Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Ubisoft not only shutting down online for older games, but taking away your DLC too.
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Additionally, nothing about any of that changes anything about my post. Just apply the post to those same situations. If people aren't actually purchasing a thing, they shouldn't be advertised to as if they're purchasing that thing. I really don't care if that's a video game, a movie, a puppy, or a pack of cigarettes.
It is not hard to grasp the logic behind it. If it's so obvious, as you say, it also won't do anything to affect how they market these games or the sales. So your argument for allowing video game producers to continue being dishonest in marketing their products is what, again?
This isn't just about a video game ending servers support. As you showed in your reply, it goes well beyond that and providers are revoking access to digital items they advertised as for sale, not for rent. Hell, producers use legal weight to shut down player-created servers these players pay for on their own just so they can continue enjoying a product they purchased. They do this *even when* the players aren't making any money off the damn thing, AND *even when* server support wasnt part of the game copy purchase, but was supported by microtransactions or a sub separate from the game purchase itself. That's a pretty clear bias in favor of producers here.
The nature of the transaction should be clear, and it's decidedly not when it comes to digital terms of service in general. You know that, I know that, and trying to act like it's not the case is burying your head in the sand.
There are literally dozens of articles over the past few years about exactly this: how much ownership we have over digital items we purchase, including movies. It is decidedly *not* common sense, because it's marketed dishonestly to those same people you think should know better. It always has been lol.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
How I miss being able to pop a CD in and just install and play a game.
Well the people who pirate games must be laughing at this.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Edit: after reading further in the thread, Vrika already said this.
That's my final answer, Regis.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Or buy those old games pretty cheap on GoG and dont need any of that.
There's a lot of nonsense in those agreements and this isn't a new concern. In fact, people having been voicing the same concerns about digital rights since Oblivion horse armor over a decade ago.
It's not like people are doing the 'I'm gonna sue you' tantrum or something here.
Some of you are so binary in your thinking that it's fascinating.
I expect the terms of agreement associated with DLC with online components would have specified access to it was not guaranteed for perpetuity. One probably has about as much claim to genuine ownership of such as the last expansion purchased for their MMORPG of choice.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
No player is ever going to get the right to access MMORPGs or any other multi-player game with impunity regardless of their conduct while playing them. To expect otherwise is absurd.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023