to play offline.
They would announce when they are going offline and allow you to download whatever you had for a certain announced duration of time.
When it comes to modern games, we don't own most of them, even single player ones. Companies just give us, the customers, a licence to use their product ; basically, they 'let us' play their games like you would let your kid play with a toy.
You can just take a kid's favourite toy and he can't do anything about it. That's more or less the same power we have as customers once we buy a game.
which is why i only buy games that work offline with no connection needed. always online is just a trap
No one is asking for companies to keep running their games forever, or give away their code, SKG is just asking for them to keep the games on a playable state, that means as long as you can play offline, then that's enough.
No point in physical copies when games are often released buggy in need of patches and updates that you'll no longer have access to eventually. 😑
I own an offline PS5 and you would be surprised at how many games can install and play fine with no Internet required. As long as you are not buying EA games or anything with a heavy multiplayer focus. So this narrative that all disc based games don't work is a lie.
@@kcadventures1454 Literally didn't say that, I said they OFTEN need patches and updates, I didn't say ALL games are released in that state. As an example if you have a day of release physical copy of Fallout New Vegas you are stuck with a LOT of bugs if you can't update the game. Don't put words in my mouth.
@@CaptainStardust1988 to me its just that digital copies should be costing way less, since its costing them way less. Especially Nintendo, their carts cost more than disc printing. The idea of digital games I think excited people in the past because they thought it would cost less but it doesn't lol. That or allow transferring of ownership at any time of digital copies just like physical
This also applies to business to business applications. For example a business buys a piece of software from a third party, the other company provides the application and later on removes said product or functionality, with only a vague TOS.
Physical is the best. Your digital version will dissapear
Having the original game isn't much use if it is only decent once patched.
@@michaelh878 Better than nothing at all
@@xtremegamer78 i doubt that since some games have major bugs or issues
@@agamersinsanity Enjoy nothing then and be happy. Oooof
It's a really good direction, but the law need to be more aggresive on this since storefront does indeed sometimes removed your purchased products, but the more common are the publisher and/or developer who decided to shut down and invalidates your purchased product.
When steam came out, I was very skeptical for many years ... but the convenience just took over after some time.
I'm still a bit afraid what happens when Gaben is gone.
Either someone takes over who actually respects his legacy and philosophy or we're just fucked
Claim to ownership for a service, should only be in place while the service is supplied. That way a company has to choose whether they want to keep control of the products or shut down the service.
Stupidest thing I ever did was sign up to GOG with my work email, not really thinking anything of it. Then years later after I left, I tried to log in, and realised my email had been terminated. Everything gone. What a dingbat I am.
You might not have lost them. I'm fairly sure you should be able to contact them and ask to change your email and recover your account.
I lost my e-mail address to my Playstation account, for 3 years. It took a bit of time but I managed to get it back with a new e-mail address. I had kept all my purchase receipts to prove it with me, and also my playstation still had all the trophies. I am pretty sure you could get your GOG stuff back.
@@quaker5712 Dude....
@@neat3468 That's a huge shout, my bank statements will show proof of purchase! Hero
This doesn't change anything it just puts a label on what was already the case to remove liability from the companies. People being happy about this are delusional.
when you buy digital content, it should be law that you receive a physical copy too
Prices wohld actually make sense again
i have a theory that denuvo anti piracy efficiency is destroying the entire gaming ecosystem, but i'm too lazy to elaborate....
This is nothing. If they just forced lets say steam to change the wording from "buy" to "get key(license)" will it upset users? NO. And then the publisher decides to remove the game from steam library we can't make them liable now because they already stated its only "license" that you own. THIS IS NOT FOR CONSUMERS BUT FOR THE TECH COMPANIES.
It already happens
So what you mean is that even if users are told directly that they don't own the game, that they will still spend their money anyways with full knowledge they don't own the game? In that case aren't they a 100% willing participant?
They will use the word "Get" instead of "Buy" simple
Read the TOS, digital media is a service where you essentially pay a fee to rent the media for the duration of that media life. If the company decide the life of the media is now over, then you dont have rights to the media anymore because its not available to rent anymore.
A company can put whatever they like in a TOS, but that doesn't magically make it lawful. A TOS can't supersede consumer protection laws (or any other laws, for that matter). So many people have been conned into believing a TOS is some sort of airtight legal document.
The problem is that the market of video games has not been built on that model and most users are not ok with those changes. We didn't have a say on that and they are playing on the fact that you can't find alternatives anymore. This is just absolutely anti consumerism and should be illegal.
@@paulw5039 I agree its all bs, but if you agree to rent something and accept those terms then you cant later moan that you dont own said something. Consumers allowed this model to brcome the norm, similar to how consumers allowed tipping to brcome the acceptable norm. both things are bs but thats how things are now.
@@nr12345 Where is this stupid logic coming from? What is it with some of you unable to think a thought through to its logical conclusion?
"Consumers allowed this to become the norm", "that's how things are now"??!?!?!?
So people are not allowed to make mistakes ever? Never be oblivious to a problem? Never allowed to admit or acknowledge a mistake being made? Never allowed to change?
physical copies or getting non-physical copies "free of charge." It's either one of those for me at this point, nothing else. That's where I'm at
Oh great, it's becoming hard to avoid YongYea 😴
Why?... what did he do?
@@Desolator-ny7cb He wouldn't say the real reason Concord failed.
@@Desolator-ny7cb Ever since he started pursuing voice acting, he turned to shilling to make sure he doesn't say the wrong things or have the wrong opinions to get blacklisted. Even if it means not reporting truthfully like the Concord thing.
@@Desolator-ny7cb I just dislike his content.
You could avoid by not watching this video. Your inability to avoid him is your own fault. You lack self-control. lol
removing the illusion of owning means they no longer need to keep up the act
this will do so much damage
have we learned nothing
how many times will we cheer on the next chain
" if buying isn't owning then pirating isn't stealing " - sun tzu
Kek
Sun Tzu never said nor write that in "the art of war" -_- Better quote the right thing from the start.
If I, as a license buyer, lose access to the license, the company must refund my money!
Alternatively, companies can offer different usage rights with restrictions, but these should not cost as much as an unrestricted hardcopy!
when you lose your internet connection you can't play your digital games, this is not ownership and needs to change.
@@jaymanilla289 lies only on Xbox I can play all my Ps5 games offline without internet in airplane mode. Switch sides.
wut? that ain't true mate.. most digital games don't require an internet connection with the exception from those who are an online service.
I can still play FF7R without the internet as long as it is preinstalled earlier.
Devil's advocacy here - "Well, if we have to say we're just lending it to you, then why shouldn't we practice our rights to revoke it more readily?"
I foresee this getting a lot worse.
This won't have any real effect. Most people just automatically just sign off all rights once a screen pop up gets in the way.
Just a nothing burger. Will it change anything. Nope. Just one more screen we have to accept without reading.
Don't act like this a big win, because the long term affects of this are minute.
I make videos for clicks... not even original content. Funny coming from a reaction channel. I want to instill me thoughts, casually, to make this seem important. It's not. See you in 10 years when it's still the same we just have one more pop up screen saying you don't own this, it is offered as a service and when the service ends, it is over. People will still sign up for it. Because Spotify, once you no longer pay for it, you have nothing.
I'm more upset I was directed to brain dead content.
@@DirteeZGCIts a step in the right direction. Maybe try not being so pessimistic for once
If buying a game isnt owning, pirating isn't stealing
People drastically overestimate how permanent a physical copy is. Even within my own lifetime I've had to replace games with digital versions because the physical storage eventually became corrupted.
I think SSDs and blurays last a lot longer than HDDs and CDs/DVDs but they're still not forever. Even archive-grade storage devices have to be handled properly (climate control, etc.) for them to last.
It's like Death Stranding. A lot of data only survives because it keeps getting recopied and redistributed. If it ever stops circulating and gets stuck sitting in one place too long it will decay in like 30 years and be permanently lost.
spectacular non point 👏
@@demarcorryip.
Archive grade storage devices are handled carefully because the people doing so have the resources to do so, and they want to maximize how long that physical data lasts. They're explicitly out to archive, so they optimize. Not because without climate control they'd automatically start melting or something.
Having owned hundreds of CDs/DVDs for decades that have gone through extreme heat and cold, I've encountered 2 cases of disc rot. In all likelihood, this is a result of cheap or flawed manufacturing at certain plants. No one knows how long well made discs will last, since that format is only like 40+ years old, but the general guess is well after 100 years.
In other words: not eternal, but stone tablets aren't eternal either.
Video games have a bigger audience than movies. Now this is because of the sales revenue. Take a look at that!
NFT is a technology in progress. it didnt "end", it just began, its in its infancy. Itlll take a decade.
Every nft has been a scam so far so the futures not looking bright 90 percent of crypto is a scam
It's a ledger system my friend, it's not some kind of elaborate high tech stuff. It's already serving it's function perfectly, there is simply not much practical use for it.
@@None38389Plenty of innovation is continuing to happen in the blockchain space.
A big reason there isn’t utility has been because the tech hasn’t proven reliable for widely used large scale utility. If everyone was transacting on BTC it would be laughably slow and expensive to do so. Same goes for Ethereum. User friendly, fast, reliable tech is still not something that exists for integration into everyone’s everyday lives. But it’s coming.
Didn't Blizzard do this for ages? Soda wasn't even allowed to stream classic private servers or they would make sure to contact Twitch, and they would have to enforce a ban on you after a warning. This was before the time that anyone thought classic servers would be a thing (You think you do but you dont).
The same happened with RuneScape and the 2009 era, but rather than making a private server, it was possible to make a third-party client to fully interface with the live oldschool game. It is now endorsed and approved by Jagex themselves. A great example of how it should be done - You are both benefiting the company and the community. I understand this is a rare case though.
0:38 rick and morty?
Lol, Brick and mortar
@@dakotahoward2728 its ok Yong still can't speak english properly despite doing it for a living, claiming to be a "voice actor" and claiming english is his first language lol
The sales screen will still say "purchase/buy" licence.
maintain pirated copies of everything you pay for.
I just want to avoid the doomsday scenario:
Imagine an evil Gaben removes access to all of your steam library you've cultivated over decades.
Next idea to go forward:
$50 digital
$80 physical
$30 DLC
Unless its indie, these are the fairest prices people can afford in this godforsaken economy.
I would say $50 physical, $30 digital. DLC - Free.
Some comments conflate the Netflix model with video on demand.
- In the first, you have access to a catalog for the duration of a membership. It's fine to stop it. You knew what you were getting.
- In the second, you bought access to watch a movie as many times as you want and whenever you want. Taking that right away without a (partial?) refund is not right.
I AM STEVE 🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
Hi Steve.
@@Cookedbread86 HI COOKED BREAD🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
Piracy isn't even stealing. It's copyright infringement. No, you should not enforce copyright over something you're not even profiting over anymore.
1 view in 11 seconds? bro fell off
True brother
True and real
Dude, why are you kids still making these? People were getting ratioed for being unoriginal and repetitive for this comment MONTHS ago .. Let alone STILL... 😂. 0 personality, just type what you see online.
Truest
just like his teeth
I've never pirated anything until recently. I used to be a big advocate for paying for what people have made, but companies keep doing things to make that less convenient and secure. It's seems the only way to "own" something digital these days is to pirate it. One thing that really set me off recently is I got Amazon Prime and paid for the ad free version, but they still played ads under the guise of them being previews for other shows on Prime. That shit pissed me off so much. They wouldn't even refund me properly for deceiving me, so I had to take it up with fair trade Australia, and I won. I got my refund because what they did was blatant false advertising, but because it never went to court, they don't have to change the way they advertise the "ad free" level of subscription
A broken, battered, nefarious clock can, in fact, be right twice a day.
Talking about Yongyeah right?
Best thing about that law is it doesn't force anyone to change their business model, just be more transparent.
The main reason I still own a console is for physical media. I've moved away from purchasing digital content on consoles because many older digital games I "own" aren't playable on newer systems, or are removed from stores like PSN, XBL, and Nintendo, or are updated with content removed in games like GTA, Burnout, or Gran Turismo. Thankfully, owning physical copies allows me to sell them if they're incompatible with new consoles. In which I then use the cash I made to repurchase some of those games I enjoyed on PC. Otherwise, if I see a digital game I'm interest in on console, I now check PC stores first, to either purchase them or add them to my wishlist and wait for a sale.
As consumers, we need transparency regarding what we’re actually purchasing-whether it’s simply the right to access (a license) or ownership of a digital copy. When paying for a subscription, you’re buying access to a catalog that can change at any time. However, when purchasing individual digital media, you should be clearly informed and given the option to download and store it locally for personal use.
This is huge, if they can retroactively force companies to sell permanent digital games to the user.
I've recently been buying disks more and more, they may take up a little bit of space but they are at least playable.
It says they cant use the word buy UNLESS they tell you your liscense can be revoked. So theyre just gonna keep the buy button and tell you in the fine print. Nothing will change
And you wonder why some people are still console gamers…this is why. STILL haven’t gotten Baldur’s Gate 3 because I don’t want to just have the digital downloaded version…I want the physical copy!
If they can revoke ownership of a thing that you buy then you're not buying it, you're renting it. You can't get your car revoked after you buy it, but you can if you rent it. If we don't own it then we're renting it, and if we're renting it why indeed are we paying the price for ownership.
I miss the days of having an exe file, or mpeg legally. That's digital ownership.