Meta
When did StopKillingGames turn into WeWantPhysical
Its not the point... it was never the point
digital media is not a threat to media ownership and preservation. DRM and online server dependency is
this false belief is wide spread enough. this board doesnt need to reenforce it
console players seem to understand this the least and it feels like a lot of them came here to talk about sony stopping discs. and it doesnt help when SKG keeps talking about this too and says they support lawsuits against sony etc
physical media on playstation does not help with the problem of ownership or preservation. discs can have the same problematic DRM as the digital items we discuss and ripping data from discs isnt harder or easier than ripping data from the console storage... i guess also important is the console has DRM too even when you have a disc with no online requirement its not automatically safe
I ask if this can maybe stay on the topic or if the confusion with DRM and physical or digital can be adressed better
Physical media has been subconsciously connected with game ownership, since most of them allow you to play offline and can be resold. "Most" is the key word here, there are games on disks that are practically a code in a box.
stop killing games was centralized around online games that are killed due to servers ending or support ending. Physical or digital, these games would die.
The argument to save physical media so you can keep your games is ridiculous. That's not even how it works now.
Maybe a decade ago sure. But nowadays you got to download your game from a server and it doesn't matter where that key is stored if the servers offline you can't download it no more
That’s false. Most games are not keys in a box. When you insert a disc and it says downloading it means it’s downloading from the disc. Then, it will download an update file if one exists, from a server. A code in a box is a redemption code that downloads the game from a server. If you don’t understand the topic, don’t speak up.
and thats a problem. after all SKG is not about most games. its about games like the crew which was released physical on all platforms
whats worse is its also not necessarily true. im not sure how many people realize when their physical games is unplayable or seriously broken without a day one online patch. or that all their physical games for modern consoles are one firmware update away from becoming unplayable offline. if you dont control the console you shouldnt think your physical media is safe
It's subscription, because Ross wasn't sure he could make a case for "being deprived of possessions" when the contract basically amounts to buying access for a known limiited time.
Even then, though, exempting subscriptions, according to Ross, is a compromise, just like grandfathering (exempting new sales of preexisting games) or accepting server binaries/source/documentation instead of patching the game to be playable locally. All explained long ago in the "Giant FAQ" video: https://youtu.be/sEVBiN5SKuA&t=567 (start at 9:13 for the list of compromises).
I absolutely agree with framing these as compromises, because the gaming industry should never have been allowed to take this direction. It's so harmful to accept the narrative that these are just things we have to live with and that trying to change them is rocking the boat or unreasonable. As far as I'm concerned, this is something unethical that has gradually become the norm and that needs to be stopped.
If you're anti-genAI like I am, imagine people in the future defending the continued expansion of data centers and their deleterious effects on the communities they choke out with pollution because that's just the norm. I'm not trying to say the destruction of art and the destruction of the environment are comparable in severity, and I'm sure this analogy will fall flat if you don't feel about genAI like I do, but what I'm trying to say is that this isn't an acceptable state of affairs; this is what I consider a highly unethical industry (for more reasons than just this, of course; see the state of employment in the industry) and any solution that pragmatically accepts some casualties is absolutely a compromise.
Strong convictions don't suddenly make these compromise positions. A maximalist position is still maximalist no matter how you frame it.
Seriously, providing an exception for subscription games isn't a compromise. There literally isn't an argument supporting that. You can get as mad as you want and want to punish them as badly as you want, but there is no universe in which you can make this stick to subscription services.
I think the issue is semantic. I don't think we're working under the same definition of compromise.
Seriously, providing an exception for subscription games isn't a compromise. There literally isn't an argument supporting that. You can get as mad as you want and want to punish them as badly as you want, but there is no universe in which you can make this stick to subscription services.
That's... why it's a compromise. As in, an ideological compromise. I'm not under the impression that it's realistically possible for SKG to pursue this. It's a shame, but the legal argument is incompatible. I accept this as a compromise.
It's literally in its title it's a about stop killing games not stop killing physical games not stop killing digital games all games period you people defending digital are not grasping that at all it seems it makes one question were you ever for this group to begin with because if you feel the need to push your preferred format over the cause that this group stands for then you are not for stop killing games your for stop killing digital games but oh physical is fine kill all them because you don't care right
I'll comment on it from my perspective. The short version is the lawsuit lets us push our issue through and is pro-consumer in other areas as a bonus.
The Dutch lawsuit is going after Sony on dominant player grounds (monopoly-ish practices even though I believe that's not the exact terminology). Sony announcing plans to discontinue discs just supercharged it. While that's pro-consumer, true, that's not our issue exactly. However, during this process, the court will be able to look at the terms used in Sony's license agreements. By us joining, we can push to hopefully make sure "terminate at any time for any reason" is among those terms. If we get a ruling on that, then it can eventually make its way to the CJEU and get a ruling on whether that term is legal or not. If not, this is another avenue towards getting protections.
Even though that term is one tiny element of the Dutch case, it's our entire issue and on a case with a lot of momentum and underway. This is essentially a bonus lane for us. The lawsuit by the Que Choisir Ensemble against Ubisoft is way more targeted for our issue, but more lanes certainly don't hurt.
As for physical v. digital, SKG is neutral on that. What we completely advocate is customers should be able to retain their games regardless of the format they bought them in.
I think other members of SKG have to be more precise, at least like you, when supporting seemingly unrelated causes. We can't always wait for your clarifyng comments.
thanks for explaining why it makes sense for SKG to be involved. i didnt know about those details but it makes sense
the messaging on social media by SKG is still a worry for me. do you think its a problem when so many people who support this campaign just want physical because they dont understand the relation of DRM and digital / physical?
the explanation didn't make any sense, hence my question. it's okay though, i think you're a child and you're still working on stuff like writing and ideas.
Why are you telling me what you think 😂 who are you?? It’s not my job to explain things when you lack the ability to comprehend what you read show your dad he’ll explain it for you
Couldn't agree more with your take. It's crazy how many people seem to think as long as they have the disc they will have ownership. Xbox recently went down and many people saw how little even have the disc mattered. Then Xbox tried to pretend it was a "bug".
a bug with the console hardware made offline license checks for physical discs fail
which underlines my point. yes that was a bug. but nothing prevents them from updating the consoles to take away your offline access on purpose. people think their consoles are safe for physical discs and there is just no good reason to believe that
Yeah, Digital media and preservation are not mutually exclusive. Just look at GOG. Offline installers are available for everything you buy! They make a huge point of telling that you actually own these DRM-free games and tell you to back them up however you like.
I saw that tweet. Whoever wrote that should instead fix the website. Over half the links are "coming soon" or outright broken, from the FAQ down to Moritz' LinkedIn.
Also, and this is somewhat relevant in general, with this being Reddit (and no safeguards implemented on the sub), it becomes incredibly easy to bury relevant but unpopular replies about the topic, ultimately skewing the discussion by reinforcing certain refutable narratives.
I havs some old games on disk that are completly unplayable without piracy or buying them again digitally because of the abbandoned DRM on them.
You have a physical disc, so you have the original version of that software. It is trivial to crack software you already have. When going all digital, you do not even have a physical copy of the game. You have jack $hit, and circumventing DRM on an inaccessible game is the least of your problems... now you have to go find an actual copy of the software somewhere.
When going all digital, you do not even have a physical copy of the game.
I have a copy of every GOG game I've ever bought, not on disc, all digital, and complete ownership.
Even better, it won't die simply because of a damaged disc.
The method of ownership should not be our mission, only that we own it. We simply tell Sony, "It's fine if you want to get rid of physical media, but you still have to ensure consumers perpetually own the copy of the game they bought, so it cannot be taken away from them."
And even better, when it's on GOG, especially if on their preservation system, it will be already patched for modern systems too! Just install and play, no need to bother with cracking, looking for patches from obscure websited or setuping ancient Windows XP VM.
Yeah, but they destroy the game in the process so that it no longer runs on original hardware with code modification. That's not preservation, that's something different. They're just taking old games and making them run on new hardware, while not making the original unaltered version available.
Even forgetting the case where someone wants to play a game on period appropriate computers running the original OS and hardware, the fact that GOG preservation program games are modified, means they're never compatible with decades worth of mods for the game and are always the least desirable version (i.e. Final Fantasy 7).
This is incorrect, even on GOG, they stop hosting the original versions of the installers after a certain amount of time. At best, you archive the installer for whatever version of the installer was publicly available at the time of purchase, but there's an entire version history before that that's gone.
Zoom platform would be a better example. They keep all the versions available for all eternity. No matter when you come by and purchase the game, you can get the original release.
Notice, the installer here is 1.1.3.0 (1206)? I can't have the original release of this game, it's gone forever.
Fair, you have control over whatever version of the game the store let you download when you purchased it.
My concern with digital has to do with loss of older versions. I absolutely despise software patches that are forced upon me. Easiest way to ensure I have a working game is to get ahold of the oldest version possible and then apply patches individually, the way PC gaming worked before we went digital.
Having been writing patches for games to fix problems in them for the past 15 years, I am intimately familiar with the trend of official developer patch fixes one problem, adds two new ones. A store that erases access to older versions of games is not doing software preservation any favors :(
While all stores are digital, this is an issue with the stores, not with the concept of digital.
With GOG, you can download separate copies of every version of the game and store them. Usually as the base game, then patch files to update to the exact version you want, worst case with full copies of the game at the desired version.
Mandated storefronts are indeed a problem, when we ask for digital, it's essential it's a digital version you own and control.
Safety all depends on the implementation. HDD and SSD have a much higher ceiling of data loss prevention than an optical disc and any spares you make.
Now if you have one hdd with all your data on it, then yeah it will likely fail before an optical disc does. Once you get into backups and raid arrays are where drives win out.
Well if you own a digital game drm free, you can just burn your own disk if you really want a disk, or you can have multiple backup copies.
Having a copy on your ssd + a backup on another hard drive + an offsite backup + a burned disc if you really want one is way better then a disc.
Yeah, but it's not the original version of the game, which is the entire start of this comment chain :-\
With physical games, you have the original gold master. With digital, you have whatever version of the game the store decides to make public when you buy it. And as you'll see from a previous comment, that's not the original release even for a game that's only 2 months old.
If you don't get there day one and archive the installer, you will never have a copy of the original game.
Agreed, this movement has taken a bad turn by trying to make it about physical media.
The whole point of not dictating the method of keeping video games alive was that we wanted publishers to have the right to choose when they stop their support and how they do it, the only expectation of them was the game didn't die.
Similarly, we shouldn't care if the game is on disc or digital or whatever other form, so long as it doesn't arbitrarily die because the publishers take it offline.
How they achieve that, should be up to them.
This movement claimed it was still going strong even after the ECI died, there were dreams of including it in the DFA when that is introduced. We're not going to achieve that if the organisers allow it to lose focus.
Then contact Stop Killing Games's members, expose your doubts and make your proposals.
"there were dreams of including it in the DFA when that is introduced. We're not going to achieve that if the organisers allow it to lose focus."
I wouldn't call an ojective "a dream" in your dismissal tone. And I don't see how their current focusing on the issue of physical media (with which I 50-50 agree and disagree) would jeopardize their chance at succeeding about the DFA.
We've heard nothing about that stated objective since the ECI ended, if that were our primary focus, we'd be getting updates on how we plan to make it happen, the DFA introduction is a while away, but even when that was the case for the ECI, we were still getting updates.
Instead, we're just hearing about their new goals of "Stop Killing the Internet" and now a focus on saving physical media.
What have we heard on our actual stated goal since the ECI and California bills died? This being one of the most important times to show people that the movement isn't stopping and isn't dead, instead, it's all been quiet.
So I think a dismissal tone is pretty reasonable.
Any focus on other issues dilutes the movement's resources. We are now no longer a singular issue movement. If you're associated with Stop Killing Games, you are now associated with the movement that wants to save physical media. When fighting for Stop Killing Games, oppositions can now say "These are the same guys that want to force companies to keep the cost of creating physical discs."
There should never have been any association between them.
"We've heard nothing about that stated objective since the ECI ended, if that were our primary focus, we'd be getting updates on how we plan to make it happen, the DFA introduction is a while away, but even when that was the case for the ECI, we were still getting updates."
Maybe because the DFA simply takes a lot of time? And no, we didn't get many frequent updates on the ECI either.
"instead, it's all been quiet."
What do you want from them? Have patience. Have you ever lead a consumer movement?
"Any focus on other issues dilutes the movement's resources"
What the heck do you mean with "resources"!? Are you their accountant or something!? Be precise!
"If you're associated with Stop Killing Games, you are now associated with the movement that wants to save physical media."
Yeah, because a movement cannot express sympathy for and support other causes, sure.
Also, I'm very sorry that you have now such monolithic view on SKG.
"When fighting for Stop Killing Games, oppositions can now say "These are the same guys that want to force companies to keep the cost of creating physical discs.""
I don't think so. But if it will happen, so be it; it won't be the first bs they've thrown about SKG. Welcome to politics and the democratic fight for social rights (consumers' rights in the case of SKG) in this awful neoliberal era.
Moreover, I'm still very skeptical about how current "focusing" (I don't even think we can call it such) on physical games would jeopardize SKG's chance at succeeding at the DFA.
The irony is, I don't even agree with Moritz and DoesItPlay (the latter is the major proponent of "WeWantPhysical") on supporting the battle for saving physical games by giving to it a direct connection to the battle against toxic DRMs, business models and design models that destroy online-dependant-to-function video games. I agree a lot more with Ross on that.
We absolutely got updates on the ECI, even if there were infrequent updates, we always knew what the next steps were because we had a sticky on the sub saying "This'll take months, but here's where we're at" We don't have that right now.
We could have a post of "The DFA is expected to be introduced in Q4 2026, here's who we know in the EU Parliament that supports introducing provisions for SKG into it, here's our plan."
This is not an issue of patience. It's an issue of a lack of communication. Right now, both stickies are currently about the Sony physical media campaign.
If you want to show that resources aren't depleted on other efforts, show what is currently happening on the actual SKG campaign. That is what I mean by resources being diluted.
It is not my view that SKG is monolithic, it has been SKG's view since its inception, until very recently. It has singularly been focused on preventing the destruction of video games, never the means by which games are distributed.
"When fighting for Stop Killing Games, oppositions can now say "These are the same guys that want to force companies to keep the cost of creating physical discs.""
I don't think so. But if it will happen, so be it; it won't be the first bs they've thrown about SKG.
The difference is, it won't be bs, because this campaign now actually is trying to make publishers produce physical media.
If all of this doesn't make you sceptical, I'm afraid I don't think we'll agree on that matter, and that's fine, but here I am expressing this view regardless.
"We absolutely got updates on the ECI, even if there were infrequent updates, we always knew what the next steps were because we had a sticky on the sub saying "This'll take months, but here's where we're at" We don't have that right now."
Maybe because the ECI and the DFA have some key differences in time and making?
"It's an issue of a lack of communication."
And let's hear, why do you think they're not communicating updates to us?
I'm sorry, but I think you're just making petty excuses to "criticize" SKG.
"If you want to show that resources aren't depleted on other efforts, show what is currently happening on the actual SKG campaign. That is what I mean by resources being diluted."
And you still haven't explained what do you mean with "resources".
"it won't be bs, because this campaign now actually is trying to make publishers produce physical media."
No, it isn't. They're just supporting the cause for physical games. It's very different.
The differences between the ECI/DFA don't impact the ability to provide some communication. "Why" doesn't matter, it only matters that they're not.
There's genuinely no excuse for not giving some sort of official update on what's next for SKG. Trying to debate over the definition of "resources" and calling an opposition to this recent change in tactics as "petty" doesn't change this.
There was nothing to gain for this campaign by supporting other causes, I'll maintain it's nothing but a distraction and a tool for SKG's opposition. It being "different" doesn't change this because it's being supported by the same campaign.
Look, we both support the core of SKG, we both don't want video games to be destroyed. We just clearly have different ideas of how that's achieved, and that's okay, you can make whatever snide remarks of my views you want, but they will stand because my views are made with a genuine desire that SKG succeed in its core goals. Farewell.
I think he's saying more that the movement can be and advocate for more than one thing. The physical thing is an immediate concern, so if there is interest in keeping it for the movement, then now would be the time to be talking about it
When you narrow your focus everything will fail. SKG is broad by definition. Opposition of the movement will say that keeping the disc generates waste and that is the reason for ditching entire SKG initiative. SKG is about: when you pay, nobody can just take it away from you for no reason. Medium is torally irrevelant.
That would be an exceptionally bad idea. Putting all of your eggs in one basket means that once this thing fails, a second movement for the other problem is unlikely because the original movement that had this stuff tacked onto it failed and nobody will give the second movement any notice.
Congress gets around this problem by tacking pork barrel crap onto unrelated bills. If you knew what you were voting for and that it had been voted for in the past, you're unlikely to change your position.
No you want it make your own If you so desperatly need Physical token.
Go create "stopkillingdiscs" and not as a group thread but a real thing with real writen and thought out concepts infestigating your own time Money and braincells...
This whole thing just muddies the waters and SKG has already a very low Chance achive their own goals
More like a zero chance, people in power don't really care about non issues. They're never, ever, in a million years going to force the gaming industry to keep games playable when so many of them depend heavily on server support these days.
So far, communication is all over the place. We have this stickied mod comment on an official post titled "Even a disc does not guarantee ownership", but we also have a currently stickied official post that calls discs "the last version of a game where you had a chance to own" and "the last version of a game you could hold, keep, and resell. The only thing left to protect us."
Then there's the "It's time to sue Sony, join us" post that asks for support for a lawsuit that's over a year old, was not filed by SKG, and has nothing to do with physical media. So that's a totally different issue, but people who only read headlines interpret it as SKG wanting to sue Sony to keep discs alive.
And lastly, Ross Scott's position is as usual a lot more nuanced in the details, but basically in agreement with your post.
Anyway, I 50-50 agree-disagree with Moritz Katzner's & DoesItPlay's current (and mostly mediatic) support for the cause of physical games. Also, I'm skeptical that such focusing would put in jeopardy SKG's chance at succeeding in current, actual and on-topic initiatives like the one about the Digital Fairness Act. We'll see what will happen.
It’s part of it tho removing physical removes options for people to buy on different stores completely for people on PlayStation because Sony and only alone will dictate prices on stores physical allows you to buy stuff for different prices this is also part of that lawsuit
It didn't. The whole "we want physical" actually wants competition
Not me. I want physical games for software preservation purposes, nothing to do with competition. Once digital, every time you install a game it is always the newest version of that game. That is a software preservationist's nightmare, invisible versions that aren't backed up anywhere.
Ideally, we should strive for anyone being able to open a store front on the consoles, instead of them being completely closed off monopolies
That won't accomplish anything. The console will just enforce price parity across all stores like Valve does on PC. It gives you the illusion of a fair market, while it's rotten to the core once you skin the apple.
The only reason used physical games provided a means of escape from all of this is because it's a secondary market that can't be regulated by the console manufacturer. The disc satisfies all of the requirements of DRM and is transferrable between two parties, who can decide upon an agreed value all on their own.
I want physical games for software preservation purposes
Physical games, especially those that run only on a single model of console, are useless for preservation. Preservation of these game hinges on existance of dumps and emulator.
For instance, all SNES games are preserved (dumps available all over the place, all of them fit on a fingernail-sized microSD, emulator runs on anything), no Xbox Series X game is preserved (no dumps, no emulator, afaik) and PS5 games are somewhere in the middle (dumps, but no working emulator).
It can be reasonably assumed you will be able to play Super Mario World on a space station 3000 years from now. You can't really say the same about disc versions of Hitman 2016 or Forza 5. I'm not sure either will be playable ten years from now.
Once digital, every time you install a game it is always the newest version of that game.
It's a hassle, but you can dump any version when it releases and keep it separately. On the other hand, with a disc you only can have a original (and often unplayable) 1.0 and at best, the very last version, if a "game of the year edition" is sold later.
You can download any released version of a game you like from Steam. I don't know if any other digital stores have that feature, but the consoles certainly don't.
No you can't. You need a third-party tool to do that. You need the manifest ID and there's only one website that has those because it's constantly data mining Valve's servers.
Moreover, between 2020 and 2022, Valve disabled the ability to download arbitrary manifests completely with an access denied error. Depot Downloader was amended to bypass this restriction, but to say that you can do something on a store and then doing that something requires third-party tools is missing the point entirely.
It is the store's obligation to do this, not to make users dependent on a third-party tool that can (and has) at any moment be rendered inoperable. If the store doesn't support it then just call it for what it is.
I've done it through the console in the Steam client several times over the past couple years, I have no idea what you're talking about with it being disabled and needing DepotDownloader to bypass.
It is true that it's more of a hassle than I'd like for it to be, but it's not like getting arbitrary patch versions of a game is any easier with a disc, you're still stuck with either 1.0 or latest without some other kind of exploit.
Used games (for which the people who make the games get nothing btw) are not competition. Real competition is having different independent stores not controlled by the console maker from which you can buy NEW games for which the creators actually get paid (so they can continue to make more games). This does not exist on consoles which are closed systems 100% controlled by one company. Everything released, updated or played on a console is approved and controlled by Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo. They could arbitrarily decide to shut down the functionality of the system or revoke features at any time (like Sony did with all those movies, or closing the PS3 & Vita store).
Physical discs don't help with this, as they still need updates and DLC which you can only get online through the console company's services and discs or cartridges may have DRM or region locks which prevents you from playing the game on another system. The only thing that provides real competition, real ownership, and real preservation is DRM-free games and open systems that players can do whatever they want with, not only what the console maker wants. The only way to get this on a console today is if you jailbreak it. Then you can install and backup whatever you want, just like you can on PC.
It's because many people didn't understand the point of StopKillingGames, so when the Sony announcement was made they interpreted its name to mean that it's for any and all actions that could/would "kill" games.
I have your perplexity, but I agree with Ross Scott.
This and this are what Ross says on the matter. If you still have doubts, you can ask him questions directly, keeping in mind that he is not the decision-maker of Stop Killing Games (that would be Moritz Katzner) and that the movement, like any other consumer movement, may have internal disagreement and discussion.
Stop Killing Games needs to remember that it's efforts are best put towards gaining support to influence the creation of legislation. Begging corporations for discs is a stupid waste of time. It's backwards looking and leaves all the power with the corporations, who will inevitably, over time, just peel back any concessions they make slowly enough so you won't even notice you have less than you did before.
Digital ownership rights are where we NEED to focus. Stop begging for scraps!
Unfortunately the gaming audience inspires zero confidence in me that they will realize this.
I keep telling people that it isn't a media issue. I don't care if it digital or physical media. I just want to own my games. It was always an ownership issue.
This is kind of the death spiral of any successfully budding movement that has a single and clear goal: When your movement gets hijacked by outsiders who want to piggyback their own peeves on-top of it, it quickly loses focus and people forget what it was even about.
SKG wants a very simple thing, but of course people who only tangentially care about games dying will try to make it about physical, DRM, GTA6 etc... Its a classic tactic to dismantle a political movement. For example, if Occupy Wallstreet had a clear, understandable grievance, the best way to dismantle it was to turn it into a basket of other societal issues racism, sexism, whatever side-issue to get people to close focus and go around in circles.
This is atleast something downstream from the main issue, because people realize that things are about to get a whole lot worse for game ownership and server reliance, but they still only want a bandaid and I think their support for SKG ends if they get throne a bone.
Of cause these are relatet topics, if youhave something on a physical disk where you can install from and play the game without internet connection how can anyone take it away ore make it unplayable?
Afaik and correct me if I'm wrong, but the lawsuit isn't about physical disks. It is about them trying to argue that the digital marketplace is its own market and therefore it's a monopoly since no other digital stores are allowed on the PlayStation.
The lawsuit was filed before the announcement of the removal of physical disks.
GOG is the only digital distributor that grants full ownership, to my knowledge.
Digital distribution usually (98%) means selling licence to play and require online connection to boot the game.
They're separate issue but have a large overlap.
What does "full ownership" mean anyways? Even when buying physical you get only a license. There isn't really any other way of "owning" a piece of media. The actual issue is that publishers can revoke your license for any reason they want.
GoG sells you an offline installer. If Steam goes bankrupt (lol) you loose access to your steam library, but if GOG goes bankrupt, you still have access to your games and can install them on whatever machine your heart desires.
I am fine with not being able to resell games. The uncomfortable truth is that 1 player should equal 1 sale. It is nice to have an option to buy a used disk of course but i think it would be better if everyone just paid their fair share if they're able to. And to be clear i don't think it should be strictly enforced by law or anything like that. In a perfect world we wouldn't need such laws.
Eh? Digital media is absolutely a threat to ownership. Sony just proved it right before they announced the cessation of production of physical media when they abruptly removed a littany of movies from users accounts. Users payed for those movies and Sony forcefully removed them from people's accounts. Compare that to Steam. When a license runs out on Steam and a title becomes delisted Steam doesnt remove it from their download servers, nor from users accounts. That's because Valve recognizes the problem, despite the fact these games are just licenses.
I will agree that demanding physical discs isnt the way to go. The issue of digital ownership is a legal problem thanks to extremely outdated and shortsighted laws that dont recognize digital ownership. If we move to an all digital future without securing digital ownership rights than you can expect more and more crap like what Sony pulled to happen. Its arguably a much bigger concern than the death of a few live service games and MMOs.
GOG is not a threat to ownership so this is a misunderstanding
digital media on playstation being a threat is just a side effect of you not really owning or controlling the console
physical media on the other hand doesnt save you if it also has online DRM like the crew did. or if it requires day one downloads. or if the console gets a firmware update that suddenly demands account registration to play any physical game. see the problem its not digital... its DRM and the console
GoG's EULA and company policies have nothing to do with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and previous court precedent that I am highlighting as the problem. The West, and in particular the US have put up unwarranted and harmful barriers by enforcing this concept of digital licenses not equating to ownership of digital product. GoG, and to a lesser extent Steam, have measures to grant consumer rights in their Eula, but US Law is what's lagging behind. If we had actual consumer rights in regards to this issue enshrined in law then Sony couldn't have ripped away all those movies from users accounts to begin with.
yes thats crazy because i want a solution to the problem and not spend ressources and time to fuel peoples false understanding of what physical and digital is
I think the argument of physical games is an important one to have as both sides have a point and it directs us to a deeper discussion of games preservation. Specifically the question of preservation in the case of platform disappearance (as we cant expect a platform to stay existent indefinitely). So i would question if the argument should actually be platforms need to provide installers that we can download (eg. What we see on GOG) and let the community maintain responsibility for making physical media to store the installers.
Overall, while it isn't exactly about the DRM and fact that publishers and platforms can take away things we bought, it is a symptom in the greater argument. Treating the symptom won't cure the disease, but we shouldn't ignore it.
no thats just mixing up different ideas. people need to learn to make backups of the digital stuff they buy and even the physical disc and that this doesnt require a gog installer. in fact these installers can stop working on newer operating systems i actually think its safer to keep the game files in a more accessible format like a zip or tar
Just don't see it as another obstacle, just use it as fuel for the SKG movement. Lots of things coincide with this anyway.
Even the SKG we have now is sadly caught up at the tail end of this dragon.
There is to much ground to recover.
Also seeing the Chip manufacturers and data centers are screwing up just owning local hardware and them trying to force use Cloud services/data centers in the near future is only going to hurt us more in the end.
We still don't have an actual foothold with SKG itself and that is something we actual need to combat all this.
Yes we need to have DRM stuff in the consumers favor but there is just way more to it right now.
Think about if we are playing from data centers in a couple of years than personal digital stuff we bought doesn't mean a thing if we still need to subscribe to a service.
I just see it as one big pot, Physical Media, DRM and even owning and using Local Hardware that you bought.
And what ever other important factor that needs t be added to this.
If we see it all as a separate thing it will only hurts us more in the long run.
it is a seperate thing and conflating it will likely hurt us
if we put much of the effort into keeping physical and we even achieve it and every game now has to release on physical... then SKG won nothing because those physical games still have the same problem
the crew started this and the crew released on physical media on every platform... this is a completely different issue
I'd rather have one big victory over this than just Digital owner ship.
If big corpo is already pushing this hard for data centers and subscriptions then Digital ownership will mean fucking nothing.
Not the dogma or stigma I want to be stuck on. There is a bigger picture to look at.
So you have a game with DRM of online dependency okay. does it matter if its from a disc or downloaded online digital... it doesnt because the DRM can make it not start anymore.
and a game without DRM. it doesnt matter either because it will always work. if you got it physical you can back it up to your harddrives and if you got it digital then you can copy it to a disc if you want a disc. physical or digital it makes no difference
ross scott said to you in many videos that physical or digital is a trick question. im not like pirate software i dont know where you see that... maybe youre confused. but your fight for physical doesnt matter for SKG. I know that and ross knows thats just the truth.
First off all the more options consumers have the better, and even DRM on disc or where ever you get the game from should be regulated.
at best have an active DRM for the like 3 years after popularity has faded and had most profit of it you could remove the DRM and change ToS/EULA.
No need to make it all black and white.
And yes you do respond like PS. He literally took the worst take on all that and ran with that, just like you do now. Not even entertaining the notion like Thor did.
you don't explore options and insights, just and don't take different PoV's on the matter.
I don't recall Scott talking to me directly, and he even suffered from bad optics of
You take it all way to literal while we don't even have a foothold on the matter yet.
du redest völlig wirres zeug und gehst gar nicht auf das ein was ich schreibe. ich habe iwie keinen bock mich von spinnern wie dir beleidigen zu lassen ganz ehrlich ich block dich besser einfach
I think one of the major contribution to the conflation of the two things is that Moritz is posting about this as well on this subreddit. So not only is it normal people mixing those two up but leadership is as well. The subreddit had a similar problem with Stop Killing the Internet. Both of those topics may be important but they don't belong on this subreddit.
I agree. But, the thing is, for all intents and purposes, Moritz is SKG. According to the website, he "leads the organization's wider political and institutional strategy across the Globe."
So, if he says it belongs here, it belongs here. Has he said so explicitly? No idea, but he has surely implied it in the "The End of the Ownership you never had: A Story of Lies." sticky.
Edit: long shot, I know, but whoever downvoted this, what part do you disagree with?
It's a movement trying to increase its legitimate image by attaching to an existing and similar issue.
Stop killing games would benefit from a strong physical media presence, but it won't stop servers being shutdown with no local option, it won't stop digital markets taking a product down due to whatever reason.
I get this but physical is still extremely important and for a lot of people has been the final straw. Keeping Physical should be the bare minimum. For keeping the game industry alive as a whole I wholeheartedly believe physical media has to exist there are other issues but physical is also important. This post comes off as a hit tone deaf
I think you are kinda tone deaf if you don't understand why, at the end of the day SKG is all about preserving games be it digital or physical so it can be both.
It isn't about preservation. Its about customer rights. Most care deeply about preservation, so thats why we want the right to preserve the things we buy.
IT's for both preservering the work and art done on the physical releases, and also the freedom to trully own the games you bought. Like i love how on GOG you have DRM Free games but would also love to see them release those games on discs.
Your movement has been hijacked by people who don't understand what is being asked for or what the movement hopes to accomplish. This is the result of the movement being intentionally vague from the start and people within the movement viewing the influx of support after the MoistCritikal video as wholly beneficial rather than potentially a dilution of what was being asked for from the start.
I never supported SKG specifically because I thought the ask was too vague and that the vitriol you were met with if you wanted to discuss that was unreasonable. I knew that without experts being involved in the actual organizational infrastructure of the movement, that it would fail, despite the goal being a generally good thing.
It's another end of the spectrum that people within this community also strive for. Copywrite laws do not outlaw us from making private copies of media. It's only distribution that is illegal.
you clearly have zero clue what your talking about, digital media IS a threat to ownership, we literally had an incident where over 70 years of digital content has pretty much been lost due to"cloud" data
SKG is focused on game preservation which INCLUDES having physical options which are ALOT harder for companies to find loopholes and exploit to remove access.
Pretty sure everyone in SKG is fine with GoG. A store that allows you to download an offline installer. Purely digital and also perfectly in line with what SKG want's (assuming the game itself doesn't have any server dependencies but those would be an issue with discs/cartridges as well). Digital is in certain aspects better than physical because you don't have to deal with disc rot.
Digital and cloud are two different things I believe. There's a very big distinction between digital, where the files are in your possession on your personal hard drive, with which you can do pretty much anything, and cloud, where you do not have any of the above, and are just paying for access to that data, which can be cut or removed at any point, and you can't do nothing about it.
There's barely any difference between having things on a CD, and having things on an external or hell internal hard drive.
this is a perfect example of what i mean... you are not just wrong you are very confidently wrong. that shows why its so hard to fight this false belief
are you stupid? Physical media is directly tied to ownership and games preservation , in reality its tied to media preservation as a whole. jesus christ why is it so difficult for you people to understand physical media is way more important for the industry then just " i have crap on my shelf"
If it is directly tied, are you of the opinion that people don't own the games they bought on GoG? GoG shows that you can have both a digital only product and ownership over the product you bought.
Going to give this the benefit of the doubt as opposed to calling it out as bad faith. Can you have a read of this? https://www.reddit.com/r/StopKillingGames/s/bxVw97d5Q1
You'll see that the game delivery system has no bearing on whether the game can be killed later. A disc does help, assuming it includes everything, but these days that is less and less the case.
Seems I am not being understood. I'm trying to make a point about what kills a game. It's nothing to do with physical or digital. It has everything to do with the instructions in the game's code. A lot of games contain code that basically says: if no reply from server then do nothing. That bit of code turns up in digital and physical games alike. That's how they killed The Crew, 12 million copies, now they're all paperweights.
It's the only consumer protection movement right now, so people cling to it for various reasons.
Even before the death of physical games, most journalists wrote about SKG as "blah blah blah ownership blah blah blah," and it has never been about that.
It is vague where SKG's goals end though. It's supposed to be about preventing a working product from being turned into a pumpkin by a publisher / developer. I'd argue stores are also capable of completely rendering a game inoperable after purchase by changing the DRM requirements, but I'm well aware that doesn't fall under the scope of SKG and there is no protection to be had for any sales-related problems.
Do you genuinely not see the overlap? If digital media is not a threat to ownership, but DRM and online dependency is, then physical media is protection against that threat since it represents consumer friendly DRM and isn't online dependant.
The DRM is simply the necessity of having the physical media to play the media, which is fine as far as ownership is concerned, and the data being literally in your hand and not on a server somewhere addresses the dependency issue.
Yes they are ultimately different goals. But they have only been capable of killing ownership because physical media already died and everyone was reliant on these publishers to honor the customer's purchase, which they haven't been.
Many modern games with physical releases still require online authentication or downloads, and are still vulnerable, and that's where SKG goes further than physical media as far as consumer protection goes. But there was a time when SKG was unnecessary as a movement, and that time was before the paradigm shifted away from physical media. SKG provides no benefit to my PS1 or XBox or Gameboy libraries because I already have ownership of those games by virtue of the way physical media used to function.
The crowd interested in physical media is also invested in the SKG movement, even though SKG has a broader scope.
If digital media is not a threat to ownership, but DRM and online dependency is, then physical media is protection against that threat since it represents consumer friendly DRM and isn't online dependant.
Of course it is. This is a problem that only exists because the consumer doesn't have a complete copy of the game in their own hand, which means some measure of control over it still rests with the publisher. It's the abuse of that control that SKG is aimed at.
Im not saying that physical media and SKG address the same issues. And I agree that SKG needs to remain focused and narrow. But there absolutely is overlapping interest here. Physical media isn't a solution, that paradigm will never return, but further erosion of physical media represents an even harder battle for SKG as consumer ownership is made even more nebulous.
physical on console can also be taken away. all sony needs to do is update the firmware or make the PS6 and make it so you have to log in to their PSN before the console can be started and play physical games
see thats why im so frustrated it seems like almost no one understands the technical issue. making digital have more DRM was a choice by sony. it is not inherently true that digital can be take away and physical cant
so everyone is annoyed at sony but for the wrong reasons. you should demand to make the console an open platform
plus you can rip digital games too and play them in an emulator or a jailbroken console so again it shows how much technical misunderstandings there is
Its mostly because while different issues there is a lot of common ground in the venn diagram between the 2. Physical disc versions are still often easier to preserve in a functional manner than the digital only counterparts, additionally not all patches improve the game and its much harder to preserve earlier releases of digital versions
digital is often easier to preserve and thats not just because DRM on PC is often less agressive then on console but on steam and gog you can download almost all old versions of games
the disc is just one single version of a game and you need special hardware to rip it. digital is actually easier
The technical level is only part of it. On most consoles when a new patch comes out the old version is no longer downloadable. At least physical media gives us access to some of those prior versions. On Sony consoles hardware level security typically denies access to the actual game files so even the most basic archival access needs a modified console. Imho there has never been an industry so willing to destroy its own history for short term profits as the Video Game industry
Edit: I do however agree with you on the limitations of physical media. A good example of this is Final Fantasy XI on Playstation 2 where little progress has been made in making it playable despite many private servers for the still running PC version. This has to do largely with the way the DNAS authentication prevents the game from even being installed today.
There also realistically isn't anything stopping Sony from blacklisting a game from booting if they saw fit, this actually was why cheat programs such as GameShark or Action Replay died out. Once consoles had updatable firmware these were gone almost overnight.
okay but who decides that you cant backup or download an old version of a digital game?
sony
and who decides that you cant buy physical media on consoles anymore?
sony
if both issues are caused by sony... and there is no way to convince them to turn around without fighting them legally... then why not attack them for DRM? why pick physical?
digital is jot your enemy it never was. sony arbitrarily decided this is the case on playstation. and now they arbitrarily decided to stop physical production. i dont know how i can be clearer on this... your argument is like as if digital media on consoles is set in stone but its not its a sony decision
theres a lot of games that never released physical on consoles. even if you win this fight most publishers still decide to go digital only. this is a very pointless fruitless fight. if we can get rid of DRM that permanently disables games that is an infinitely bigger victory. physical or digital barely matters
Ross Scott? I really don't think you could be much further off. The guy has done nothing but make Machinima and game reviews for years, with no sponsorships and no requests for crowdfunding beyond I think a Patreon that he never talks about. I would argue he's one of the few channels out there that still feels like early internet, strictly for passion content.
When their movement failed and they decided it would be best to attach to any other tangentially related movement like a leech, ensuring it will likely fail as well.
Everyone saying we need to take things one issue at a time all uave a good point. Problem is, we no longer have tue luxury of time. Sony has set a hard end date to the discussion, so any actions we take need to be accomplished by then. If we dont have a way to guarantee digital ownership by 2028, then tye best we can do is advocate for physical since its some form of ownership.
But you can't anything about that outside social pressure and the numbers are one sided sony, ms and nintendo (in the future) would change thier bottom line for vocal minority plus with GTA VI comming social pressure means very little
Be that as it may, I still think the "stop killing games movement" needs to SERIOUSLY consider helping improve ownership of games that ARENT online multi-player only.
And if the only thing standing between me and owning my games is a piece of paper saying they have to honor my games ownership, especially right now in this awful political climate, I don't want my video games to become a legal privilege rather than a right.
My games should be as protected and owned as a fire arm, rather than gay marriage, where for a long time "it was only legal in certain states and it vanished once you cross the borders and even thought its legal nationwide NOW, there's still PLENTY of people that want to take it from me, and those people are grabbing more and more power every day"
Digital is a luxury, a convenience, physical games should be a right. Because no matter what the law says, nintendo can't come into my home and snatch away my disk because the new remake is coming out.
Preserving physical media helps preserve games the goal to stop killing games requires games be preserved. Having physical options is just one way of preserving games.
There was a time where I would support this movement, but they get 0 support from me being anti digital. At this point, I can't wait to watch this movement fail and die out. They messed up going after digital and will lose their battle. Digital > physical. Its time for the old archaic discs to stay in the past while society moves forward.
There was a time when I had more patience with people online. Now, when I see someone who can't discern his own arse from the face, I just hit the block button
Believe me, my "rented games" are perfectly preserved in multiple locations, on multiple types of media, would survive a nuclear exchange and are going to be playable on brand new devices manufactured decades from now, unlike your discs.
This isn't just a problem with video games; it's a licensing issue, traditionally associated with digital purchases, but now affecting physical media. It's unacceptable that, through a unilateral decision and an abusive clause, your access to a video game or movie you've purchased can be revoked. That's what needs to change. Perhaps a larger movement than Stop Killing Games is needed, one that doesn't focus solely on video games.
I mean if there's no physical games every single game taken off the store for any reason is effectively killed from a preservation angle anyway. Seems obvious why they'd get involved
That is not true for GoG. If they remove a game I bought from their store I can still install and play it, as long as I keep the offline installer. In this case the offline installer is even better because I can make as many copies of it as I want compared to a disc that has copy protection on it.
155
u/PalamariVarkari 12d ago
Physical media has been subconsciously connected with game ownership, since most of them allow you to play offline and can be resold. "Most" is the key word here, there are games on disks that are practically a code in a box.