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

41–50 of 283 posts

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#41

Post by bsimpson »

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…

Then the button becomes License and everyone knows that's the one you click to buy.

As much as I empathize with (and even support) the reasoning, I wonder if it would have a tangible effect. Is there anyone who was gonna click "buy" but not "license" (presuming they relabel the button and everything else is the same)?

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#42

Post by ReptileMan »

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.

The PC has thriving piracy scene. So for any game worth playing there were lawful backups available on specialized sites. In a way it is different.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#45

Post by alephnerd »

wredcoll wrote: post #19
redwall_hp wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Valve was a plucky underdog against the established publishers and, while dominant today, still has reasonable competition, sony is a giant corp with a reputation and a monopoly on playstations.

> sony is a giant corp with a reputation and a monopoly on playstations.

That's like saying Volkswagen has a monopoly on Volkswagen cars.

Sony clearly does not have a monopoly on the video game industry, and a plurality of video games are cross-platform across consoles, PCs (Windows/Linux), and even MacOS.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#46

Post by bsimpson »

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…

It's incoherent.

They're also forcing Stage Tour to include discs with their guitar bundles, even though many PS5s can't play discs.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#47

Post by antiframe »

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…

> You have the same risk and not really ownership.

You don't, though. When I download a game on Steam or GOG, I have the files on my PC. I can back them up. I can modify them.

Yes, live service games still have an online component I don't control, but I do still control the files on my computer. I don't on a console.

Actually, I don't own any consoles for reasons of software freedom but I hear they are much more difficult to do things like back up your data, etc.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#48

Post by nemomarx »

ThinkItThru wrote: post #21
cratermoon wrote: post #8

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

Don’t worry, DRM eliminates the possibility of piracy since the content is gated behind an account. Go ahead and copy/distribute the game client, even reverse-engineer the server and launch a private instance. You still don’t have the content.

I mean does it? DRM is cracked within a week or two of launch now. companies are actively removing drm from their games a few months after it comes out because of the cost of licensing it.

AI has accelerated this if anything, and especially the server side stuff. Look at the destiny 2 private servers right now recreating lost content.

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#49

Post by usefulcat »

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?

Depends on the details of the license, no?

Re: Sony makes bold claim about game ownership

#50

Post by loconut »

ncr100 wrote: post #16
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…

Yes. "buy" and "purchase" are redefined in the EULA

I wonder if said EULA can also help me make sense of my diceware password.
Post reply on HN