45
Subscription services are changing our relationship to gaming
(www.theverge.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
45 points (94.1% liked)
Games
16380 readers
1090 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Technically, we've never owned our games. Even cartridges are meant to be a license to the game. This is one of the many bullshit defenses that games manufacturers use to go after people making tools to dump carts to files and people who develop emulators.
It's the same argument used by companies against DVD or BluRay ripping.
I get that physical gave us a lot more control over our purchases than digital, and subscription services have degraded that control even further, but I'm tired of everyone framing this as an ownership issue. At best it's an access and control issue. The whole "you're just licensing it" problem has been present for decades.
I don't understand why people make this point. You own the physical media and you own a perpetual license to the game. It's like saying you don't own your car because you have to follow the traffic laws.
Because the point is correct.
It's incorrect in the sense that the statement implies that there is a kind of ownership distinct from owning a license that is denied to users. But this isn't possible. The only way to own intellectual property (games, books, music) is to have a license to it.