SEGA Warns Players They Can't Own Metaphor: ReFantazio

if buying isnt owning, pirating isnt stealing

13

Anonymous user

·a month ago·

Okay, I can't own it, so I don't buy it. Deal!

0

Anonymous user

·3 days ago·

"Agenda 2030 you will own nothing..."

Elon Musk is not liberal, but republican. He doesn't working with Soros, he's a good guy.

0

Anonymous user

·3 days ago·

They mean it in reference to the product and they state it very clearly. That all parts of the product (code ,art ,music, screenshots of the game, etc.) belong to them. Which is obvious but must be stated for legal purposes. If you make a game, you should also state the same in your ToS.

1

Anonymous user

·10 days ago·

This is the main issue I take with digital ‘content’ (term used generally).

It used to be, if you purchased a VHS copy of Jurassic Park and then ran out and bought the Rampage Edition Genesis game, that 100% meant that you OWNED a copy of Jurassic Park: The Movie and Jurassic Park: Rampage Edition for Genesis.

No one could revoke it…except maybe your parents..

It’s on the shelf (what we’ll call our ‘library’) and as long as we didn’t loan it, lose it or sell it, we had access to it.

It didn’t matter if a company shut down, lost the license, had to renew music rights, became controversial, the format went out of style or that there just wasn’t enough viewers/players.

NOW, if you purchase something digitally, you are essentially paying a fee to rent the content for your library with no DEFINED due date…only the agreement that at some point in the future, they COULD pull it from your library without notice and at their discretion.

What would be SO horrible about an End-User Agreement simply stating “This grants you ‘ownership’ of ONE (1) Digital Copy of ‘Game Title’ that is yours to keep and continually access from this moment forward, provided you adhere to the rules/regulations of this agreement. Should it be found you have broken the terms of this agreement, we reserve the right to revoke ownership blah, blah, blah.”

I mean, obviously, this would mean a whole new digital-based definition of ‘ownership’ but it would likely make a lot of people feel at least a little better about the terms associated with digital purchases.

I don’t think that scenario would be that much different from purchasing a console, breaking a rule and having your console bricked/banned, etc…

There’s also the unfortunate side of NOT purchasing something digitally…as you could potentially miss out all together..

Movies getting no physical release and then being pulled from streaming/sale for tax write-offs..

Game Developers/Publishers losing the rights to IP, not renewing music licensing, companies going full blown bankrupt, etc and that’s not even taking into account server-based multiplayer issues that or even server-based accounts/progress making it where even if you DO have the game in your library…it becomes a useless shell without the servers!

There’s no question that the CONVENIENCE of digital is wonderful…but it’s a high cost for sure...

Content preservation has become increasingly more important but the companies fight it because of the piracy allowing the financial aspects to outweigh the importance of the projects they worked so hard on NOT becoming lost media…which is a bit ridiculous, considering if content is delisted, there ISN’T ANY financial aspect! So why fight SO hard against the preservation of your dead product?!

I miss the simpler times of physical media..

Sorry for the long comment..I guess the topic hit a nerve..

0

Anonymous user

·13 days ago·

Agenda 2030 you will own nothing and be happy. Elon Biden Harris Trudeau Macron Stammer every Liberal Democrat is working with Soros from the WEF to control and distroy the west.

-4

Anonymous user

·a month ago·

I guess i pirate the game then sinne thats not stealing

2

Anonymous user

·a month ago·

If they don't want me to own it, then I guess I'll just pirate it. Can't steal something that's not real

4

Anonymous user

·a month ago·

People don't realise THIS is when boycotting actually makes an impact. If gamers stopped buying games and explained they won't buy unless they have the right to PWN the game and play when they want without the risk of losing it... It can change a lot. But a lot of people need to do it not just a few people here and there and not just with one of two games.

4

Anonymous user

·a month ago·

this article writers figured they'd get dome extra clicks and ride of the Ubisoft hate with not "owning" the crew when its been like this for every game ever , either this or its the firat EULA this person ever bothered to read

1

Anonymous user

·a month ago·