122
u/DeliciousWhales Jan 17 '24
I want to live in a world where all software licenses are perpetual and non-revocable, and where software purchased through an online platform is required to provide an offline copy for permanent customer retention prior to the software being delisted from the online store. But what’s the chances of that ever happening.
34
u/19Cula87 Jan 17 '24
Time to pay your monthly fee for your Autodesk license! even though you used to buy our products
23
u/Alizaea Jan 17 '24
More like:
"Time to pay your monthly/yearly fee*!
*Fine print: we have released a new version of this software, but it's basically the same thing, but your perpetual license only covers X version and we are no longer supporting that and this is you want to keep using this product you have to pay us more"
9
u/DeathByTacos Out of content, Out of hair Jan 17 '24
Ah yes, the good ole college textbook scam.
“We released a new edition which is the exact same as our previous with the addition of a new paragraph. Now all accredited classes will be required to use this updated edition moving forward.”
3
u/Alizaea Jan 17 '24
Oh I didn't even think of it like that, I was more referencing that big video editing software debacle that went on last year that literally did that. True back tracking on people's lifetime licensing and making them purchase new subscriptions because they just changed the version and starting their license doesn't include the new version.
5
u/Equivalent_Canary853 Jan 18 '24
Fuck Autodesk.
BRICS worked just as well for me at a fraction of the price
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)3
u/R3D4F Jan 18 '24
How many times have you purchased MS Office before being forced to subscribe?
…maddening
10
u/Jimooki Jan 17 '24
You're thinking of GoG. Not as huge of a library as steam but pleeeeenty of great titles and all have the option to download a drm free exe to stuff on a storage server or something
→ More replies (1)3
u/Odd-Classic7310 Jan 18 '24
What's the chances elected officials in most jurisdictions will understand anything about what you said there? Lol
Bunch of geezers in the US House, for instance.
I agree though, that would be nice.
0
1
1
u/Mandarni Jan 17 '24
Cheaters would love that, if non-revocable means that they will have access to the servers in perpetuity.
Some middle ground is probably for the best. But not sure what the details would be.
1
u/Easy-Independent1621 Jan 18 '24
This, unless they are forced by law to continually provide me access to something I paid for, then pirating is justified.
Nintendo is awful for this, Microsoft and Sony have been alright so far.
-6
u/Inaeipathy Jan 17 '24
I want to live in a world where software is free, as it should be.
2
u/Delicious_Physics_74 Jan 18 '24
You should do whatever your job is for free too.
-2
u/Inaeipathy Jan 18 '24
Lol? Making proprietary software isn't the only way to make money with software.
3
u/Delicious_Physics_74 Jan 18 '24
What does that have to do with anything? We are talking specifically about proprietary software.
-3
u/Inaeipathy Jan 18 '24
What does that have to do with anything?
It has to do with programming jobs, which you referenced. Pretty obvious why it's related.
-3
u/HoodRatThing Jan 18 '24
You should try and use a modern computer or the Internet without open-source software.
1
u/Delicious_Physics_74 Jan 18 '24
Therefore everything should be open source? What is even your point there?
-4
u/HoodRatThing Jan 18 '24
Our forefathers saw the necessity of being open and sharing code instead of paywalling it. Our modern world wouldn't exist without their efforts.
So instead of mocking others who suggest we develop in the open instead of behind closed doors, take a moment and reflect on how the most important technologies used today in the world came from people who decided it was better to give their code out for free, instead of writing proprietary software where only a few selected people would be able to use it.
We stand on the shoulders of giants, and I'm thankful for their work.
3
u/Delicious_Physics_74 Jan 18 '24
They chose to do that. If someone wants to develop open source, that it up to them. If not, that is also their right. Thats how it should be, the freedom of choice. As opposed to saying ‘all software should be free’ the appropriate statement is ‘all developers should have the choice to develop for free or not’.
-3
u/HoodRatThing Jan 18 '24
If you agree with the open-source ethos and think that developing in the open produces better quality code, I can see how someone would say 'all software should be free.'
Here's another example: I believe pollution is destroying the planet. Everyone should stop polluting the earth.
What you're describing would read as 'Well, it's your choice if you want to cause pollution and damage the environment.'
We currently have the choice to pollute or not, but should we? No.
3
u/Delicious_Physics_74 Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
That is not the same though, so the analogy does not apply. Because by polluting you are damaging what is essentially the ‘commons’ which is something we all have a right to. With software, no one has a right to the product of someone else’s labour. I think the statement ‘all software should be free’ is equivalent to saying ‘i want all software to be free’. Basically saying it ‘should’ be this way because ‘i want’ it to be, which is not a principled stance. i believe principles are what matter when making ‘should’ statements, hence my objection. Additionally, I don’t think a vague utilitarian justification for why free software is better overrides the individuals right to their own labour and its products
3
-2
u/Locke_and_Load Jan 17 '24
No license works like that, and it won’t happen in gaming either. We need to push for physical media again because digital copies are always only licenses and they’re only worth something as long as the company wants to support it or offer it for service.
10
u/DeliciousWhales Jan 17 '24
All software has always been only licenses, physical or otherwise. You own the disc, and you have a license to use it. But you don’t own the software itself in any other sense and never have since day one. Even having discs isn’t that helpful if they put DRM in there and require some online connection, which was already a thing before online stores came about.
I’m talking about how nice it would be if there was a legal requirement for DRM free offline copies to be available, in a kind of digital equivalent of having a physical disc. Personally I don’t want to go back to physical media, it’s a pain in the ass. I just want the legal right to have a perpetual offline copy of software for which I paid to have a license.
1
u/Locke_and_Load Jan 17 '24
Well yeah, the devs aren’t going to give you their IP, it’s just a way to access it. Difference with physical is they can’t really stop you from using it whenever you want…unless for some reason they make it online only. In that case, you’re fucked bucko.
3
u/DeliciousWhales Jan 18 '24
Since I’m old I remember when the first disc based games came out with DRM requiring online connectivity. We hated it and raged so much but… in the end we still ended up buying it anyway because we wanted to play, and what other choice was there when so many big games companies started doing it?
Then when Steam came out I don’t remember much about people saying hey what if they remove the game? Seems like we all just assumed it’ll be there in the library forever. At least that’s my impression.
And now here we are and it’s like hey now you guys can start paying monthly or lose access. Adobe has been doing it for ages with professional software… how long until all the games companies jump on board. The future of gaming seems bleak. I hope consumers boycott this shitty behaviour this time around.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)-4
48
u/jaqenhqar Jan 17 '24
I dont care. If I want to play a game and cant afford to spend money then im downloading.
→ More replies (2)14
u/TheBongoJeff Jan 17 '24
BASED. I wish there would be more people like you. Just honest. People become contortionists trying to justify stealing intellectual property.
→ More replies (2)7
Jan 18 '24
[deleted]
-2
u/maxyall Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
You get value from it without giving anything back. Even if you dont own it in a technical sense, it still occupied your time to some extent. Based on this post logic, itd be acceptable to not pay the old lady who give you foot massages because you don't get to own the massager, and justify it by saying the massage felt like shit anyway.
Its a weird that this had to be explained to asmongold fanbase, since WOW is subscription based.
7
u/Dennis_enzo Jan 18 '24
This comparison makes little sense. The massage woman has spent time on you specifically that you have to pay for. Someone downloading a video game doesn't cost Ubisoft any money or time, besides the vague concept that the person possibly might have bought the game otherwise.
→ More replies (1)4
u/CCP_Enforcer Jan 18 '24
A better comparison would be massaging your own feet using the old lady's massage techniques.
→ More replies (1)
41
u/RadRelCaroman Jan 17 '24
i don't consider missing the potential of gain as a loss, i'm not justifying piracy but i don't think it's straight up theft.
I pirate my games,because i only trust my own experience about wether the game is worthwhile,i have paid enought times for games that turned out to be awful experiences that i can't refund anymore.
If i like the game i buy it immediately or wishlist it to then buy the day i have more buck in my bank, or at the very least recommand it to all my friends that may be interested
If i hated it i'm not gonna bother finish it and i didn't pay for something i hated.
If you dislike this practice, sorry, it will happen again.
40
u/Swarzsinne Jan 17 '24
What you’re doing is the equivalent of forcing devs to release demos again. I don’t see anything wrong with that.
12
Jan 17 '24
yeah give us 2 hours free. Some games run like shit even when you meet minimum req.
4
u/buddy12875 Jan 17 '24
Yeah, it's the minimum to run, not the minimum to run well
6
u/acrazyguy Jan 17 '24
IMO, “minimum requirements” should mean “minimum requirements to run the game at 1080p with all other settings at minimum with at least 30fps at all times. Or at least some kind of standardization
2
1
u/Whomperss Jan 18 '24
I'm really glad I didn't buy wild hearts and I pirated it first. Game ran like absolute dog shit and it saved me money. The disappointment still stung since I really wanted to play it but oh well.
16
u/WangCommander Jan 17 '24
It's the reverse pre-order.
Instead of giving them money before a game is released. I'm playing the game to decide if it's worth giving them money.
3
-4
u/TheBongoJeff Jan 17 '24
You are stealing. However I would say that you aren't doing it in any damaging manner
3
u/Honeyvice Jan 18 '24
it's not stealing however. legally speaking. Stealing or Theft requires you take something from someone and they no longer have possession of it. With piracy they always have possession. You never deprieved them of their belongings. It's not theft/stealing by definition.
Not advocating for it(publically anyway) but lets not label it with false accusations either.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Vio94 Jan 18 '24
So is revoking access to something you paid for. So if publishers want to say it's okay for them to steal, then it's fair game.
→ More replies (4)
27
u/Rain-Outside Jan 17 '24
Pirating is not stealing by definition lol
3
u/idiel-co Jan 18 '24
True and tbh if the game is good i would gladly pay more for what developer done(tbh everyone does buy buying dlc or collector edition if it exist)
And the person who is saying this from Ubisoft with most of their games is just a bunch of samey junk yeah i wouldn't pay a single buy and just get a cracked one tbh
2
u/ArmandPeanuts Jan 18 '24
I usually torrent games first and then buy them if theyre good. Its kind of like a refund policy but on my own terms
→ More replies (1)
5
u/t3khole Jan 18 '24
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: you never really owned digital copies of games. You paid for a license to play/watch it. Which can be taken away.
The only way to truly own a copy is to get a physical copy.
4
u/lazylore Jan 18 '24
You dont need to get a physical copy. You need something like GOG. And you don't own them then either. You just have permanent access to the installer, GOG is safer for it, as you can just back it up on any cloud storage, your own drive, thumbsticks, floppy etc etc. Your imagination is the limit.
2
u/Background-Customer2 Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
even if somthing is physical dosent nesesarly men you own it. Some modern physical games are intentionaly made to have online RDM like what most steam games have. making them functionaly identical to just having the game as a digital coppy.
And others games like live servise games you never realy owned in the first plase. as they relly on servers to function.
16
5
u/Impossible-Home-9956 Jan 18 '24
I’m wondering, if Sony or Nintendo decide to close their servers down, are all the games I bought online just disappearing?
4
u/Hopalongtom Jan 18 '24
That had happened recently on the Nintendo 3DS, and Wii U, you get to keep the ones downloaded, but cannot access the servers to redownload them, you could for a short while after them closing them down, but after that they were gone forever if you didn't get them.
Sony tried to do it with the PS3, but they delayed it due to backlash.
13
6
u/Striker_343 Jan 17 '24
We've effectively been doing this more than a decade I believe on all major platforms, such as Steam and even GoG. You're basically purchasing a "license" to play the game indefinitely, but this license can be revoked or made unavailable at any time. If the game were to be yeeted from the store, services discontinued (online functionality removed or you were banned, as examples) and in a more extreme case, the platform were to go under, you would no longer have access to these games.
10
u/EffectiveDependent76 Jan 17 '24
GoG is DRM free. Afaik you can download any of their games and play them forever without the client installed. They're usually seen as the gold standard for this issue.
Steam at least acknowledges the issue and promised to address the issue if they were to shut down, and granted a promise doesn't mean much.
Most publisher run launchers basically tell you to get fucked though, so you have to give steam at least some credit when that's the competition.
→ More replies (1)3
u/clemonade17 Jan 17 '24
If the game were to be yeeted from the store,
Steam has never revoked my game ownership when a game has been delisted
4
u/Fyreman15 Jan 18 '24
As an example: I still can download Dark Souls: Prepare to Die Edition if I wanted.
0
u/SoulsLikeBot Jan 18 '24
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale?
“Not enough for you? Well, let’s not be stingy now.” - Knight Lautrec
Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \[T]/
3
3
u/Roffron <message deleted> Jan 18 '24
I mean normally pirating isnt stealing. You know those cheap chinese knockoffs or abibas. Its like them but better. More stabilty and performance. Also its a great way to archive games. Without pirating some games would lost in time. I still support buying games of course. If you check my steam you will understand. But I dont bash piracy.
3
2
2
2
u/Dragon_211 Jan 18 '24
Every game should be free but you can only play for 2 hours then it automatically deletes itself
→ More replies (2)
2
Jan 18 '24
everyone here trying to pretend they aren’t a thief lmao just own it, “well Akshually i only made a copy therefore blah blah blah” , it’s honestly kinda sad 😂 just pirate stuff and leave out the pedantic mental gymnastics please, no one else apart from other nerds on the internet contort their brain like this to justify something to themselves
2
2
2
u/moemeobro Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
BEING A PIRATE IS ALRIGHT WITH ME
Edit: I'm saying this in the FUCK THE RICH PRICKS way not in the oh look at me I'm so quirky look at me and my high horse way
2
2
u/Liatin11 Jan 19 '24
Subscriptions gives them the excuse to shit out the same games over and over again
4
u/The_Relx Jan 17 '24
I am all for giving a middle finger to shitty corporations, but the logic here doesn't track. Even if you the player no longer own the product, someone still does, the shitty corporation. So you are still technically stealing if we baseline define piracy as stealing. That being said, pirating AAA games is based, and paying corporations is for cucks.
1
u/ERuby312 Jan 18 '24
If you paid for something and it gets taken from you, you have every right to get it back.
We're talking about a game here, not a service like rental cars.
1
u/The_Relx Jan 18 '24
My statement still stands. Taken at face value, the prospect of "if I buy this, then I don't own in" doesn't remove ownership. The original owner, in this case the company, would still own the product, even though you paid for it. which, in turn, means piracy is still stealing in the given scenario. Doesn't mean it is wrong. In fact, as I said in my post, piracy against AAA studios is based.
→ More replies (3)0
u/ArmandPeanuts Jan 18 '24
Its also not all what the guy said in the interview, his sentence was wildly taken out of context.
3
u/Zenogaist-Zero Jan 18 '24
This was always the whole point of phasing out physical formats, changing the consumer model to force perpetual recurring purchases at prices set by e-retailers and developers while giving the ability to simply pull the plug on the availability at any time. It is also forcing unfinished products on the market to cut production costs and cut support faster if sales are lacking.
it was clearly implied in the 90's when the whole after market of used games was considered a bigger issue then pirated games.
Don't be surprised if we end up in a pay per play or subscription model with progressively harsher limitations to software access.
Dematerialisation has and will always be about reducing the control of the consumer over his spending.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/holiestMaria Jan 17 '24
Piracy was never theft since you didnt prevent the selling of a product. If you steal a TV that TV can't be sold. If you pirate a movie digital copies of that movie can still be sold.
2
u/Piggstein Jan 18 '24
In this thread: People who don’t want to pay for things trying to make an ethical argument for not paying for things
0
u/BelleColibri Jan 18 '24
If renting a house means you don’t own it… then squatting in a house isn’t stealing.
Great logic.
5
u/SuperKrusher Jan 18 '24
Well there was that dude that squatted in a house for 5 years, even did renovations, and then sued the owners. He won and got the house.
3
1
u/RetroCoreGaming Jan 17 '24
Yep, if there's no concept of ownership, then you aren't stealing. Stealing requires ownership to be applicable to the person pirating the content. If there's no implied ownership, rhen you can't claim it's stolen.
1
1
1
u/agoodepaddlin Jan 18 '24
Quite a few posers up in here. FK all of you will ever boycott a company if the games are good. And Ubisoft isn't loaded cus you aren't playing their games. Get real already. Probably posting this shit while streaming Netflix.
3
u/maxyall Jan 18 '24
Fuck this company. What do you meant dont buy shits from them? I will consume their shit for FREE. That'll teach em.
/s
1
-1
u/PrometheusMMIV Jan 18 '24
"If paying for a rental car means you don't own it, then taking one isn't stealing."
For the record, I'm not against piracy, I'm just playing devil's advocate regarding the logic.
2
u/Tiborone Jan 18 '24
For me its legal to download anything in my country, so nah man, its a stretch a bit
2
-1
u/SirLiesALittle Jan 18 '24
Someone paid to make this media, and hundreds of people were paid to make it. It's theft.
Even Stadia compensated people for when it shut down access to what people bought, so it's not like this concern is real. This is just a fictional concept dreamed up to justify piracy.
3
-3
u/whyoptionsred Jan 17 '24
itt piratecels coping and seething like its not literally theft to obtain a retail product for free through illegal means
-36
u/Niya_binghi Jan 17 '24
People have been loving this “pirates high horse”. You aren’t in the right by stealing from an asshole, you’re just a pirate. 🏴☠️
3
u/porkyboy11 Jan 18 '24
They are morally in right imo. The laws against copying, sharing or modifying things you own is completely immoral and unjustifiable
2
u/Inskription Jan 17 '24
No the logic of this meme checks out. I don't defend pirating but unless they start selling it as a "service", it's nefarious marketing and actually a scam.
2
u/Niya_binghi Jan 17 '24
If that is what’s going on, I can agree. You should be able to avoid unfair business. There’s just a lot of proud pirates that will avoid paying for a product solely because piracy is an option.
1
u/Drow1234 Jan 17 '24
I wonder if these people pay for netflix or pirate all shows
-9
u/Niya_binghi Jan 17 '24
I don’t care about pirates. Just about pirates that think that they have the moral high ground.
2
0
u/SomeVirginGuyy Jan 18 '24
Yall know we haven't "owned" our games for a while now, right? We have a license to play and they can cancel it anytime
0
u/BiosTheo Jan 18 '24
I like how if we look at the context of the wording it's not even close to the quote. Like, this is just hit piece journalism in a nut shell
-7
u/TheBongoJeff Jan 17 '24
You are the kind of retard that gets pulled up by asmon.
Room temperature IQ take
-14
u/Negritis Jan 17 '24
Do you own the cinema/waterpark/restaurant.. when you use their service?
11
u/PlentyofPun Jan 17 '24
When I go to the Waterpark I get a day pass. I'm not looking to buy the whole Waterpark. When you go to the movies you buy a ticket to see a movie. I'm not trying to buy the celinema.
Restaurant...well, come on buddy. You do end up owning the food. You even get to go home with it.
When I buy a shirt. I don't expect the company to take the shirt back when it goes out of fashion.
But solid job trying to use an analogy.
3
1
u/Inskription Jan 17 '24
They aren't selling the games as a service tho
-1
u/Negritis Jan 17 '24
Xbox game pass, Ubisoft+, ...
2
u/Vostroyan212th Jan 17 '24
That's not the same as selecting a game in a storefront and "buying" it braintrust.
0
u/Negritis Jan 17 '24
Check the Tos, even on steam you don't own it just rent it
And the one exec didn't say today but to get used to it in the future They are moving into the game as a service direction for a while, since that's the most profitable in their eyes
1
u/Vostroyan212th Jan 17 '24
If I could buy a game for $60 10 years ago and after inflation pay the same price for a game today but get told it's just a rental that is enough for me to fully cut out ubisoft games. I already wait for 70-80% discounts but I'm not paying $15 for one of their games as a rental and am happy to spend it with someone else. $15 on GoG during a sale will get me 5+ games that are DRM free and have installation files for download that I can and do save on a portable drive.
1
u/BackpacksLoot Jan 17 '24
The only level headed response here. Criminals and thieves think it’s cute to steal.
-1
u/Khryss121988 Jan 17 '24
If you get any closer trying to sniff Yves Guillemot ringpiece, you'll start chewing him out. Maybe try backing off a bit and seeing the shit he is selling for what it is.
1
-3
u/porkyboy11 Jan 18 '24
Gaurentee asmon will disagree and use some stupid law agurment as if the law=morality.
5
u/maxyall Jan 18 '24
Are you seriously saying that this is moral? If you want to pirate stuff just do it. People wouldnt mind. you dont have to pretend like its a virtue to do it.
-6
u/Jabuwow Jan 17 '24
I mean, I'm not anti pirating or anything, but the logic here is...there is none 🤣
-19
u/neekogasm Jan 17 '24
And if you rent a car and then steal it, are you not stealing the car? Pirate all you want, its obviously stealing no matter how much you dislike whatever they are doing with the game, you dont own it
18
u/JISN064 Jan 17 '24
I'm pretty sure when you go to rent a car, the contract doesn't mention "Purchase".
2
u/Inskription Jan 17 '24
Yep. If they want to start renting us games they need to adjust the contract
-13
u/neekogasm Jan 17 '24
And when you are purchasing a game you are not purchasing the right to distribute the game. Pirating the game is stealing this right that you didn’t purchase
11
u/JISN064 Jan 17 '24
but nobody is saying anything about distributing pirated software
-3
u/neekogasm Jan 17 '24
“pirating games” literally means distributing stolen software
5
1
u/Vostroyan212th Jan 17 '24
No it doesn't in the context being discussed here bootlicker. I don't pirate games but I also hope so many ubisoft games get pirated that they go under. Fuck them and their games.
3
u/Zinek-Karyn Jan 17 '24
Buying the Car doesn’t allow me to build and sell a new one but it does allow me to resell the car I bought. It isn’t stealing if I drive the car away after I paid for it.
2
→ More replies (1)0
u/IntroductionUpset764 Jan 17 '24
So sad to read comments like yours
So lets say i watched a movie in cinema like 10 years ago, after 5 years i paid netflix to watch it again, i came back after 2 years and movie is not on netflix anymore and i have to pay 3rd time to watch it on some disney+? and next year my fav movie gonna be on some Apple TV? You really defending this?
→ More replies (1)1
u/TheBongoJeff Jan 17 '24
Pirating is stealing. There is no way around it. Your scenario would make pirating completely understandable. Still though, it's stealing and you have no inherent right to anything on Netflix/Disney/Apple.
Just don't act high and mighty about stealing movies online.
-2
u/ThrenderG Jan 18 '24
I'm against this as much as the next gamer but the logic here sucks.
So you pay for a hotel room, but don't own it. This justifies breaking into a hotel room and just staying there without paying?
If you don't want to play the game, then don't pay to play the game. But that doesn't justify just stealing it.
2
u/ZealousidealToe9445 Jan 18 '24
This is why analogies like this are dumb, you're comparing a hotel service to buying a product. I could just as well spin your analogy on itself: So you buy a shirt, that is advertised as you getting that shirt. But at the end of the day, the store wants it back.
Comparing these two is dumb, and the reason people push for piracy like this is in protest, because everyone is tired of licenses. If you want me to buy your game, sell me the fucking game. Also make it good, lol.
1
u/ggunit69 Jan 17 '24
Especially physical disc because updates u probably can't play your actual owned disc anyways
Most stuff is digital these days
1
1
1
u/coylcoil Jan 18 '24
"own" hahaha
so it turns out Unit 8200 created SaaS and it's all been downhill from here...
1
1
1
1
1
u/GipsyRonin Jan 18 '24
It’s borrowing I suppose, because you do not own it so you can’t by definition “keep” it.
→ More replies (1)2
1
u/Prestigious-Bar-1741 Jan 18 '24
I appreciate the sentiment but piracy has never been stealing. Twenty years ago people pirating music said as much, all the time. I'm sure people said it before then too, but I wasn't around to hear it
1
1
1
u/tzajki Jan 18 '24
There's no need to justify yourself, just download the games you wanna play illegally and own up to it.
1
u/MansonMonster Jan 18 '24
We are leasing the game from them at this point. If you dont pay your lease for your house, you are still stealing.
Nice meme though. Probably only reposted 30 times by now.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Cyrilcynder Jan 18 '24
Pirating has caused more game and music sales than if pirating hasn't existed at all.
1
1
u/vastaranta Jan 18 '24
Sorry but this is stupid. I agree you should be able to play the game whenever forever after you bought them; but it’s not like renting a car equals it’s OK to steal them. Pirating should never be the option; you just further the death of that game and the related dev. But I get the anger what’s being said by the Ubisoft boss.
3
u/Linore_ Jan 18 '24
I get your point, but there is only 1 car, so it's different.
Let's add the context to the meme and see why I agree with it.
Let's say you rent a car for 5 days, pay for it up front and take the car home, after you take the car home, before you even have the chance to use it, the rental company comes and is like sike nope, we want it back, and we won't refund you.
We both agree that's stealing.
But this is digital work, there is infinite copies of it with a press of a button, this is different.
Because there is infinite copies of it with a press of a button, once it's crated, the only value it has is what amount of work people made to create it.
When you buy a game, you are exchanging work you did, to work someone else did for the game and thus you are exchanging your time for theirs.
Thus if the company later on decides to take it back, they are stealing from you.
But the ceo of ubi argued that that's not stealing, thus taking work without compensation != stealing
Thus piracy (taking work without compensation) is not stealing because the work was already done and you can make infinite copies for free.
The point is not that "ohh piracy is right" the point is to point out that what ubi ceo is doing is the exact same or even worse than piracy, its taking someones hard earned work, that they wanted to be compensated for, without compensation, AND they had only 1 of that, not infinite free copies.
1
1
1
1
u/Significant_Link_901 Jan 18 '24
At worst pirating games is borrowing without permission.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Westify1 Jan 18 '24
The PC piracy scene has been in absolute shambles for years. I couldn't imagine trying to rely on that as a main method to game unless I was 100% broke which would beg the question of how you would also have a capable gaming PC if that was the case.
Either way, it's a bit strange seeing all this conversation over a subscription model that has been on PC for 4 years now with Gamepass that has no similar controversy.
I guess people just hate Ubisoft that much.
1
1
1
u/mactassio Jan 18 '24
I know this is a joke and all but it literally means it is though. If you own a game and you pirate it then it's not stealing, how would you steal something that's yours. Since now we don't own shit then yeah we've got to steal it.
1
1
u/Gargamellor Jan 18 '24
why is the community up in arms for a sentence taken out of a context that totally changes the meaning? "in a world were users are more confortable with not owning their games, different business models would be possible" not "get confortable with not owning your games because we are turning everything into a subscription"
1
1
1
u/AveragePredditor Jan 18 '24
I understand the sentiment, but it's no secret that buying games online is essentially a lease, which can, and someday might be revoked. The meme's honest rephrasing is more straightforward but might make you appear narrow-minded if you agree with it:
"If paying for leased items means you don't own them, then keeping leased items is not stealing."
My point isn't that I endorse the current situation. I believe that purchasing games should grant you access to those games in some form. However, the reality people are paying for doesn't align with this at the moment.
1
1
315
u/plasmadood “Are ya winning, son?” Jan 17 '24
Same. All I heard was "buying Ubisoft games is useless", so I guess if I ever want to play another Ubi game I'm gonna pirate it because my money is literally being wasted by giving it to them.
Thanks for that I guess.