Again, we know that we don't own Crash Bandicot, the IP, but, we wanna own a copy of a game that features Crash Bandicot.
post
ceos getting upset at people pirating their games is a mentality issue.
Oh. So he is an asshole like Elon. Good to know.
You mean the same guy that told people to work two jobs for the honor of buying his five hundred and ninety nine dollar console in 2006? Oh yeah, he's an asshole.
All of them are, especially when you get anywhere near the size of Sony.
Its very crowded there at the asshole department.
I understand that physical discs have become a metaphor for 'owning' games. I really understand that mentality...
Yeah, the fact that you call it a "metaphor" proves you don't understand it at all.
It's a metaphor in the sense that if they didn't get rid of physical disks, they would still be putting games on them that don't work without an internet connection and cannot be resold.
It became a metaphor back around when they released Empire, Total War, (edit: 2012 ish maybe,) and the disk meant nothing and just sent you to Steam to download it, forcing you to keep steam on your computer that tried to run at all times, and make you ask for permission every time you wanted to play the game, revocable at any moment I presume.
It really is an us vs them thing now. There's zero respect given to the consumer. They believe all people are their addicts who will always push the button to receive their food pellet.
My PS5 hasn't been turned on for a year. Others will catch on. Reading books has taken over because they've become a better experience than turning on a corporate product.
We just need to be honest with ourselves and say no more to corporate products. The video games, the crappy food, bad drive thru coffee, electronics that are all junk, and even our news and information is comes from the same types of places. All of it is crap. Worthless crap and we've been spending our lives consumed in it.
Good job Onion, nailed it aga....
Wait this isn't satire, he actually said that?
They actually have a point. People are pissed that they don't own their games anymore. So guarantee ownership. Give us recourse when servers shut down. Let us trade, sell, borrow second hand games. Let us play games without an account. We should be free to do with a game whatever we want
Sony doesn't even make anything if merit anymore.
They stopped making televisions, the only thing of note are headphones which have decent profit margins but that market is so crowded their still not a top 3 player.
These dipshits are playing Russian Roulette with their company by trying to strip consumers of their ownership.
They're literally staking their company's survival on the idea that they can do this without their consumers simply walking away.
Don't let them.
Haven't turned on my PS5 in a year. I'm not some revolutionary. I'm a person who quits a rigged game and I know bullshit when I see it. I don't argue with myself or sulk. I quit immediately and find something that I'll enjoy. No one is enjoying their PS5 the way they enjoyed gaming systems in the past.
Getting a system meant something. Now, it's like a poor financial decision. The hardware is iffy at best and you know you have to hit a wall of subscription requests, ads, filling out forms, giving up personal information...and it never used to be like this. We'd rip open the box, slam a game in, and start playing as a group in the family room.
It's not the same experience anymore. It hinges on addiction. What was once fun is now a dead social experiment. Look at gaming today vs the 80s and 90s. Depression and online gaming go hand in hand. I never gamed back then because I was depressed. It was fun and we partied over Goldeneye. What we're experiencing today is harmful to people.
There's definitely more to this story than we're all privy to.
People should feel that others look at them dimly for giving money to sony, any personal boycott is just personal decision that affects only your own life.
So, Ken, got any jiggalicious PH neutral seven spice aubergine conditioner to go with your foul snake oil opinions?
I think he's correct that it's a mentality issue: but the issue is with Sony's mentality, not the consumer. If the PlayStation store operated like gog.com there wouldn't be as much of an issue.
I think he also underestimates the advantages of a separate disk per game, especially when he mentions hardware prices in the same breath...
If a member of the wealth class is brutally killed, upset at their discontinuation is a "mentality issue"
They’re trying so hard to implode. All we have to do is nothing and they’ll be gone in a few years.
It really makes me worried to be fair.
I'm not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories, I try to think myself as someone who can process information in an objective^1^ , level-headed, reasonable (scientific) manner. Occam's razor and all - and pretty much every theory fails these simple tests of logic.
(^1^Objective in thinking, not in opinion. Opinions are by definition subjective)
But I can't help coming back to the "forced no local computing" theory that's been going around for about two years, where people theorised that the entire DRAM/NAND/chip shortage is just a ploy to move computing power away from ownership by people and towards corporate hosted services.
Which is obviously dumb because what company would say "you know what, B2B is enough for us, why should we sell for B2C?", what company would axe half its market just so the other half can sell a service instead of a product?
Especially when you consider some of the heaviest computing dependent things: gaming being the foremost leader, followed by various other 3D rendering requisites (from artistic through engineering modelling, physics test frameworks for about a dozen major industries that use them indirectly, including construction, aerospace, radio technologies and so on), compute heavy processing of data, hell, code compilation or even complex map rendering...
But then all of a sudden the big gaming giants began faltering. Xbox had three layoffs from Xbox and a new one is rumoured as they're "restructuring" the department from gaming-focused work to 'digital media creation'... Sony is doing their best to lose customers, and Nintendo... well they didn't change a bit.
Every single major gaming studio/publisher seems to be running straight into the forest of dicks with a wide open mouth. And it can't just be greed and stupidity. Some companies doing this, I'd agree, but all the major ones, at the same time? This looks more and more like an intentional attempt at destroying the primary consumer market for high end computer hardware. Destroy the demand, wait 5-10 years, restart game studios (consolidated into 2-3 megacorps of course), and sell games as a service. No ownership, no modding, no piracy, no need for "loud and hot local hardware", just a display and a controller. Wet dream of business execs...
Which is obviously dumb because what company would say "you know what, B2B is enough for us, why should we sell for B2C?", what company would axe half its market just so the other half can sell a service instead of a product?
This is my occom's razor explaination:
Around 2017, the video gaming industry hit a major milestone of becoming a hundred billion dollar industry. That caused businesses to flood themselves with MBAs and finance bros. To the best of my knowledge, this is usually a bad move as a big influx of MBAs into an organization is usually a net negative. Research I'm aware of shows productivity goes down, employee pay goes down, and usually stock prices grow at a similar rate than before.
However, along with everything else, it is also pretty well documented that an influx of MBAs into a business drops employee retention, and that the peak of that drop is 3-5 years. In something like the gaming industry, the brain drain of talent into adjacent industries like traditional software development, film, and advertising hits hard. There is a lot of tribal knowledge inside of individual studios that gets lost quickly with just a few layoffs and transfers.
Therefore, I think we are experiencing the down wind effects of the industry performing well, attracting MBAs, MBAs driving off talent, and tribal knowledge being lost at many companies in the game development industry.
"A mentality issue that we've built a business model around. Now that our exploitive behavior is laid bare, you want to complain about it. I just don't understand why you're so attached to the 'metaphor' of ownership that we've been using to extract money from you."
Can I sell my digital copy to someone else? Or borrow it to them?
You keep making it different, asshole.
I'd borrow you one of my fucks, but I don't have any.
I give you knowledge for free, broke ass
These days "borrow" can mean "lend" because it all comes down to common usage. Dictionary writers are historians of language, not arbiters of it.
I've only ever heard people who have English as a second or third language mix them up.
That's not true at all in my experience, almost everyone uses them interchangeably. Although many also do correct people on it.
It's like saying that guy and me, it is improper, it's that guy and I. But no one follows the rule anymore.
fwiw I've never heard someone say that they can borrow someone something before. Might be a regional thing.
Huh, really? I am in the upper midwest, and I grew up in the country, that had a relatively good public school, and it was commonly misapplies as such.
Not like those that say they don't know nothing when they mean they don't know anything, that is so common in the cities there is no point in trying to correct them. You know what I'm saying?
Apparently regional. Minnesotan born and raised, 'lend' is used only rarely, and usually in more formal settings.
Funny, I'm on the eastern side of the upper Midwest, grew up suburban/rural. The phrasing reminds me of using "learn" in place of "teach", which I'm familiar with the concept of but haven't heard used unironically.
Edit: I've been saying sentences with "borrow me [thing]" out loud and it's possible that I just haven't registered folks using it, rather than having never heard it. It sounds off but not alien.
I'm not the person you were responding to, but I have also never heard anyone other than a child that made a mistake say borrow instead of lend. I'm not saying it isn't a thing, but maybe it isn't as widespread as you believe it to be.
Here's a few relatively modern examples to illustrate my point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nimrod
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/random
It doesn't matter if you agree with it, it comes down to common usage.
Here's a nice list and explanation of how English is a living language:
https://wordopedia.org/words-that-changed-meaning
But go ahead and down vote me over dictionary squabbles. I'll just call you a fool* for arguing.
*(one with a marked propensity or fondness for something)
He'd probably argue you couldn't legally do that with the disc copy you had though.
Ok. I'll read a book instead. I haven't turned my ps5 on in a year. Corpo execs have a mentality problem in that they've worthless leeches of people with addictions. I'll just sell it and probably make all my money back because I have the discs with an overpriced system that continues to go up even though it was released years ago.
I'm a much happier person today. You don't need these things anymore. Now is the time for humanity to return to common and basic activities. It will help us come back together and solve a lot of our social problems.
They're doing us all a huge favor by pricing everything out and stealing what little we can afford. Face the music. They're telling you the thing you paid for is theirs and not yours. It's time to move on.
Did too much hair dye seep into his brain?
It's always pathetic when these super old guys dye their hair constantly, like Steven Seagall, he's like 80 without a single grey hair, and not grey roots even, meaning he is dying like all the time.
Everyone ages, at some point, just embrace it. After 60, 70 tops, just go with the grey.
Owning a disc hasn’t been synonym with owning a game in a long time. And that was already an issue!
It's true tho, we never owned games, music, or movies on physical media either. We owned the revokable rights to view/use that copy of the media for private usage.
Every teacher that showed a movie in class broke a federal law.
It was just one of those things that was unenforceable and no one understood.
It doesn't mean we should accept not owning media, it just means we have zero chance of fixing it if we never understand it. A purchase should be lifetime usage, regardless of media. What you're buying is a license to view/use it, method doesn't matter.
Like how some people back in the day would only download a movie if they owned the DVD. That should be legal.
But trying to explain that never goes well
Naw man, that's just what they want you to believe because it benefits them.
We've de facto owned copies of whatever was purchased until the Internet changed the way ownership functions.
Laws are written by people. Traditionally, greedy people.
I think everyone understands just fine, we just won't be able to change that until the people who write laws are changed.
No, that's literally how software/media has always worked...
If you "own" code, then you can copy, distribute, and profit off of it 100% legally.
That's why software/media you "buy" is a license for personal use.
That's the entire point of the issue....
Did you think Blockbuster or any other rental store could buy a copy from Walmart and rent it out? Those were different licenses and the rental stores paid a shit ton more for their copies to be able to rent them.
Because it's never been about the physical media, but the license attached to it that determines fair usage
Did you think Blockbuster or any other rental store could buy a copy from Walmart and rent it out? Those were different licenses and the rental stores paid a shit ton more for their copies to be able to rent them.
Yes and no. They did have licensing deals for video, but for video games they relied entirely on the First Sale Doctrine. Nintendo tried to sue because they didn't want to allow rentals, and lost.
You misunderstand me.
It hasn't always worked the way it does today. I know you buy a "license". But when you bought that cd rom or floppy or dvd or whatever physical media, you didn't have to do anything else to make it work. That copy ALWAYS worked, and you could sell it when you no longer needed it. Or you could let your friend borrow it.
"Fair usage" doesn't really work the way it used to.
That is not what “fair use” means in the context of copyright.
Also most of those licenses were non-transferable which means it was illegal to sell those games secondhand. But again it was unenforceable.
What you are talking about is DRM.
I think you are also missing my point.
I'm not talking about what the law is/was.
Also, I put "Fair usage" in quotes for a reason.
My point is that those producing media should not be able to sell you something that you are not allowed to control to some extent, and use at your disposal.
Did you think Blockbuster or any other rental store could buy a copy from Walmart and rent it out?
YES! That's how it fucking worked! For the exact same reason libraries can just buy a book, and then lend it out, because they fucking own it. That's what the money was for!
Rental chains only developed contractual relationships with movie studios because it's otherwise kind of difficult to buy five thousand copies of one tape. Studios sued, and lost, and came back with a truce.
The first sale doctrine is over a century old. Every medium has tried insisting it's special, and been slapped down as just another product. Software has been long awaiting that slap. Their excuses aren't anything new. Your rights have not changed.
De facto, yes. De jure, no.
No, it's a corporate greed issue that we don't want to deal with. Fuck him and capitalism.
I mean he is right that it's a metaphor for owning games.
And he is very wrong that it's a mentality issue.
Honestly I even believe him that physical discs are not feasible anymore to produce, but then again I ask: "don't we have a point in making sure we still own a copy of the product we bought?" It's not like we don't have a reason to be anxious about this.
And then if we go back to the discs, if you get rid of that, what's the point of consoles? The differences between PC and console get slimmer by the day, and this exacerbates it.
It wasn’t a metaphor until the games became too large for the storage media that the console manufacturers chose. They could choose better storage media.
Correct. If you own some data, nothing stops you from writing it to whatever media you want, be it laser discs, ribbon or HDD. Do console gamers own anything? Most probably not.

top 97 comments