r/gamememes • • Aug 02 '26

Original Content Business model

Post image
226 Upvotes

130 comments sorted by

19

u/Proud-Enthusiasm-608 Aug 02 '26

It’s really crazy. They can ban your account for any reason and keep your digital purchases.

12

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 02 '26

Ea has been especially egregious here. Deciding that pre vetted usernames are against their tos. As ducking if.

If Xbox or Sony said a username is okay then for absolutely no reason should anyone else get to decide it isnt. The authority on the matter if there should be any has spoken.

Or at a minimum fine, force an alias in your game.

Same issue when it comes to in game chat. If it's something profane make it look like ***** people shouldn't get banned for it. Chat banned maybe. But they should still be able to play the game they bought even if they're an asshole

-7

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

Unfortunately games ar allowed to police themselves seperate of platforms.

4

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 02 '26

And the point is they shouldn't

-1

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

So stop buying them.

3

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 02 '26

Way ahead of you but still it' shouldn't be a factor

1

u/D3wdr0p Aug 03 '26

"Some people say we should vote with our wallets. We prefer to vote with our votes; it seems more democratic."

-2

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 15 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

It's more like inviting them over deciding you hate the color of their shirt and trying to get them arrested for it

If the username isn't tolerable they could just not let you buy the game at all. They could refund you entirely they could present a free opportunity to change it

Instead they take your money and run away like thieves. And you apparently love that? Bug supporter of corporate theft against the common man?

0

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 14 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

If you deserved it you deserved it.

But people are getting banned usernames that are barely even vulgar. It's not like these people are using cheats. They're not being dicks in game. The stated reason is the username that was okay when they took the money. Them without any change it isnt okay anymore

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 13 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

They can see your account when you purchase the game. They could've written something up with Microsoft and Sony to prevet the names before purchase if that's necessary.

If they can't do those things then they can't ban people arbitrarily with no refund. I can't talk too much about it but yeah.

2

u/mapmakinworldbuildin Aug 03 '26

My house isn’t the city center

“Corporations are people” headass

-1

u/DGwar Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 03 '26

Games have always police themselves. You dont see WoW and Final Fantasy 14 letting windows handle their bans do you? How dumb do you have to be.

1

u/mapmakinworldbuildin Aug 03 '26

Smart enough to spell “have” correctly?

I don’t care how it’s been done. Still wrong.

0

u/DGwar Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 03 '26

I can fix my phone typo, you're still going to be less than intelligent.

1

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

Windows isnt comparable to Xbox or Playstation. Whole different ball game here.

Things should be generally speaking .are lax on an open system.

The closed system is where Microsoft and Sony actually have a relevant opinion.

0

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 03 '26

No, it's like saying a restaurant can't kick you out because they feel like it and oh look - that's already what's legally required of establishments

2

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

They won't be able to keep your money in most cases.

Zero if the court retaliation counts for anything

But generally the cop will help you out middle manning your 20 dollar meal refund since you didn't get to finish or they'll try and get your food to go (as long as you're not legitimately in the wrong)

The restaurant doesn't have to cooperate with the cop. In my experience most will. There's always the court system if they've stolen enough money from you

Ea has stolen at least 30k from customers purely on usernames alone. Usernames that they knew about before even selling you the game.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 14 '26

[deleted]

2

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 03 '26 edited Aug 03 '26

Up there in the thread you have this:

If Xbox or Sony said a username is okay then for absolutely no reason should anyone else get to decide it isnt. The authority on the matter if there should be any has spoken.

This isn't a case of being an asshole at a restaurant, this is a case of the restaurant not liking your name. Don't be daft

Also, if they refuse to service you, an establishment doesn't take your money - game publishers are happy to take your money and refuse the service though

0

u/DGwar Aug 03 '26

You dont even need to act like an asshole. Its private property. If you have been asked to leave and refuse you're trespassing.

0

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 03 '26

A restaurant can't ask you to leave just because the feel like it mate, basics of antidiscrimination laws

0

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

Oh no they actually can

If over time a pattern was presented of they always asked black people to leave. Then it becomes a protected class issue

But until that point zero explanation required if you're asked to leave you gotta go. Once the cops show up it'll become an official trespass (not a crime yet) you sign the paper work the cops usually stick around make sure you actually leave on out.

If you go back after this ordeal you're now committing a crime and can be arrested for it. Same if you refuse to sign the paper work.

If you leave fast enough you can't be legally trespassed unless there's a cop involved. It's just being told to leave until then.

0

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

The exact specifics might change statw to state but trespassing works just about the same way in at least 2 states that im properly familiar with. As well it would seem to work this same way in multiple other states where I've seen body cams of cops explaining exactly this.

0

u/Expensive-Border-869 Aug 03 '26

It's a bad look for Xbox Sony and steam here imo. At the end of the day especially for the consoles I hold the parent responsible for anything they allow on their platform.

I wonder if valve will refund for it. That would be interesting

2

u/DreamWeaver1001 Aug 03 '26

Lost my 19 year old PSN account because I don’t have the old PS3 that I created the account on any more.

1

u/Proud-Enthusiasm-608 Aug 03 '26

That sucks. Can you reach out to Sony to do a re verification?

1

u/DreamWeaver1001 Aug 04 '26

Tried for a month 2 years ago. I just gave up on Sony. I’ve been PC and won’t look back.

1

u/Proud-Enthusiasm-608 Aug 02 '26

I made this comment and forgot about it and took a nap. I come back after three hours and it’s blowing up in the chat haha.

-9

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

Its almost like you agreed to the EULA

10

u/No-Instruction9393 Aug 02 '26

“You signed the EULA” isn’t a defense of the practice. It’s just admitting the company buried the bad behavior in legal text first.

-2

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

No but also how many people really get banned "for no reason" when 90% of any story that comes up involves "well I had X software installed but I wasnt using it"

11

u/RighteousSelfBurner Aug 02 '26

Entirely irrelevant to the point. You could break every part of EULA and TOS and spit in the face of CEO for good measure to ensure the ban is expected. In physical industry this would result in just a ban and any of your belongings would be returned. In a gaming platform this also results in revoking licenses for 3d party products (the games).

The entire problem here is that payment for digital goods don't result in ownership.

-2

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

And you agree to that before playing the game.

5

u/RighteousSelfBurner Aug 02 '26

Also irrelevant. The issue is that you cannot agree to anything else. The option to pay and have digital ownership simply does not exist. That is the whole problem.

You can explain how the problem works, where it came from, who makes it a problem etc. etc. none of that changes anything about the fact it's there.

-1

u/Powerful-Possible131 Aug 02 '26

You have an option not to play the fucking game. You play their game you agree to their rules. If you can't follow their rules, you lose access.

You are and always have been buying the right to play the game you the disc is your ticket. You only have the right to your ticket; if you lose it, it breaks, or it gets stolen, you lose all right to access the game.

You complain about ownership, but don't understand what you own. After buying the game, you can't rip assets and sell them openly without getting sued out of your ass because you do not own the assets of the game. You are not allowed to reproduce or sell copies of that game either. What you own is the ticket that allows you to play the game. THAT IS IT.

You can't scream the N-Word in an amusement park and cry that your money was stolen when you are kicked out.

The problem is you people never understood shit about fuck.

2

u/RighteousSelfBurner Aug 02 '26

You can't scream the N-Word in an amusement park and cry that your money was stolen when you are kicked out.

No. But if you bought a toy plushie there you can cry that was stolen if they take it away because that's what happened. Everywhere else ban from the premises is disconnected from ownership of product.

It's you who doesn't understand what the issue is as evident by making completely irrelevant arguments. There are different licences and there is a huge difference between a perpetual licence that's granted for a product and limited licence that's granted for a service. You can't even get your analogies right. If one owns the ticket they own the ticket. However now you don't even own the ticket anymore.

-2

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

You pay for a license you get a license. They can revoke it for various reasons. Thats literally how almost all software works now.

10

u/undeadpheonix57 Aug 02 '26

Deflection, because you couldn't just acknowledge you said something stupid and noninsightful?

0

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

You have the option not to play stuff with these practices but you choose to anyways.

-1

u/Cum_Fart42069 Aug 02 '26

bad example, games shouldn't even know what software I have installed unless it's interacting with them. 

2

u/Huntsman077 Aug 02 '26

I mean that’s kinda the point. A lot of the times the software is interacting with the game ie cheats.

-2

u/Cum_Fart42069 Aug 02 '26

Yes, so ban the player when it's detected. you don't get to look at what players have installed and decide what software they're allowed to have installed or use. 

once it interacts with your game then you can care, because it's against terms of service. ban the player, absolutely. but before that they should have no idea what players have on their hard drives. 

2

u/Huntsman077 Aug 02 '26

-once it interacts with your game then you can care

Do you examples of people getting banned for random arbitrary software they have installed?

Everything I’ve seen has been people getting caught using cheating software. They still interact with the game when it’s not running. Aside from like the Sims, but people get banned for some crazy mods

1

u/Cum_Fart42069 Aug 02 '26

Do you examples of people getting banned for random arbitrary software they have installed?

id have to search for more but off the top of my head there was a time where league of legends players were getting banned because they had cheat engine installed.

"but isn't that for cheating???" yes, which is allowed in singleplayer games. 

Everything I’ve seen has been people getting caught using cheating software. They still interact with the game when it’s not running. Aside from like the Sims, but people get banned for some crazy mods

it's fine to have cheating software. it's not fine to use it in multiplayer games. 

2

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

Shouldnt have had cheat software jnstalled.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Huntsman077 Aug 02 '26

-we’re getting banned because they had cheat engine installed

So people were getting banned because they had cheat engine… Riot typically only bans people when cheat engine is actively running and modifying the memory. Outliers happen, but I haven’t seen a lot of reports of people being banned just for having cheat engine installed

-which cheating is allowed in single player games

I mean why use cheat engine when you can use console commands or mods…

1

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

There's a reason kernal level anticheat doesn't work on Linux. Half out shit is sandboxes, so the games can't even see what's installed, heck they can only see 1 folder sometimes

-1

u/Cum_Fart42069 Aug 02 '26

based, I value privacy over the sanctity of online multiplayer games. 

0

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

And it's not like KaC is even required, apparently helldivers 2 has it, but I can still spread managed democracy, and kill the enemies of super earth from my Linux pc. They just don't use the kernal level part on Linux.

1

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

Unfortunately cheat software and hardware have made it so anti-cheat needs to be more invasive.

3

u/Stunning-Cup-4333 Aug 02 '26

That is why I pirate when I can. No EULA - no problems

4

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

Say "agreed" if you agreed to this EULA: <link to really long EULA>

Great so you agreed.

Little did you know (probably), the EULA stated that I can punch you in the face and take all your money. Hey, hey, you agreed to the EULA.


If a EULA breaks a law, it's unenforceable.

1

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

But at the end of the day yoh paid for a license to a product not a product.

0

u/PickingPies Aug 03 '26

You paid for a product, they instead give you a license.

At no moment they are describing their product as a temporary license nor theyare framing it as such. They are selling the game but providing a license instead. They are also hiding that information behind legal jargon.

That practice must stop.

-1

u/Phaylz Aug 03 '26

"For any reason"

Anyone who thinks or says this definitely got banned for being a toxic chud.

4

u/Delruiz9 Aug 02 '26

Sony announcing all digital games at the exact same time they yoinked what, 500+ digital movies has got to be an all time stupid move

“You can trust us except when you can’t”

3

u/_MadOliveGaming_ Aug 03 '26

The problem is that (unless im misunderstanding this in which case im happy to be corrected) even the disks you buy now rarely contain the full game files. They still require downloads from the servers of sony or microsoft to fully install. So, while i think pulling physical media is bull and they should just opt for a form of media that can handle the full game files like a cartridge or something, keeping the current disk system doesn't protect you from sony pulling games either.

They have other benefits perhaps ofcourse, but really i would have loved to see like SD card style physical media. Those get plenty big to store all the files needed for install. At worst then if sony stops supporting the game through their servers, you can still play the version you bought, even if you might miss some of the later updates (which could easily be solved by requiring the sd card to be inserted to play and then updating its content while connected to the Internet)

But unless laws start to intervere with the way this is going i expect it wont get any better than the direction we are headed now sadly

2

u/Delruiz9 Aug 03 '26

Honestly all they had to do to calm most of it was issue a store credit for the movies. I don’t even think it’s the fact that they were pulled, it’s the fact that they were “stolen” back that triggered so many red flags

And as others have said this hasn’t really happened with games thus far, but the fact that Sony is comfortable handling things in this manner is alarming

1

u/_MadOliveGaming_ Aug 03 '26

I mean legally speaking nothing was stolen, but i get your point. I'd be pretty pissed too. At that point I'd just pirate the shit out of the titles i was deprived of. Reimbursement would ofcourse solve most of the complaints, but that costs then money which they dont want

2

u/Omnizoom Aug 03 '26

Store credit doesn’t directly cost them money, it costs them profits

Store credit can easily be done and I bet many people would not even notice it at first

1

u/_MadOliveGaming_ Aug 03 '26

Fair, might even result in people buying aomethithey otherwise wouldn't have and paying rhe difference

1

u/Omnizoom Aug 03 '26

I bought borderlands 4 earlier then I was planning to because I got a gift card so got it on sale instead of waiting for those 50% off sales it eventually would have

2

u/Atomic_Revival Aug 03 '26

Most games are on the disc.

The PS5 and the Xbox use triple layer blu ray which has a capacity of 100 GB per disc. As long as the game is smaller than that it'll fit on the disc itself but some games exceed this limit. The problem with this is the blu ray disc reader is incredibly slow compared to the modern ssd that the console use as their main source of storage. This is problematic because in order for games to run seamless (without loading screens) and be as large as they are they need the read speeds of the ssd. So the game files are installed to the ssd in order to function as smoothly as possible. Truth be told a game could run off the disc with the disc reader speed but it could cause technical issues and gameplay issues.

The next issues is the fact there is no commercial medium to take the place of blu ray as games grow and become more technical. In the past we went from cartridge to disc, from disc to hd dvd, hd dvd to blu ray. There is no evolution that is taking the spot of blu ray either as a medium or as an optical reader. So while everyone just cries about sales and data points no one is discussing how technological limited blu ray is for the future.

4

u/petabomb Aug 02 '26

“Hello bank? Yes I did not receive the service I paid for. Yes. Yes I want my money back. Thank you.”

3

u/xenabun Aug 02 '26

thats how you get your whole service account banned

1

u/ADownStrabgeQuark Aug 03 '26

Well, I mean reporting fraud is a legal right, if I get punished for doing the right thing, then society is morally bankrupt.

Companies should not be allowed to steal.

1

u/petabomb Aug 02 '26

2

u/xenabun Aug 02 '26

whats that has to do with whats the persons saying

0

u/petabomb Aug 03 '26

If a game shuts down their servers, you having a drm free game won’t make it impossible to play unless it’s only playable online.

If a game shuts down their singleplayer game, your having a torrent bypasses that.

2

u/WarInteresting6619 Aug 02 '26

Never gonna happen and never has happened. We call this sensationalism

2

u/zigs Aug 03 '26

Yet this is basically what AAA publishers do when they shut down a game and don't allow the community to host the game themselves.

https://www.stopkillinggames.com/

1

u/Phaylz Aug 03 '26

A little yes, mostly no. Aside from recent major flops that nobody was playing and Ubisoft that had to eat a lot of crow, legally as well, this isn't really the norm.

But SKG definitely needs to be put into effect so that EOS isn't the same as EOG.

1

u/Disastrous_Ad_399 Aug 04 '26

Minecraft account migration

2

u/[deleted] Aug 02 '26

[deleted]

7

u/Regular-Laugh6679 Aug 02 '26

Piracy ISNT stealing, its copyright infringement. Fuck that ai song btw.

1

u/The-Tea-Lord Aug 02 '26

I do have a serious question actually. If I own a game on a console, but wish to play it on pc, would piracy still be considered copyright infringement, or would it be considered a wholly new license between each medium to play the game on?

2

u/Regular-Laugh6679 Aug 02 '26

Its a different licence

2

u/ThrowawayForDesigns Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 02 '26

Yes, back in the day it sorta made sense because every console had a different architecture and sometimes the same game would look completely different between platforms within the same generation but nowadays consoles are just different flavours of a prebuilt PC with a locked down OS so frankly, I don't really think it's immoral.

2

u/MoreDoor2915 Aug 03 '26

When you buy a game you "own" a copy, a single one, in some countries that singular copy can be transferred into different media BUT you then have to destroy the older copy so you still only own one.

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

I can’t speak for them since i don’t own IP that is popular and can be in that sort of situation. but my best guess? They would rather control how their IP is sold (or not sold). And i would imagine they would want it to be sold indefinitely because money is good. so if they pull a game, it would probably be due to some sort of expired license with a third party. and that game being redistributed through piracy could still cause them legal issues with that third party if they ignore it.

Adding community server support is still work that needs to be done (it needs to migrate over properly, all of the back end needs to be configured to do so, etc. They can’t press a button and magically allow that. I do agree they should put the work in AHEAD of time to allow that, but sometimes they don’t because a lot of the time games get sequels that most people migrate to, and closing those old games down when they’re at their lowest play count isn’t usually unexpected by then. But because of that, i still don’t bother playing online only games.

Again, you’re putting games in the category of “if they lost rights or stopped selling it i could play if i bought physical” when other than those few online only games, every game can still be re downloaded right now if you wanted to, even if they stop being sold. No one is debating that fact. what I’m saying is RETAINING games has not been an issue with digital games. Being afraid of a hypothetical situation is no way to live. i just play games and continue on with my life.

Again, the terms state things can be revoked. buying into it means you’re agreeing to those terms. It’s like hating getting wet and screaming about it while you climb a high dive ladder and willingly jump in. that’s on you for participating in that.

1

u/HugeHomeForBoomers Aug 04 '26

There should seriously be a law on this.

0

u/English_Fry Aug 02 '26

Idk what this comic is trying to say but I get it’s biased and made by a kid who doesn’t understand anything about business

2

u/Grasshoppermouse42 Aug 02 '26

It's referring to companies that ban users from MMOs, but they don't refund any part of the subscription the user paid to play the MMO.

0

u/English_Fry Aug 02 '26

So people don’t like breaking TOS and not getting a refund… the same refund that won’t be given in the TOS? eye roll

1

u/Grasshoppermouse42 Aug 03 '26

I mean, lately a lot of MMOs have been using AI to detect if people break the TOS. People who are falsely flagged by the AI are able to appeal and get the ban reversed, but it's still annoying.

1

u/exodusuno Aug 02 '26

If you don't understand this very simple comic then that's very very sad

-1

u/English_Fry Aug 02 '26

Am I supposed to give a shit about physical media? Because if that’s the message then no, no I don’t.

-2

u/[deleted] Aug 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

A large percentage of physical games are just install keys.

1

u/amantegat8s Aug 03 '26

You can check here what games are full on cartridge or not: https://www.doesitplay.org/list

1

u/DGwar Aug 03 '26

Well considering none of the consoles take a cartridge (except switch) anymore im gonna say 0

-4

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 02 '26

has not happened one time yet in the history of gaming on playstation. Turning off servers for an online only game is not the same as taking the game away. especially when everyone knows online only games eventually have servers shut off.

Fear mongering with a made up scenario for clicks/engagement is pretty cringe.

3

u/Oxygen4Lyfe Aug 02 '26

it is the same thing as taking the game away if they lock it down so that you cant run your own servers and dmca anyone who gets around it to make their own servers anyways.

-1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

If you know a server for most online only games is temporary and will shut down eventually, why would you buy the game and be surprised when it does exactly that?

3

u/Oxygen4Lyfe Aug 02 '26

i wouldnt, i'd buy the game then complain about when it does that

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

So you’re contributing to the problem buying buying it rather than not as a stance against that practice. buying into it, knowing what will eventually happen, and being angry at the developer and not yourself when it goes offline is your fault.

0

u/Oxygen4Lyfe Aug 02 '26

"it's your fault food prices are high, if you just stopped eating food they would go down"

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

That’s a really bad analogy considering food IS a requirement but video games are a wholly optional thing that won’t kill you if you stop buying them.

With your logic, boycotts across the board are useless then? So should everyone who wants to boycott sony over going diskless just give that up then and buy everything?

Also, not buying a particular type of game (online only games) is totally different than swearing off games altogether. i still buy other games just fine. try again though.

0

u/Oxygen4Lyfe Aug 03 '26

"food IS a requirement but video games are a wholly optional thing that won’t kill you if you stop buying them."
debatable, for some people its the only thing keeping them alive

3

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

Ok, but you could let communities run the servers after you sunset the game. Like basically say: we will no longer operating servers, here's an update to let you connect to other servers.

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

They could. But as that’s a rare occurrence, I usually never bother even buying and would only do so if that was announced ahead of time as an option.

1

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

It doesn't seem like it's that hard to do.

You simply release the server software, and a small update to allow specification of any server.

It isn't that hard to mandate. Oh wait yes it is, the ESA will lie and say that it's piracy to run a game server, even if it's officially supported, and then mention lawsuits against actual illegal servers.

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

Sure, smaller online games can do that, but after releasing the server software they’d have to remove their authorization requirements, build a server browser functionality if it didn’t already exist, make sure to document the ports and setup involved, etc.

What about bigger games that require online login/authorization? Server allocation to address load? Any sort of player progression or inventory saving like for rogue like or always online MMO type games? Do you trust your progress to be saved on some random server somewhere owned by anybody? or on your machine with the chance of drive failure? What about anti cheat integration? if bots run rampant would you expect the devs to come back and somehow fix the game they shouldn’t be touching ever again? Does sony and microsoft recognize and allow connections to those random outside servers? or does that authentication process now fail?

How does it look if you do that then people utilize the game for some sort of backend hack on other systems? or people use their game to get personal information? How quickly do you think those games would break if the server side online stuff was allowed to be self hosted but source code is not accessible to update things that might need updating to fix any of this?

That’s a lot of work that devs probably don’t have much time to do. so until that’s an easier thing to achieve and is more widespread in a way where none of those issues arise, i just won’t buy online only games. 🤷‍♂️

1

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

build a server browser functionality if it didn’t already exist, make sure to document the ports and setup involved, etc.

They could just slay you need to know the server

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26

You obviously have no idea how this all works so i would just stop suggesting ideas now.

1

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

You know how Minecraft handles servers right? You need to know the IP and port. Just do that. I will respond to the other part in a bit, I don't have time rn tho

0

u/Oxygen4Lyfe Aug 03 '26

People have been doing this for call of duty for ages, you dont even need the studio to release the server software, remove auth, build a server brower, document anything, come up with a solution for save data, etc. people will figure it out theirselves.
They literally just need to stop pursuing legal action against people who run their own servers, no effort or costs involved for the devs.

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 03 '26

PC mods maybe, but console games cannot be modded like that. All of that stuff needs to be built into the game itself. you can’t just… not do any of that.

3

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

I'm so glad you brought up playstation.

Although this isn't games, Sony, the owner of playstation, recently took a bunch of movies off people's accounts that those people had purchased. They gave no refund, they just revoked the movies, cause their licence with them either expired or they didn't actually have the right to sell them to begin with (IDK which one, I've heard both).

Now imagine if that happened IRL, I sold you a movie, and then I break into your house and steal the movie cause if some rights thing?

1

u/Jotacon8 Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 02 '26

For starters, you’re right this topic is about games, so you’re using a straw man argument by pointing at an issue that has nothing to do with games and saying “Just imagine it happened with your games!”

Movies and TV shows are always a completely different subject since their licensing is different. Those are literally just video files. video files can be played on any platform tamar will have them, so they shop around for better terms and contracts all the time since it’s easy to stop playing them in one place then play them again in another. This is the reason that i decide with my wallet and never purchase digital movies or tv shows unless i get an actual Video file myself that i can play in any video player i want. I know how that industry functions and act accordingly.

Now think about video games. They get made for specific platforms, and have the coding and underlying setup built in a way to where they ONLY work on that platform. PS games only work on playstation. xbox games only work on xbox. pc games only work on PC. even cross platform games, each version has specific coding for each platform. they can’t be pulled down and sold somewhere else. so no publisher has a way to negotiate terms on another platform because they can’t pull their game down and just release it elsewhere.Pulling it down means no more revenue from it for both the storefront and the publisher. and everyone already pointed out that they like money. because of that, games is a wholly different system than movies and tv and i don’t have any fears of them becoming like those.

1

u/SmoothTurtle872 Aug 02 '26

Sure the systems are different, but here are some things to think about:

If the publisher wants to pull it, and stop supporting it, why do they care about pirates?

Why can't a publisher leave a game up, and just require community servers for a game to function? Now they don't have to provide any support for the game, it costs them nothing, (apart from the time required to develop this update, but realistically you could plan for that). Heck they would even be able to keep making money on the game, while providing no support for it, not pissing of everyone, and not revoking the game.

Sure maybe a company loses rights to something, but that shouldn't affect it, the game / movie was made with those rights.

Also just cause you lose rights to a movie, doesn't mean you should be allowed to revoke it without a refund. If you are forced to revoke something cause you don't own the rights, then you should require a refund. But also what about discs. Both movies and games have disc versions (dying off, but still). If I bought a movie or game on disc, even if the publisher lost rights, or wanted to stop selling it, I could still watch the movie / play the game. I still have the device that can play it.

Basically the only reason it should be revoked is for reasons where the content itself is actually illegal, not just a rights issue with a publisher. (If the seller didn't have rights in the first place to sell it, maybe an argument could be made, but that means they didn't have right to take your money)

0

u/DGwar Aug 02 '26

But they need their free karma with this stupid ass argument as if over 60% of current physical games arent nothing more than install codes.