You don't own your Steam games

You don't own your Steam games

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

zobapo

bazongo

I've never purchased anything from steam

you don't own ANY of your games, physical or digital

but i do own my Steam games, sheldron

bodongo

you don't own your internet on consoles

BLESZINSKI

Nope. YOU don't, because you're a penniless communist.

Everything you own can and will be taken from you one day

Don't think so

we own you

Give one (1) reason how this is any different to owning a license to play a game on a disk instead of a hard drive

That's fine, I only pay for multiplayer games anyway, everything else I just torrent

It's not but you still dont own it.

if you back up your shit and registry entries it wont be a problem really

Bogzanga

>he says this as if it is some mind blowing revelation
I hate you pretentious nihilist fucks so much.

>download all of my games onto a hard drive and a backup drive
>set steam to offline mode
What'cha gonna do Gaben? Don't test me again.

What effective difference does it make?

Yeah, but I don't really own my console games either. DRM free PC games are the best we've got, and even then....

Information is not ownable. You can only control access to the information. Since all games are piratable, it doesn't matter if I don't actually own my Steam games because if Valve decides to Jew me I can just pull a copy off TPB.

You never own any entertainment you buy, you just buy a license to legally use it.

I own all my pirated games though

Well, if the fact that I don't own them ever fucks me over, I'll just pirate them.

I don't see the problem really.

Lets see

Disk:
>not tied to one account
>can still be played even if account is banned or hacked
>can resell it
>can trade or lend it to others

That's exactly the same with all software, even on a disk. All you actually own is the disk. If you owned the software, you could distribute it freely.

not legally you can't

>"hey penny wanna play some games"
>"no"
>"BAZLOOPIE"

every piece of software you buy since software was invented is merely a license to use it.

You can't own software. Even the rightsholder doesn't own it, they have the right to reproduce it.

Wrong, right of first sale.

"game cannot be launched. Please login to Steam"

For all intents and purposes the license I was given by steam is the exact same as owning it to me. if they ever take my license away, they will either be doing it because I have done something to warrant it, or they are doing it because they are corrupt. In either case, they could just ban me from steam to get the same effect, making the point of taking away individual games kind of stupid.


Plus I'd just pirate all the games I had legally bought. They're not coming out ahead.

>right of first sale
next comes Sovereign Citizen right?

I was in a place without internet for 6 months and that never happened to me, GTA V refused to launch because for some shit reason it will stop working after 15 days of last online, you can bypass it by changing the date, but the game launches just fine, it's the Rockstar Launcher that won't let you through.

bazinga!

>I'd just pirate all the games I had legally bought
why not pirate them in the first place

Sovereign citizens are retarded fags who think that an individual can be a state, first-sale doctrine is an established right.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

I mean, it doesn't matter, because copyright is meaningless at this point anyway, but back when shit came on physical media you WERE allowed to redistribute your copy.

To support developers you enjoy. Because I'm not an entitled child.

not him, but honestly convience
when you have a game on sale with steam for like 5$ its way easier to just buy it, have it download quick and then be able to play with friends online or not have to worry about cracking it or mounting it.
im lazy so id rather spend a 1/3rd of an hours pay vs pirating it

this is correct
if the difference between a license and full ownership was significant enough to survive in court, the owner of a game could have you surrender your disk as well

for all intents and purposes, you're never going to court over video games, so why bother caring about ownership rights? just pirate the game if they ban you from using it.

>only limits the distribution rights of copyright holders

Don't you want to be paid for your work too? Or should your employer be allowed to just not pay you?

I generally like to support the developers for games I enjoy. My library is mostly full of indie games and multiplayer games, along with a ton of humble bundle games.

I'd like for developers to know that I'm enjoying their content and they should make more of it. I'm not against pirating though. If you you can't afford or don't want to pay for games for any reason, go ahead. I mostly pirate shit to use as a demo reel before I buy the game.

Okay, so there isn't a right.
I'll just send my friend a magnet link instead.

...

Non-argument, no contractual obligation exists between me and the developer until I buy his game.
Paying for games is charity.

>paying for this computer is charity
>paying for this car is charity
>paying for this bread is charity
You sound like a retard.

i do buy but only on sale but if i was going to pirate it eventually i would just do it honestly

See , you can't own information. Even the copyright holder literally just has that, the legal right to make a copy.

If I could make a one for one copy of any car or any computer, then yes, paying for one would be charity.

literally this is why everyone has the right to shit on pc "gamers"

Why? I probably pirate more console games than I do computer games. Have you tried getting ahold of a legit copy of Radiant Dawn?

By playing a game you are consuming a product, same as if it was a car or a computer. People worked to put together the game regardless of how many copies can be made, and you're taking it without putting in any work whatsoever. Just because pirating games is easy, that doesn't make it right. But if you're ok with acting immorally, then I suppose there's really nothing I can say to you.

tfw some faggot opened up a retro game shop in my town and drove up the prices by an insane amount

The labor theory of value is total bullshit. People spent a lot of time on No Man's Sky and yet we can probably both agree that it's not worth a single cent.

I do, in fact, pay for games, because there are some games that I really like and I know that the money goes more or less directly to the developer. However it should be viewed as what it actually is: A donation made in appreciation for the game or in the hope of getting more of the same.

Actually you're the one acting immorally here. Anything that can be shared freely must be shared freely. If withhold data for monetary gain or support others who do then you're a bad person.

Stallman go, there's no moral imperative to share information any more than there's a moral imperative to control access to it.
The bare fact is that all information can and in fact does end up being shared.

I agree about No Man's Sky, but my argument is that if a game is that bad that the developers wont be paid, then why do you want to play the game at all? I wouldn't steal a shitty car any more than a brand new sports model. Just because it's worth next to nothing, doesn't mean it's suddenly ok to steal it. With anything else in the world you would simply not consume the product, but for games it's suddenly ok. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

>anything that can be shared freely
Developing the game wasn't free. Your argument doesn't work.
You could also freely give away any other product, but you'd go bankrupt extremely quickly that way.

The jew in this thread is strong.

bad goy

Thing is you're making an analogy to physical things when games (and all media) are a different class of object.

Every car requires more metal, more labor, more plastic and more gas to get made. Every new computer chip has to be fabricated in a plant and then soldered to the board that it'll eventually go on. There's a cost inherent in producing a new copy. There is no cost, aside from maybe the tiny one associated with electricity and bandwidth, involved in making a copy of a video game, a movie, or a book.

If you pay for digital media, you are making a donation. If you pay for a physical object, you are paying for the cost of the materials and labor necessary to bring that object to you, plus profit.

i know right!!! us console gamers are proud buyers of video games!

>the cost of...labor necessary
You just destroyed your own argument. Do you think developing games requires no labour?
Plus any server costs, costs for the equipment like computers and software needed to program, render, model etc. There are certainly costs to producing digital media, which means that by your own admission, they should charge for its consumption.

what the fuck are those

user, don't play games with me. You know as well as I do that games require labor and other costs exactly one time, i.e. when you're actually developing the game.
Once the game is made, it's made. No extra labor or material is required to produce a second copy.

And all that cost to give you a temporary service rather than a permanent good.

The result of people stealing from redbox machines

there's virtually no cost for making more of them once the development cycle is finished

Besides server costs, disks and shipping?

And by pirating the game, you're not giving anything for the hours of labour that went into the game. You seem very focused on reproduction costs, but if you can't charge for the game on those grounds, how do the people who made the game get reimbursed for their work?
We could argue about how much a game should cost and I might agree they are too expensive, but it must be above zero or else there is no incentive to make the games in the first place, since you would always be making a net loss.

can I get a quick rundownga

Every good is temporary. Things break down, wear out, or are consumed (e.g. food). Should you not pay for those?
see

>just pirate
This

The only cucks are the ones who pay for video games

>All these Br monkeys trying to justify stealing

And so we go back to the labor theory of value. What are you, a fucking commie? Reproduction costs are the reason that things cost money. There is no reason to pay for labor unless that labor produces something useful. There's even less reason to pay for labor when no labor is even actually fucking happening.

Remember that I do in fact pay for games. I'm just urging you to view the payment for what it is, a donation rather than a transaction.

this

>love collecting for PS1 and Saturn
>damn near every game worth owning that isn't Crash Bandicoot or Astal is 50 or more

Yeaaaaaah fuck it. Its why I emulate now. I would rather buy food, have gas in the car, or save for retirement.

You dont own your internet

And as a result, developers only make games that we "cucks" like, because that's where the money is.

I would argue games are useful. Stress relief or socializing, for example. If you think labour isn't worthy of payment in and of itself then again I ask why your employer should pay you anything. If a person spends their limited time to work on something for the benefit of others, that person should be reimbursed. Are you a slimy capitalist?

Maybe this is an uncommon opinion but I believe people are more important than money.

>If you think labour isn't worthy of payment in and of itself then again I ask why your employer should pay you anything
Because I supply labor, which meets his demand for laborers. My labor is worth money to him because he needs someone to do my job, not because he places a moral value on my work or my survival.
>Are you a slimy capitalist?
National socialist, which is why I'm arguing this viewpoint.

If you view digital media as a good to be bought and sold, then the immediate and inescapable conclusion is that the supply/demand system is totally fucked. There's infinite supply for a naturally finite demand. Therefore the good is worth nothing because it's abundant, it's literally everywhere. If you view paying for games as patronizing an >artist whose work you enjoy, then it's both morally more desirable to pay for it and financially more reasonable.

If you're only going to pay for games you enjoy, then why even pirate the ones you don't? I wouldn't want something for free if I wasn't going to enjoy it.
And while there is an effectively infinite supply of some game specifically, this is not true of games in general. At some point you'll run out of new games to play. Paying for them ensures the business of making them remains profitable enough that they will continue being created.
I don't get the feeling relying on donations would be effective, based on what I've seen with artists who draw for a living.

>buy game
>spend a handful of hours installing it
>finally get launcher open
>launcher needs me to install the game again for whatever fucking reason
>having the launcher open counts towards Steam play time, so I go past the refund time limit before I even try the fucking game

you are financing pirated software if you buy videogames

The only game I've ever played that did this was Planetside 2. And that's free to play.

Then your argument should be about refund policies, not stealing games.

Are you people fucking retarded. The point is that when Steam disappears so will your games. My physical games will never disappear unless someone steals them or my fucking house burns down.

Retarded children, I swear.

>data degradation doesn't exist

All of my NES and Atari games still work. You done, child?

>The point is that when Steam disappears so will your games.
Steam doesn't even have to disappear. Getting your account suspended is enough.

Then don't break the rules, idiot. It's not like they're going to start randomly suspending people for no reason, it'd be terrible for business. You piratefags are worse than conspiracy theorists.

All my games can be played when in offline mode

checkmate atheists

You really don't.

I went to Austria last month for the birth of my child. While there, my wife bought me a new phone. The important part is that I use MetroPCS which forces an activation fee for new phones even with the same sim card. So I was out a phone for a day when I came back to the states. Unfortunately I used steam mobile authenticate to login to steam. But since I couldn't get an SMS for my number I had to contact steam support while waiting for the next day to activate my phone. So for a period of 24 hours I could not access my 200+ games.

It's true but I was never bothered with it until now.

The criticism here should be the authentication being fucking retarded, not "well, better go pirate all my games"

Not buying your games from GOG

>what is FOSS

I have a hell of a lot more faith in a physical game holding up than I do a company's integrity or continued existence. I have games that I've owned since the NES was new, and the only one in my library that don't work are ones that I took apart when I convinced myself that I was an electrical engineer as a preteen.

I didn't mention pirating at all, so don't accuse me of it just because it was of someone elses topic. I was just trying to say that I never had an issue with it at all until now just because I ran into the issue. There's nothing you can really do sadly.

Was there ever a more forced meme in the history of humanity than bazinga? Even reddit didn't fall for it.