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

Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

aginggamer.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 284 posts

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#31

Post by nerdjon »

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #15
nerdjon wrote: post #3

What I don't understand is why Sony is the one being targeted for this when this has been the case with any digital purchase for 20 years? I don't know of a digital marketplace that works differently. But instead all of the hate, the boycots, etc are all targeting Sony instead of focusing on actually figuring out how to improve digital purchase rights which extend beyond games (and far beyond Sony). I know that some…

> What I don't understand is why Sony is the one being targeted for this when this has been the case with any digital purchase for 20 years? Examples: literally two days ago Sony permanently removed access to over 500 movies for people who had "purchased" them, and only a couple months ago Sony announced their plan to permanently shutter physical media production for Playstation. I agree with you that it's a systemic…

I maybe should have phrased that better since I do understand their announcement around disks and removing the movies is a reason why they are the current target.

I just find it hypocritical, people keep saying they are going to move to xbox or pc next gen and its like. Their policy is exactly the same. You have the same risk and not really ownership.

And I am not defending Sony, they have a long history of getting cocky with their consoles and pulling some shit. But in this particular case they are following the trend that we allowed by going all digital on PC and buying digital games on consoles.

Sony isnt going to be the one that changes this, the only way to expect change would be targeting all of them including Valve. But everyone, like this article, just seems to gloss right over that and seem to imply its only Sony that is the problem here.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#32

Post by ncr100 »

cratermoon wrote: post #8

If buying isn't owning, piracy isn't theft.

In my view this is faulty logic --

Buying in this case is "buying", and is a redefined term inside the legal contract which you choose to agree to when Sony accepts your money for a license to access their published video games, and so, it does not mean buying in the mundane sense of physical goods.

I would suggest this workaround: If you don't accept society's rules about related norms, such as you having a different definition of theft froom society's, you must proactively declare -- in your mind at the minimum -- and accept without two-way agreement on behalf of everyone else whom you steal from, that theft means what you choose to define it as at any moment. Do that, then that logic is solid.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#35

Post by Grombobulous »

redwall_hp wrote: post #4
nerdjon wrote: post #3

What I don't understand is why Sony is the one being targeted for this when this has been the case with any digital purchase for 20 years? I don't know of a digital marketplace that works differently. But instead all of the hate, the boycots, etc are all targeting Sony instead of focusing on actually figuring out how to improve digital purchase rights which extend beyond games (and far beyond Sony). I know that some…

Valve killed the previously thriving boxed game industry two decades ago and people can't get over how much they love everything about Valve. Sony follows 20 years later (in a world where internet is faster than installing from BluRay and games are outgrowing three layer discs) and people lose their mind. There's more noise about this than Microsoft's mass layoffs at the game companies they bought up.

- Sony has a track record of removing purchased media en masse, while Valve does not.

- While it could be argued that Valve runs an effective monopoly of the PC platform based on their marketshare, Valve operates on a platform with competitive options including DRM-free stores.

- Game consoles have always been more attached to physical media than PCs.

- Sony is the largest player in the market (disregarding mobile phone gaming) with more total marketshare than Valve and the PC platform. This makes them a much more visible target.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#36

Post by Waterluvian »

captainbland wrote: post #11

If we're not owning it, you're not selling it, you're leasing it. Terminology on sales pages should reflect this. "Subscribe now" "purchase license" etc. should be mandated if this is the expectation. Terms like "buy" without qualification are misleading in this context, but they won't remove them from store pages because people are more likely to pay higher rates for something if they believe they are actually ownin…

This is the only regulation I feel is reasonable. When it comes to luxury goods like video games, it doesn’t make sense to dictate how the product is offered. But by all means insist they’re clear with what the transaction type is.

I can imagine the natural competitive wedge where GOG can say “Buy Game” but Steam has to say “Lease Game” on their buttons.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#37

Post by Topology1 »

captainbland wrote: post #11

If we're not owning it, you're not selling it, you're leasing it. Terminology on sales pages should reflect this. "Subscribe now" "purchase license" etc. should be mandated if this is the expectation. Terms like "buy" without qualification are misleading in this context, but they won't remove them from store pages because people are more likely to pay higher rates for something if they believe they are actually ownin…

This is actually state law in CA. People reported Sony to California's Attorney General, who basically said they weren't going to do anything about it.

Unfortunately the law is only as useful as its enforcement.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#38

Post by singpolyma3 »

Boxxed wrote: post #26
captainbland wrote: post #11

If we're not owning it, you're not selling it, you're leasing it. Terminology on sales pages should reflect this. "Subscribe now" "purchase license" etc. should be mandated if this is the expectation. Terms like "buy" without qualification are misleading in this context, but they won't remove them from store pages because people are more likely to pay higher rates for something if they believe they are actually ownin…

I even take issue with "Purchase license". Shouldn't it be "Lease License"? Purchase implies that it can't be revoked, no?

Nah. Licenses can be revoked. When I buy a hunting license I don't get it forever

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#39

Post by nemomarx »

nerdjon wrote: post #31
chrisfosterelli wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I don't understand is why Sony is the one being targeted for this when this has been the case with any digital purchase for 20 years? Examples: literally two days ago Sony permanently removed access to over 500 movies for people who had "purchased" them, and only a couple months ago Sony announced their plan to permanently shutter physical media production for Playstation. I agree with you that it's a systemic…

I maybe should have phrased that better since I do understand their announcement around disks and removing the movies is a reason why they are the current target. I just find it hypocritical, people keep saying they are going to move to xbox or pc next gen and its like. Their policy is exactly the same. You have the same risk and not really ownership. And I am not defending Sony, they have a long history of getting c…

Nintendo still has pretty good physical. Move to them if you can imo
Post reply on HN