Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

dexerto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 346 posts

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#261

Post by Volundr »

atoav wrote: post #45
Volundr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump's said he wants to end it. That's something I'd back him on. I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing. I'd be rooting for him!

Trump promises a lot of things, while also promising others their polar opposite or flipping 180° once in office. If you'd back a politician with a track record that bad on any promise, that is probably something telling more about you than the politician.

I'm not sure what your saying here? Trump lies so you'd rather his energy be spent on ICE raids, ending birthright citizenship, and illegal tarrifs than ending daylight savings? Personally I'd rather the latter but you do you.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#262

Post by atoav »

Volundr wrote: post #261
atoav wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump promises a lot of things, while also promising others their polar opposite or flipping 180° once in office. If you'd back a politician with a track record that bad on any promise, that is probably something telling more about you than the politician.

I'm not sure what your saying here? Trump lies so you'd rather his energy be spent on ICE raids, ending birthright citizenship, and illegal tarrifs than ending daylight savings? Personally I'd rather the latter but you do you.

That is what you're saying. I was very clear.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#263

Post by l23k4 »

Folcon wrote: post #224
l23k4 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but you'd generate the same value by simply collecting them.

Wait, are you arguing that activities that make people happy have little to no value? I mean, we only spend money when we believe that what we buy with it is more valuable than the money we've spent, so there is some underlying activity or follow up to spending the money that naturally follows otherwise, the buyer would perceive no benefit and would not buy again So how are you equating collection and enjoyment of yo…

Surely they must have value at an individual level, for people are willing to pay to engage in those. The time you spend playing games does very little to help the society around you, and might in fact distract you from more productive activities. Perhaps gamers would go outside instead, and reduce the burden on the healthcare system.

This essentially amounts to government intervention to reduce the already incredibly cheap cost per hour of these activities for a small minority of gamers. Is that good public policy?

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#265

Post by Volundr »

atoav wrote: post #262
Volundr wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what your saying here? Trump lies so you'd rather his energy be spent on ICE raids, ending birthright citizenship, and illegal tarrifs than ending daylight savings? Personally I'd rather the latter but you do you.

That is what you're saying. I was very clear.

No, I said exactly the opposite. My exact words:

> I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing.

You say you were very clear, but I genuinely don't understand what about that you disagree with.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#267

Post by roblabla »

hobofan wrote: post #252
sensanaty wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, as SKG has been saying, make games like Among Us or PEAK have some way for players to self-host the games. It'd be absolutely ridiculous if the devs behind PEAK decided to one day say "Y'know what, we're shutting down PEAK and you can no longer play it" when nothing about the game needs to be tied to a persistent internet connection at all . Besides, PEAK has offline mode already built in, so no subscriptions nee…

> Besides, PEAK has offline mode already built in, so no subscriptions needed. Yes, single player offline. SKG is specifically about deactivating the online/multiplayer component in games, so if PEAK were to deactivate their online coop mode, they would definitely fall under it (ignoring grandfathering).

SKG cares about games staying playable. If a game with both MP and SP modes has MP disabled, SKG’s proposals do not fall under it, because the game is still playable offline. They have repeatedly hammered this point in their official communications (such as their youtube and press releases).

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#268

Post by akramachamarei »

So much noise, so few principles. Whatever happened to don't buy if you don't like it? Read contracts before you agree to them? This whole discussion is kind of ridiculous. Gaming is not a matter of health or wellness. We don't need a nanny chaperoning videogame purchases.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#269

Post by akramachamarei »

sdenton4 wrote: post #32
EarlKing wrote: post #6

If only those 1.3 million signatories pledged to never buy from a company that Kills Games again...

Boycotts are the weakest form of protest.

How do you reckon? Boycotting has a concrete immediate effect, unlike for example, picketing, signing letters. Weak, maybe, weakest?

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#270

Post by akramachamarei »

skotobaza wrote: post #189
kgwxd wrote: post #175

1.3M signatures to grant government power it shouldn't be granted. It's good that it failed. Stop giving money to proprietary software if you have a problem with the arrangement.

> to grant government power it shouldn't be granted What power? Power to save games from becoming unplayable on the whim?

Power to say "that product you are selling is not okay with me! If the customer is willing to buy, it must be because you have deceived him. We cannot trust customers to buy games on their own, they need help from the state to do that!"

Shall I go on?

CU: I consent.

GD: I consent.

EU: Isn't there someone you forgot to ask?

"Oh, won't someone think of the gamers?"

Post reply on HN