Yea, but there are bigger problems coming, this outage is just a temporary preview of the future.
What happens to game preservation in 20 or 10 years when the authentication servers for this generation are permanently shut down?
Millions of physical discs will instantly turn into e-waste.
Recently got a big fancy TV with 4k + Dolby Vision
It’s a lot of work figuring out what movies support the format. And all the premium upgrades to Netflix, etc get them to stream premium formats. Then it doesn’t work and you’re spending 30 minutes debugging your TV, wondering why you’re not getting the amazing new restoration of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I totally understand why people just buy physical media.
Games may be harder given software updates. But I’d pay a premium for a physical copy of mature games I love (like Halo Master Chief collection)
> All I'm saying is it's all digital on the PC side of things, and has been for ages, but we have means of maintaining access to the games we love over here, and it's one of the reasons I've gravitated to the PC for quite a while now.
It all depends on where you buy your games of course; GOG will let you download DRM-free installers, but if Steam goes down, your libraries goes down with it. They have made a vague promise that they would prevent that if the company ever went out of business, but who knows if they will keep that promise.
Guarantees about playability went out the window the day free, easily-obtained updates came out on PC as much as consoles.
At least on the PC side, there's a vibrant piracy community.
Gaming is heading in the same direction that TV, movies and music are. It’s a shame. I can invite my friends over, boot up my GameCube to play some Mario Kart Double Dash. As long as the console and disc are okay, I can (hopefully) do that until I pass away.
These days? Not so much. I’ll never be able to be sure I can play GTA VI in twenty years. It just sucks not owning anything anymore. I know why they do it, it’s a massive profit difference.[1]
On the PC end of things, it’s not as bleak. Services like GoG let you download the standalone installer, DRM free. I try to get any single player games I can from GoG, you should too.
Support the corps that give you ownership. Buy those Blu-rays of your favorite films. Either to support physical media or to ensure you will have it until data degrades.
This idea that you should have to log into an online account, in order to use a device that is otherwise entirely offline, is the root of all evil in consumer electronics today. Not just game software and game consoles, but PCs, TVs, smartphones, home automation... Everything requires a totally unnecessary tether to the manufacturer, and only allows you to use it if the manufacturer is 1. still listening to the connection, and 2. is satisfied that you tethered properly.
I shouldn't need an online account to use 99% of the things that I have that currently require an account.
The Steam DRM is trivially bypassed and they don't seem to be interested in playing the cat/mouse game with it at all. It's not a great argument that you can crack things you already legally purchased, but I'm conflicted. If digital software could be reasonably/legally transferred, then it'd probably put most software companies out of business simply because the digital domain would enable efficient reselling of 'used' copies with an exponential decline in price.
This isn't a problem with physical copies because there's a lot of friction to selling stuff, and there's also something quite nice about having a physical collection of games, music, or whatever else. But with digital stuff there's no friction, and much less incentive to collect. The efficiency of the digital domain really messes with a lot of things we take for granted in the real world.
Meh, perhaps games from big studios, but the majority of games work fine without DRM. I find indie games and games from small studio a lot more fun and have a lot more soul than most "big studio" games.
For games that require online services, this will always be an inherent issue. But for games that don't, I'm betting on emulation continuing to save the day. When the PS3 was released with its complex/novel architecture, it seemed like an emulator was highly unlikely, but look at how good RPCS3 is now.
On the Microsoft side, they've been incredibly good about first-party backwards compatibility. I bought most of my Xbox 360 games digitally, and I have been able to play them on my Xbox One, Xbox Series X, and now they are even bringing them to PC. My son and I were just playing the timeless classic NBA Jam: On Fire Edition (a 15yo game) a couple of days ago.
Emulation development will probably be significantly enhanced by the ability to use LLMs as well.
Even if you will be able to play "GTA VI" in twenty years it won't be the same game as you grew up with because everything is a constantly changing live service now.
Even if the games are played off the internal hard drive with updates, there's a bit of "legal grey area" where enthusiastic fans of the game rebuild the code, and run the game with assets from the original media. "Technically" only folks with the original media in their possession will be able to play the original game.
After weeks of discourse where the physical token of the Compact Disc had become the all-important object of the fight, it's reassuring to see that we're back at the beginning, where it was clearly understood that you don't meaningfully "own" a game if you need to be online to use any of it.
For a golden decade or so, piracy was less convenient than paying: Xbox had subscriptions offering on tap games, there was only really one streaming service to speak of that had high quality content, music came from Spotify or YouTube, etc.
We are back to where we are in the 2000s: the gatekeepers of large tracts of culture are behaving so badly that piracy is probably going to end it's lull. It is a shame for artists, developers, and anyone else who needs to get paid that companies running genuinely very good services have chosen to behave so badly.
The services aren’t really that great IMO. They don’t always get you the quality you pay for. They hide their libraries either to keep you engaged with their app or to convince you it’s larger than it is. Most of them charge you even when you don’t use the service that month. But they’re doling out seasons an episode or three at a time to make sure you don’t unsubscribe during any given month. Some have renegged on their previous statements regarding password sharing. You pay for “screens” but those screens have to be for your household only. Their UIs and apps are often broken and are inconsistent between devices. Even when you pay for ad free sometimes there are ads “due to licensing issues” and almost all of them advertise their own shows or apps or podcasts before the content you want to watch.
I own a physical book, I don't own the IP of it. As long as I own the book - I can freely read it's contents 100 years from now.
If I own[1] DRM protected ebook on a Kindle. Tomorrow I may not have that book on my Kindle (and I will not be refunded, because fuck the plebs) or may not be able to open it even if I have the file, that I bought with my money.
[1] I paid money for it, just like the physical one.
> "But owning a game on a disc today isn't really the same thing. It's still just a license..."
Here's the crux of the problem in their own sentence and they don't even realize it.
Owning and Licensing are not the same thing. If I own something, I own it outright. If I license something, I am leasing it.
It does get fuzzy with media, I will admit. But we need the same protections as physical books and game cartidges. If I buy it, it is mine to use as I please and even resell or transfer. If that's not what the transaction is, then don't call it buying or purchasing, call it leasing or licensing.
Require stores and publishers to use language that reflects the nature of the transaction.
Owning and licensing is bullshit propaganda they feed you so you'll feel better about not owning, and you lapped it right up. For consumer products there should be no distinction.
The right word for a consumer product is "rent". As in I'll "rent" this game. For $2 every week until I return it.
> Require stores and publishers to use language that reflects the nature of the transaction.
After this law is made and they change the word without changing anything else, that won't save the past. They'll probably even market test some nonsense word that won't even make people feel like they're being ripped off.
One consideration I have on every purchase I make is that I own it, like actually own it (with exceptions where necessary, of course). Internet access in something that shouldn't need internet access is a downside. It's a way to mess with the purchase you made.
If my e-reader had a bad battery after years of use, I should be able to replace that battery myself without issue (personal skill allowing). I purchased it. Why wouldn't you be able to? I haven't yet found reason for this in consumer devices, except because they want you to send it in or buy a new one from the manufacturer.
Every time we see something like this, it doesn't get enough eyes or care from those who use these platforms. Sony takes your movies away, Xbox requires you be online, Amazon updating your books automatically without asking you, etc. My favorite that I repeat constantly is all of the BS that BMW has done over the years: heated seats subscription, proprietary bolt heads, ads in the infotainment. If you buy a BMW at this point, I'm sorry, but you had alternatives and I don't feel bad. The scary part is when enough people accept it that everyone else in the industry follows suit and then the outliers are the ones that respect you.
If I purchased a physical disc, I'm not even asking for the source code (which I'd love), I'm just asking that I can run the damn software I bought, but you can't even do that now. Viva open source and right to repair. Make the educated choice when purchasing software and hardware, to your benefit, where appropriate. Of course, the proprietary system is what you need/want sometimes, but I bet most of us don't most of the time.
Normalize usage of "have been granted a limited license for" instead of "own." The word "own" implies all manner of things that don't exist for things like Xbox games, Kindle titles, etc.
I keep seeing article like this, that look like they have been written by these companies to push the opinion.
People saying "who cares because you cannot play it anyway" instead of "discs should be less dependant on network to gain another advantage".
But the case for physical disk is not (only) about playability, it's mostly about ownership and the fact that you can actually lend it to someone or resell it.
It's also about retail, and it's about collectors. About people with a slow or limited connection having access with that much less to download.
Another thing is also that if I have a physical copy, I have the right to a digital copy. So a non-working disc might not always be the end. But if I have a digital copy and they take it off the table, I do not have this right and it is gone forever.
130 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 64.1 ms ] threadIt’s a lot of work figuring out what movies support the format. And all the premium upgrades to Netflix, etc get them to stream premium formats. Then it doesn’t work and you’re spending 30 minutes debugging your TV, wondering why you’re not getting the amazing new restoration of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
I totally understand why people just buy physical media.
Games may be harder given software updates. But I’d pay a premium for a physical copy of mature games I love (like Halo Master Chief collection)
It all depends on where you buy your games of course; GOG will let you download DRM-free installers, but if Steam goes down, your libraries goes down with it. They have made a vague promise that they would prevent that if the company ever went out of business, but who knows if they will keep that promise.
Guarantees about playability went out the window the day free, easily-obtained updates came out on PC as much as consoles.
At least on the PC side, there's a vibrant piracy community.
These days? Not so much. I’ll never be able to be sure I can play GTA VI in twenty years. It just sucks not owning anything anymore. I know why they do it, it’s a massive profit difference.[1]
On the PC end of things, it’s not as bleak. Services like GoG let you download the standalone installer, DRM free. I try to get any single player games I can from GoG, you should too.
Support the corps that give you ownership. Buy those Blu-rays of your favorite films. Either to support physical media or to ensure you will have it until data degrades.
1: https://youtube.com/watch?v=sESfDf0My84
I shouldn't need an online account to use 99% of the things that I have that currently require an account.
This isn't a problem with physical copies because there's a lot of friction to selling stuff, and there's also something quite nice about having a physical collection of games, music, or whatever else. But with digital stuff there's no friction, and much less incentive to collect. The efficiency of the digital domain really messes with a lot of things we take for granted in the real world.
Otherwise, there is only one option left, make it illegal to do certain things and ensure the ownership belongs to customers.
On the Microsoft side, they've been incredibly good about first-party backwards compatibility. I bought most of my Xbox 360 games digitally, and I have been able to play them on my Xbox One, Xbox Series X, and now they are even bringing them to PC. My son and I were just playing the timeless classic NBA Jam: On Fire Edition (a 15yo game) a couple of days ago.
Emulation development will probably be significantly enhanced by the ability to use LLMs as well.
In the end, 1 guy owns everything and we’re all batteries.
Consoles, Apple, Google, etc.
We are back to where we are in the 2000s: the gatekeepers of large tracts of culture are behaving so badly that piracy is probably going to end it's lull. It is a shame for artists, developers, and anyone else who needs to get paid that companies running genuinely very good services have chosen to behave so badly.
I own a physical book, I don't own the IP of it. As long as I own the book - I can freely read it's contents 100 years from now.
If I own[1] DRM protected ebook on a Kindle. Tomorrow I may not have that book on my Kindle (and I will not be refunded, because fuck the plebs) or may not be able to open it even if I have the file, that I bought with my money.
[1] I paid money for it, just like the physical one.
Isn't it weird how there's tiers to everything and they only benefit the top tiers.
Here's the crux of the problem in their own sentence and they don't even realize it.
Owning and Licensing are not the same thing. If I own something, I own it outright. If I license something, I am leasing it.
It does get fuzzy with media, I will admit. But we need the same protections as physical books and game cartidges. If I buy it, it is mine to use as I please and even resell or transfer. If that's not what the transaction is, then don't call it buying or purchasing, call it leasing or licensing.
Require stores and publishers to use language that reflects the nature of the transaction.
The right word for a consumer product is "rent". As in I'll "rent" this game. For $2 every week until I return it.
After this law is made and they change the word without changing anything else, that won't save the past. They'll probably even market test some nonsense word that won't even make people feel like they're being ripped off.
If my e-reader had a bad battery after years of use, I should be able to replace that battery myself without issue (personal skill allowing). I purchased it. Why wouldn't you be able to? I haven't yet found reason for this in consumer devices, except because they want you to send it in or buy a new one from the manufacturer.
Every time we see something like this, it doesn't get enough eyes or care from those who use these platforms. Sony takes your movies away, Xbox requires you be online, Amazon updating your books automatically without asking you, etc. My favorite that I repeat constantly is all of the BS that BMW has done over the years: heated seats subscription, proprietary bolt heads, ads in the infotainment. If you buy a BMW at this point, I'm sorry, but you had alternatives and I don't feel bad. The scary part is when enough people accept it that everyone else in the industry follows suit and then the outliers are the ones that respect you.
If I purchased a physical disc, I'm not even asking for the source code (which I'd love), I'm just asking that I can run the damn software I bought, but you can't even do that now. Viva open source and right to repair. Make the educated choice when purchasing software and hardware, to your benefit, where appropriate. Of course, the proprietary system is what you need/want sometimes, but I bet most of us don't most of the time.
But the case for physical disk is not (only) about playability, it's mostly about ownership and the fact that you can actually lend it to someone or resell it. It's also about retail, and it's about collectors. About people with a slow or limited connection having access with that much less to download.
Another thing is also that if I have a physical copy, I have the right to a digital copy. So a non-working disc might not always be the end. But if I have a digital copy and they take it off the table, I do not have this right and it is gone forever.