>The company maintains that digital ownership is impossible due to the simple fact that the same game can be purchased by multiple consumers simultaneously. If one player were the “owner” of a title, another could not buy it. https://insider-gaming.com/sony-digital-playstation-games-licenses-not-owned/
>>746530535Nfts already fixed this issue.
>>746530535I simply want it guaranteed that I can't lose my digital game. Why won't they do that?
>>746530970Because they don't give a fuck about you.
>>746530535This is what blockchain technology is for, in the future video game licenses will be traded like crypto. Sony is really missing out on an opportunity here that valve jumped on long ago with lootboxes.
>>746530535What?So if there is no ownership then piracy is not stealing.
>>746530535I dont complain about this. Me and my friend swap ps accounts and we split every game that comes out. Paying half price for every game is worth it
>>746530535>If one player were the “owner” of a title, another could not buy it.what, are they being retarded on purpose?
this only affects third worlders.
>>746531424yeah they are digging their own grave by saying that.
>>746531475Yes corpos pretend they're retarded during court battles to drag everything for as long as they can
>>746530683>>746531380SAAARR
>>746530535There's a simple and elegant solution to this issue already.
>>746530535why cant sony just shut the fuck up already and let this drama run under the bridge? the goycattle will forget about it in a month or so of silence anywaywhy the FUCK do they keep constantly bringing it up and keeping it in public discourse?
>>746531740>why the FUCK do they keep constantly bringing it up and keeping it in public discourse?because they can legit get sued and i think already got sued in some countries
>>746530535>digital ownership is impossibleAnd they would be correct. The first sale docterine doesn't protect media that is digital, only physical, and all media ownerships rights go through the first sale docterine.
>>746530535>our DRM identifying exactly who has rights to this copy would break if we allowed digital ownershipSo get rid of the DRM. Games I've bought on my old PSP still run even though there's no longer an on-system store to connect to for verification. Isn't that wild?
>>746530970Because preservation isn't a guranteed right yet unless laws around digital media change.
This is why I stick with Nintendo.
>>746532119fun fact, frenchies tried to pass legislation that would allow digital games to be resold, effectively providing you with real ownershipvalve lobbied against that to shut it down and won, by the way
>>746532376That's because Valve is anti consumer. Also france is retarded as well. The only possible way to own digital is to have some tangible physical element that can be passed between owners like Nintendo GKCs, but then it isn't even digital anymore. Retards in the EU can pass all the laws they want but until laws pass guaranteeing the limitless preservation of purchases so that your transaction can not be wiped AND publishers facilitate that ownership allowing legal transfer of property between users then all they're doing is lip service.
>>746531475Yes and it works. It's quite literally what killed SKG in Europe. The lawyers appeared, obfuscated and lied about what effects the proposal would have in a closed door meeting where the main guy couldn't defend it or correct them, and that was it.
I argue that owning a sony console isn't plausible anymore.
>>746532359They're even more draconian.
>>746531668The banks won't have sex with you
>>746532847>>746532376This. Nintendo lets me resell my digital games, unlike greedy gaben.
>>746531669It's still not true ownership because once the servers go down, it's over. It all depends on 1 company keeping it alive forever, which is impossible.Crypto is the only solution. Decentralized ledger containing the keys of all the players, hosted on millions of computers across the world.
>>746530535Im so fucking happy Snoy made me switch to PC and turn into a full pirate after they told me to fuck off.
>>746534667>he's so naive he thinks lawyers won by arguingLmao all the politicians got paid and walked away happy. Like they always do. They're not arguing there behind closed doors, they're counting money
>>746534946>Crypto is the only solution.lol
>>746535038Yes it is. See how you can't tell me what the other better solution is?
>>746530535thats fine, dont care, I got plenty of PS2 games to play anyway.
>>746530970Because they want to be able to take it away from you at any point.
>>746532376I did a quick google search and it looks like the case got dismissed due to piracy protection laws contradicting the original case.
>>746535012It's both. They're required to leave a "convincing" paper trail to cover their asses, even if all the paper said was >"it's unfeasible and will cost us money because Ummm ickqpvdaod fwptciwhv8"then at worst it'll look like the politicians simply flipped for bad faith arguments (many extremely retarded ones actually do) and the rest can go getting paid in 'donations' and 'sponsors'.
>>746535078nta, but have you seen the current trend with tech? ((they)) are on their way of killing personal computing, so centralizing is possible. Once decentralizing gets impossible since they will own all the compute power, the blockchain loses its credibility
>>746530970Because they want to sell you demakes of them in the future
>>746531507true. their government don't even bother with online verification IDs, which shows how little they care lol
>>746535649Thankfully they don't actually control shit outside of US. They can stay in control of frontier AI models and absolute top tier hardware but everything below that will be made by someone somewhere (in China) and released to the publicThe real enemy is complacency, we're only fucked if the public actually likes using cloud computing, then everything else can die due to lack of demand. But there's no danger of that happening any time soon
>>746534991>Im so fucking happyWhy didn't you do that from the start, then?
>>746535309Something about their explanation there feels really shaky and off, especially with the semi-off topic mention of defending investments. They make it sound like if you buy a game you could just resell your copy infinitely, but that doesn't make any sense.Instead why couldn't you just resell your digital license to your goods tracked and facilitated by the platform you're doing it on? A new Apple account doesn't have access to the newest capeshit movie, they have to buy the license to it to watch it. Why shouldn't it be possible for the first person to sell that license to someone else/another account and in turn lose access to it without repurchasing it?
>>746536831>They make it sound like if you buy a game you could just resell your copy infinitely, but that doesn't make any sense.Based on the small quote my guess is if you sell a digital good you can just duplicate it and claim you sold the original copy.
It's very simple, physical ownership entails rights of ownership, digital does not.They know this so they all prefer having the advantage in this new digital only world where they hold all the power. Same shit with streaming and cloud. It gives them ever more increasing power over you.Putting everything in their hands and "allowing" you access to it is their goal that way they can put any restriction they want on it, like changing your purchasing of something being only a temporary license that you have to renew.People that welcome digital only are either retarded or paid shills.It's not like you are even getting a trade off like getting a license to a game but getting it much cheaper since you own it for a limited time or because it's digital only and therefore reducing the cost of production resulting in cheaper games, no, it's the worst of all worlds.You get less and you pay more for it.
>>746536831Why? Because digital storefronts literally only exist because corporations wanted to remove consumers right to ownership and the second hand market entirely to get exclusive rights to a sale and to avoid commercial and distribution middlemen. More money. They won't do what you're suggesting because that means less money and less control.
>>746537509by commercial I meant retail
>>746537509Eh that's true but you still need a practical solution for reselling digital goods. There is just no way to make sure the guy reselling his game isn't selling a copy of his original game.
>>746535012This. EU is extremely corrupt. Same as USA. And China, Japan, all Middle East of course. I can't find a single place in the world without these "people".
>>746537598The solution is physical.
>>746530535the true reason they are dropping it is because the blu-ray patent runs out soon
>>746537335>>746537509>physical entails ownershipWhy do you keep pushing this lie? If this was true, then physical games wouldnt have drm or.copy protection in them. An owner would have every right to modify his own property.
>>746537680Yes but some games are digital only without a physical copy to buy. If anything the law should go for devs to mandate a physical copy.
>>746536963>if you sell a digital good you can just duplicate it and claim you sold the original copynot if the good is tracked by a unique license, the same way it isn't possible to just spoof ownership of a game on steam and download whatever you want. you have to buy the game/license before you can install it. just make it so you can sell your license to others on the same platform, they already effectively do this with gun skins in counter strike and whatnot. >>746537509oh I know why, it just feels more productive to approach and talk about it more in a light of it being a commonsense bipartisan issue rather laying back and taking the raping like a defeated slave. It really rustles the jimmies of corporate bootsuckers too.
>>746537598>but you still need a practical solution for reselling digital goodswhat part of "they don't want you to do so" you don't get?
>>746537806Well as it stands you're wrong corpo shill. I own my media whether or not you put your EULAs on it. Read the exhaustion principle.
>>746537838Yeah I would like that
>>746537975That's the point of consumer protection laws. Obviously they won't want it but you need some practical solution that would make it even possible if a government were to force it.
>>746537998So you can legally emulate your games on non approved consoles, and you can even flaunt it in public, with the company being unable to stop you?
>>746532119Maybe first sale doctrine should protect digital purchases. As it stands it doesn't even protect the software elements of your games. See: The Crew
>>746538058>So you can legally emulate your games on non approved consolesYup I can decouple from your authority entirely ^_^>and you can even flaunt it in publicNah I'm not retarded. You'll never catch me.
>>746538158>Yup I can decouple from your authority entirely ^_^I can do the same with digital games. Guess i own my digital games. ;)
>>746538096Already does. Just take a digital file and put it in a disc or cart and license it.
>>746530535>we need le digital rights for digital copies!It’s so funny seeing the zoomies and alphas that ignored physical pushing for this now. Supporting physical media was their last chance at owning anything. But they wrote it off as “boomer shit”. Now they have their claws in all of us. Things will get worse, you will have zero rights, you will own absolutely nothing! You created this situation by being such a retarded goy falling for things like steam sales. When everything goes streaming only in a few years, you’ll see them lamenting about the “good old days” when you could just download the game onto your hard drive. Kek, what’s coming is 100% self inflicted and deserved.
>>746530535>the same game can be purchased by multiple consumers simultaneously. If one player were the “owner” of a title, another could not buy it.But the same can be said for physical. You and I can both buy physical copies of the same game. Simultaneously. But that doesn't mean I own your copy or that you own mine or that either of us own all copies or the original master. And it's the same for digital distribution. You and I can both buy digital copies of the same game. Simultaneously. But that doesn't mean I would own your copy or that you would own mine or that either of us would own all copies or the original master.
>>746538243No you can't Gabe. Read the exhaustion principle. You gave your consumers no ownership rights, remember?
>>746538367Thats not my problem. I can make infinite digital copies and sell them to my friends. Nobody can stop me.
>>746530970If your children could inherit your games. And their children could inherit both of your games. And their children could inherit all of your games. Maybe your great, great grandchildren, wouldn't ever need to purchase new media to stay sufficiently entertained! And that'd be the theft! Just think of all the potentially lost sales! Ownership = Theft!
>>746538303Calm down edgelord
>>746538398That's not my problem.
>>746538412Your children wont care about your gamr library, and would probably hawk them at a pawn shop for pennies.
>>746538398hey baldy, maybe if you got a job to upgrade your PC you would have more shit to play aside from literal chomebook tier indies like terraria and FTL, which you are clearly bored with, given you keep wasting your time shitposting instead of playing gamesbut no, you would rather waste all day every day for years on end shitting your pants over nintendo hardware on this shithole so abandoned that it's piss easy to spot individual posters these days
>>746534667>killedgood morning saar pls redeem the disinfoIt's still very much alive, but government always works at a snails pace. New legislation was never a win condition. Forcing publishers to follow already existing laws is all that's being asked for, and that new digital rights thing they're working on with an acronym that has slipped my mind is going to address that.
>>746538528Wowee, who pissed in your cheerios?
>>746530535100% agree. Sony does not "own" any of its (non-physical) games, and therefore me downloading them privately is not theft.
>>746538528He's still pissy over shilling modding so hard only to have troons hijack modding communities and killing that as a selling point for PC gaming, please understand.
>>746538831Stop samefagging, troon.
>>746530683crypto and "NFTs" were on some level psyops to disarm the threat of blockchain tech and prevent it from allowing actual ownership of digital goods (which it indeed does). by making your average dunce dismiss blockchain as a breeding ground for memecoins and cat jpeg NFTs or whatever, corporate interests prevented consumers from understanding what this technology was actually invented for and demanding a solution that allows true ownership of game licenses which can be resold etcthe bad guys won, and anybody who lazily memed about muh heckin pump n dumps and NFTs is partially to blame for not taking 15 minutes to do some basic research
Ironically they are right. They don't own them either because I will just pirate everything. If nobody owns anything them I'm not stealing. Shirmple as that
>>746538552it's not. SKG lost.
>>746532376>and wonThey didn't. Reselling is perfectly legal in the EU, as in valve et al. can't legally forbid you to resell, but they're not obligated to help you facilitate a resale either. Not illegal, but effectively impossible unless you want to make an account and get a new credit card for every game you buy.
>>746530535
>>746537680>>746537598the solution is what >>746537852 says here>the same way it isn't possible to just spoof ownership of a game on steam and download whatever you want. you have to buy the game/license before you can install it. just make it so you can sell your license to others on the same platformYou'll never be able to sell official digital goods without oversight like a storefront tracking ownership of it in the first place so just force those storefronts through legislation to have user markets that allow reselling your licenses. >Got an app on the Google Playstore you don't want anymore? Sell it.>Bought the new Taylor Swift album on Apple Music and it sucks? Sell it off.>Finished a game on Steam and want to make a couple bucks back from it? Sell it.
>>746530535>Sony Argues Digital Game Ownership Is Not PlausibleSony is right; digital is not meant to own. GoG walks a fine line on their own but as option it's good>>746530970Not plausible; you have a license, not a not a physical product to your claim. Digital is built under a trust relationship with little to no certainty beyond the provider/publisher promising that to you as consumer.And you really hope any given company in this day and age being trustworthy when they can simply steamroll you? LMAO
>If one player were the “owner” of a title, another could not buy it. How the fuck it end up with that conclusion. So if i have physical CDs that mean i own that title?
>>746530535Thanks for admitting "piracy" isn't stealing
>>746539054>>746539036>we want drm in our games
>>746531424It never was.
>>746538641Hey ACfag, people are going to talk about serious topics around you and you don't have to get angry or upset about it because you can just leave
>>746538990Pretty sure that motion failed which is what is cited here >>746535309
>>746530535Snoyggers are nigger cattle
>>746539136>tech illiterate console users try and fail to understand game ownership, and spew bullshit out of ignoranceYeah, we can see that.
>>746539124You can still just buy the digital DRM free version or pirate
>>746532173>Because preservation isn't a guranteed right yetThey just have to make physical games, then it's guaranteed.Even better, if they keep producing games, the new discs should have all modern patches already on them.
>>746531669That's a scam, not a solution>>746534751>copingNah, they used to and by that I meant towards third party devs long ago. That said; after the 7th generation and its effects thanks to 3rd parties Nintendo should go back and being 10x more draconian to them
>>746539261If I failed at anything you can quote it and debate it. Until then, peace.
>>746538412>>746538502Anything older than 2 to 3 gens is so easy to emulate it isn't even worth pulling out the console you own. You can download the entire SNES library in a few minutes and people pay hundreds of dollars for carts. What do you call this except for mental illness? Collectors don't even play the games they are more like NFTs than games. Nobody buy old digital games that is why remakes became popular.
>>746539290If you bought a drm free digital version, then why would you ever want physical? Its a literal, objective downgrade.
So keep making physical games? Why is this difficult?Oh right, it's not difficult. But they opt for the retarded gay "you will own nothing" path because that's what their World Economic Forum investors want. BlackRock owns these retards.
>>746538528Meds
I guess GOG is using some advanced alien civilization tech then.
>>746539338It's already been explained to you why people would prefer physical.
>>746534946>Decentralized ledger containing the keys of all the playersThat's cool and all but what about the actual fucking game files?
>>746539332When you say that physical is ownership, and yet its chock full of anti consumer drm and copy protection, which shows that you dont own jack squat. Meanwhile, your sole argument against digital was something something trans people. Pure schizophrenia.
>>746538528What no games does to Nintendo hating mfs.
>>746539387See >>746538865
>>746538926This. Why bother buying anything if it's only temporary and they'll take it away?
>>746530535It's possible if we have a digital bill of rights. It gives people perpetual ownership of a license. Sony is the worst at this and wants to have the cake and eat it to.
>>746539425Yeah, theyre scalpers who dont play games, and just want plastic on a shelf.
>>746537806>Why do you keep pushing this lie?Because it's true>An owner would have every right to modify his own propertyYou do, that's why products state "do not manipulate in non intended ways". You can modifythe product you paid money for because you own what you gave money for. Now if you do that you'd be disregarding the guarateed state of the produtc so don't go complaining if you end up fucking it up beyond repair after exherting your ownership and modify it despite being warned about. In the end it's you decision
>>746539454You can't talk sense into them they are collector fags. They like having a bunch of boxes on their shelves and this is how they justify it.
>>746539454See>>746539332
>>746539203>a lobby group said something so it must be trueAnon...
>>746539124Steam has DRM as well; this is about physical and digital differences, not DRM.>>746539290This.
>>746539515That's an attack on their character.
>>746537335Wrong. We could have a future where digital ownership would be a thing. We need to push for a digital bill of rights regardless of what companies want
>>746539569>lobbiests lying about a court case you can just google ?
>>746539372>Why is this difficult?It's not; it's just they want to kill options for consumer and save every cent they can after the consumer was fine voting with their wallet telling them "it's ok; go digital" for decades
>>746539124Obviously not the same thing. You can't download a game and it's packaged drm without the storefront/steam checking you have a license for it first and foremost, you can't even launch the game if you've refunded it either because you've given up your license for it.>inb4 you can still play it by removing such-in-such file in the game folderOkay, now you've bought the game, refunded it, and locked yourself out of getting future updates or using any multiplayer features it might've had. Why bother with any of that when you could've pirated it right out of the gate?
>>746539569I can't help you with that.
>>746539520So how do you modify switch 2 games? Since you have the supposed right to?
>>746539508>digital bill of rightsLOL. Will never happen. Physical was your chance for a last stand but zoomers wrote it off as “unc shit”. Enjoy your streaming box.>don’t call it a grave it’s the future you chose
>>746530535>it cannot possibly be done because we are incredibly stupid and dumb and barely know how words workcompelling argument Sony, no wonder you're about the exit the industry
>>746539630>We need to push for a digital bill of rights regardless of what companies want>We No>involving a goverment>at all>after 2010Surely goverments getting involved would improve things. What could go wrong?!
>>746539474Cope + meds you mentally ill loser
>>746539630That would require a physical component AND a gurantee that the purchase will be honored forever. The second part wont happen unless a law is passed.
>>746539752>Open cartThere, ez
>>746539795Good to know + you'll survive + sure
Between Sony getting rid of discs and Nintendos anti consumer game key cards, physical is pretty much dead.
>>746539840So you can emulate switch 2 games? So far i dont see it. Cant make backups either. And no modding. That doesnt seem like ownership.
>>746538502Anon, people in the same family can share hobbies. And take things from each others.If your beloved grandpa gamer gives you his favorite game, it would be very disrespectful to sell it if you are a gamer yourself.
>>746540037A modification is anything done besides its base state. Emulation is not a modification in any way
>>746540067Or you can just emulate his entire game library, without fiddling with consoles designed to break after 5 years. And dont claim that they dont. Sony was literally sued for this over the ps2.
>>746540108>emulation is not modifying the game
>>746540037What things seem to you isn't really relevant to anything.
>>746540018I keep coping by saying that at least first party Nintendo games are still on the cart. But I’m not expecting that to last. We already saw all the normal cattle make Pokopia one of the best selling switch 2 games despite being on a goy card. Wouldn’t surprise me if Wind and Waves is goy card too. We are completely fucked after that. Expect every single switch 2 games to be on key cards by 2029 or so if the market accepts the next big Pokemon game on an empty card. I hate Pokefags so goddamn much.
>>746540181>no argument but an ad homConcession?
>>746539515You don't know what a scalper is.
you put your games onto an external HDDthen you have a backup copy on another external HDD
>>746540486>>746540252Being able to enjoy your games without shitty console DRM isn't relevant to ownership, you say. It doesn't seem like ownership when a company can literally dictate everything you do with your game, down to what controllers you're allowed to use to play it.This is never a problem for DRM-free digital games. Seems like you own them much more.
>>746540401Pokemon will 100% by on a goy card and will cost $80 on top of that. Tendies are at their happiest when Nintendo makes money off them.
>>746531669Yeah and in 10 years you wont be able to access the game because the servers will be shut down just like the wii and 3ds
>>746530535>nfts don't exist???
>>746540731PC has DRM as well, shut up vegan
>>746530535>>The company maintains that digital ownership is impossible due to the simple fact that the same game can be purchased by multiple consumers simultaneously. If one player were the “owner” of a title, another could not buy it.gamers dont own the ip of a game when they buy the disk you fucking faggots, if this is their best argument in court they are going to get destroyed, GOG sells games with full ownership do i now own resident fucking evil because i bought it on GOG? no sony i dont im buying a copy of the game you fucking retards lmfao this is the worst argument in a court case i have ever seen
>>746540938Best case scenario, they manage to stay on, but nintendo stops producing hardware, and they don't let you transfer games forward via a flimsy excuse "oh the architecture is too different, buy the game again goy". They didn't even try making up a valid excuse for why 3DS and WiiU purchases don't transfer forward.
>>746539759
>>746541068Where's the DRM on my GOG installers?
>>746541114>They didn't even try making up a valid excuse for why 3DS and WiiU purchases don't transfer forward.They didn’t need to, tendies were ready to defend them from the get go.
>>746541178Security? None. Basic? In the intended format you're using said software.
>>746541178the installer itselfalso needing pc hardware to run pc games
>>746540731Okay but it is ownership
>>746541340you know pretending to be retarded just makes you look retarded
>>746541323>>746541340>In the intended format you're using said software.What is the "intended format"? PC isn't a genre or a corporation. It's the most open ended and free piece of software you can own. You're not restricted by GPU model or motherboard manufacturer or even operating system. How is that DRM?>um you need a PC to play PC gamesYou need electricity to run consoles. I guess you don't own them then.
>>746530535Well, this drive I have with me that has the entire ps1, ps2 and psp collection says otherwise
>>746540938So... the servers won't shut down, just like the Wii and 3DS
>>746541127Grim. Do you think they’ll ever realize what they’ve lost or are they just too retarded to see that even after the streamed copy they will lose after six months gets taken away from them?
>>746541530That'll turn them to piracy, aka true ownership. Seems like a win to me.
>>746541458>already admitting PC does in fact have DRM and already coping with a "no u"you are really slipping nowadays baldyguess you didn't take well to the trooning of terraria huh?
>>746541530nta but i got a relative i asked about disks they said most play online but if it is single player they like getting the disk if its not a online game so i think sony is full of shit
>>746541589>piracy>when everything can only be streamed How are you going to manage that? They’re currently busy trying to price everyone out of physical hardware with their AI shit btw. Good luck with that.
>>746541093GOG rents licenses that can be taken away from you.>but I can keep the gameThat's piracy.
>>746541613What schizobabble are you talking about? You already got BTFO when you made a retarded argument about PCs having DRM, and then you go into a random tangent about Terraria? Genuinely seek help, you can't even keep a consistent argument going. Your obsession over troons is also especially concerning.
>>746530535Just like in those debates where leftards pretend to not understand basic things. That's their defense mode.>can't allow gamers to own their games because then we can only sell the game to 1 person!
>>746541458>What is the "intended format"?The one the software in question is released
>>746541613NDSgroids in general are going apeshit over duskbloods looking so good.
>>746541703>GOG rents licenses that can be taken away from you.really? so gog can magically come into your pc and take your folder of the game you downloaded? are you fucking retarded?
>>746541458>I guess you don't own them then.correct; electricity is service for that reason.
>>746538882See also bitcoin and the like, selling and naming itself after physical things like actual gold. bitcoin calls itself a coin, it isn't physical. bitcoin mining is a term, yet no physical human work is being done. it isn't tangible, it isn't gold, but it wants people to think it is through wordplay and imagery, fakery. It really is fake and gay. Digital will never be ownership, only that which you can hold in your hands is ownership.
>>746531424Incorrect. The company that developed the game owns it (usually, it could also be the publisher or some other company that contracted it out and so on), you are buying a license to view it, or whatever the license is for (you read your licenses, right?).If you are participating in piracy it quite literally is theft. If you merely download something then in theory you are only guilty of possession of stolen goods (but good luck arguing in court that you didn't know), but if you distribute you are literally stealing - hence why torrenting is so much worse as torrent networks make you a distributor even if you wanted to only download something>waah waah corpo cope but m-my funny buzzword sayingI ain't saying it's neccesarily a good thing but that's just how the cookie crumbles legally. This isn't legal advice btw.
>>746541809And what software is that?
>>746541857>already addressed that, but you can't read AmericanGo back to polackia. Why pay for games if the store can revoke your access and you end up pirating them anyway? Why not buy from a store with real ownership, like Steam?
>>746541668anyone who isn’t retarded knows that digital only is the gateway to their true goal: streaming only. can’t have piracy if you can’t access the files or have the hardware to run it. cattle still call me paranoid when i tell them that “you will own nothing and you will be happy” isn’t a meme. (((they))) couldn’t be clearer about what their intentions are. but i guess some prefer to remain retardedly unaware.
>>746541938Usually some draconian DRMware like linux. It makes you put in all these spells and incantations that I'm pretty sure will get you excommunicated from the Catholic church.
>>746530970You will lose it and you'll lose it faster than you would a physical copy.
>>746541857Not your PC your GoG account, that's why you need accounts for digital licenses. GoG, after that, gives you software with no security. That said; the licenses exists for a reason and are the weak link in the chain
>>746542031>streaming only is going to happen>it doesn't work well over a LAN, but it's going to be the thing over the internet>2 more weeks>cheers from Brazil
>>746541938No idea what software you want to buy/use.
>>746542120You're arguing with someone who's a complete tech illiterate retard. I wouldn't pay him any mind.>Linux is draconian DRMFor Fred Fuch's sake, just try to ask him to justify that.
>>746536392Luckily they are all brain dead and are unable to build decent programs hoping generative AI builds itself a flawless version of a product that everyone wants to buy.
>>746542117see your trying to equate gog to sony you buy a game you download the offline copy and put it on multiple hdd's and can install it at any time thats fine, you cant do that with sony you fucking subhuman rat they just take your shit >>746541990i dont buy anything i pirate everything im just making a point on actual digital ownership if you buy something digitally you should get a offline copy just like a pirate does and can be installed on anything at anytime
>>746542095It's not asking for much. Just remove the part in the agreement where Sony has the right to remove games from an account.
>>746542251>see your trying to equate gog to sony you buy a game you download the offline copy and put it on multiple hdd's and can install it at any time thats fine, you cant do that with sony you fucking subhuman rat they just take your shitThey're both digital license services; they're both equal. The only difference between them is what they offer within their services; Sony offers... whatever Sony does and GoG offer free security DRM software for your licenses.
>>746542052>draconian DRMware like linuxPC derangement syndrome claims another victim.
>>746542393>skips over everything i saidi will do the same. lmao what a fucking cunt hahaha
>>746542120>doesn’t know that tech will evolve and that internet infrastructure will improve while retards like you swallow up the lie about “convenience”>has the nerve to call me brown despite falling for constant schemesYou’re hopeless.>>746542206You seem to be confusing me for someone else but I have zero interest in your autistic back and forth with them.
>>746541916what you say is the legal argument but you are just breaching a license by pirating. It is more like sneaking into a private event then it is stealing something from a persons home. It doesn't matter if I own a disk, a digital copy, or if it has DRM. The worst I can do is violate the license. The only software you "own" is libre software with a permissive license, or if it is royalty free. There are a lot of anons in this thread who don't understand software ownership at all.
>>746542442Is that cope?
>>746542445>internet infrastructure will improve>while trying to stream to a machine 10 feet away, separated by a single switch and on the same subnet, is uncomfortably laggyYou're that stupid.
>>746542445>doesn’t know that tech will evolve and that internet infrastructure will improve while retards like you swallow up the lie about “convenience”Yes yes, the digital dark age will totally destroy everything and make us slaves who own nothing. Just two more weeks, right?Meanwhile, consoles are literally doing that, and you turn a blind eye.
>>746542579PC storefronts did that two decades ago
>>746542771My offline DRM-free games beg to differ.
The entire concept of "reselling" digital games doesn't really work since there are currently no storefronts that deal in digital resell. You can't take a digital download to Gamestop and exchange it for cash, the infrastructure doesn't exist.
>>746542872So do the offline DRM free consoles and console games
>>746542872>>746542958
>>746542958>consoles>DRM free
>>746543003*Security free
>>746542771I don't stream games from Steam. They're downloaded to my SSD to do with as I please. I can (but don't, since I'm not trans) mod them or copy them elsewhere.
>>746543003Correct. DRM free consoles. I said that.
>>746543183Even the NES had DRM that only a few unlicensed games managed to bypass when it was relevant.
>>746543085>>746543183There's no difference. You bought a cuck box that gives you less freedom than a Mac, and then flounder around with sour grapes, talking about how PC features are actually bad.When you can install a custom OS in your Switch 2, and modify and tinker with the files in Switch 2 carts, without Nintendo banning and bricking your console+games, then maybe you'd have some semblance of an argument. Until then, your shit is so locked down that you have to resort to buying demakes of games that you could easily emulate on any number of devices.
>>746543132That's called piracy and you are decoupled from steam which is what I suggest as opposed to giving digital storefronts money for nothing.
>>746543247Up until you reomove it
>”people” brag about having to crack the games they bought on steam instead of just pirating in the first place This well never stop being funny to me. Newell really conditioned his loyal cattle perfectly. He’ll be studied in psychology books someday when someone wants to know how to condition the perfect slave.
>>746543295>download pirated game>have to wait for updates to be cracked>might need a crackfix on at least one updateor>download from Steam>fully updated>works>beat game>beat dick>happy
>>746543276The difference would be on console platforms you can own your media.
>>746543295>>746543369Piracy is the best option, of course. Only issue is that it's more preferable then even physical games. If gives you more ownership than physical, too. No reason to pay money for locked down cuckware that strips you of your basic freedoms.
>>746536763PC has no games so it was only really worth it after playstation took games away.
>>746543415No, you can't. A car you can't modify or change under the hood is a rental box.
>>746543410Pick whatever option you feel like
What a weird argument for a company pushing out physical.
>>746543426It has Palworld, the game that makes tendies cry.
>>746543484Well you're wrong so your analogy is pointless
>>746543608The nincompoop who says that Linux is DRM is accusing others of being wrong. hahaha.
>>746543484>rent car from Hertz>go to Best Buy and get stereo replaced>return car>refuse to elaborate
>>746543693I posted that as a troll, and you think other people are me, but you're not a nincompoop.
>>746543543Most of the reason lies in just trying to lay down the facts. The reality is that no matter what happens, the language used will never change. Legally, "ownership" implies ABSOLUTE ownership of an IP. You CANNOT truly "own" a game unless you own the IP as a whole. This is why no publisher can ever use the word "ownership" when it comes to digital sales, and they never will. It does not matter if physical media makes a comeback, they will never, ever change the language. You will never "own" the games because "ownership" means something completely different for publishers as opposed to consumers.This language barrier is what causes a lot of the modern discourse. There are people who GENUINELY believe that the "ownership VS license" thing is a recent thing. There actually are people who believe that video game "licenses" only started existing with the rise of digital distribution.
>>746543693You're just repeating what happened while adding an attack on my character
>>746536831Dude, think what youre asking for.It woud be basicly like gamestop, but you cant get fucked by the middleman, instead the middleman is forced to be your cuck and sell the game for you, for your profit instead of selling their own copies.I can understand why digital storefronts woud shit themselfs.
>>746543806Suck my dick you corporate cock sucking faggot. >hurrr durrr you don’t own your books unless you own the IPThat’s how fucking stupid you sound to anyone who doesn’t have an IQ lower than room temperature.
>>746543823>>746543750You deserve to be attacked after saying that Linux is DRM. It's a little too late to backtrack and say "w-well I was only pretending to say something stupid".
>>746543806Lol no. You can absolutely own licensed media ie Books magazines manga volumes, cds vinyls music scores, vidya carts and cds, etc. There is no language barrier or confusion. You're outright lying. Ip ownership and media ownership are two individual things and factually exist seperately from each other. Nobody is confusing one for the other. Any implied confusion is entirely on your part.
>>746530970because thats antisemitic as fuck
>>746544054From the publisher's standpoint, the consumer doesn't own any of those things. The consumer can say it, but the publisher never will.
>>746544025Thanks for sharing. Anyway you derailed here: >>746543608Care to continue or are you done?
>>746543183And you're stupid for saying thatThe entire operating system is DRMrequiring the disc or cart to always be in is DRM
>>746544025>links someone that's not me as wellYou're not helping your case. linux is for fat faggots who don't bathe, and I love to rile them up. You're a fat faggot who doesn't bathe, and I riled you up.
>>746544127From the standpoint of the First Sale Docterine I couldn't give a fuck what they think about that
>>746544129>>746544147>non argumentYep. As if we needed proof that consolegroids don't argue in good faith.
>>746544147Nintendo is literally for troons and childrenGlass house
>>746544136I don't really care to be honest. I just wanted to teach you that consoles could be hacked and you can pirate console games since you didn't know that.
>>746544198Then we're done. Peace.
>>746544198>still links someone else in addition to meI'm a PChad, fagboy.
>>746544270You're not teaching anyone anything, you petty condescending childIf you accept console hacking then all their benefits are gone
>>746544270But you said that doesn't count. The same can be said of steam games, but somehow you don't own those?
>>746544346>>746543415
>>746544342Which reddit board did you steal that screenshot from?
>>746544354Not owning digital media has nothing to do with DRM.
>>746544409No, you can resell your license You don't own anything https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1854-copyright-infringement-first-sale-doctrine Most computer software is distributed through the use of licensing agreements. Under this distribution system, the copyright holder remains the "owner" of all distributed copies.
>>746544421You are a faggot.
>>746544482>you still own something, even if it has invasive DRM in itlol>>746544541>lazy photoshop jobYou're not even trying.
>>746544624So, it's clear that linux fats are all liars.
>>746534946>once the servers go down??? Never has this happened before, servers will probably outlive you
>>746544624Correct, you still own something even if has DRM in it.
>>746544681So, it's clear that console users are all liars.
>>746544681Wrong, see >>746544506you're a licensee, don't play it upyour licensing terms are in fact so garbage that reselling is their sole redeeming quality
>>746544717>tries to use my line on someone else like he gotchad me>/v/ is one personHairy Pottery.
>>746544792You've already exposed that you're lying by saying something incredibly ignorant like "Linux is DRM". You could've said that you just hated it, but instead you shot yourself in the foot. Sorry.
