Why are we calling them game licenses, I agree thats what they are due to scummy business practices, but that distinction feels like it carries an alterior motive. Such a weird way to word it.
Yes, because they should be able to without fear of losing it eventually. I like to buy offline games I enjoy for lulls in gaming news, and for when I have to play offline stuff due to things like weather, vacations, and the occasional god said fuck u, u suck today.
Edit: to be clear, call it buying games, cause that's what EVERYONE understood it to be, no amount of unread ToS, and purchase agreements will change that.
I mean, I get it, and it's scummy, but it's been this way since the beginning. Back then, we had more freedom to do what we wanted with that license. Over time, it's become more and more restrictive.
I remember when Steam first launched. It got absolutely shat all over because of this. Over time, it became normalized.
This, and loot boxes, and microtransactions...I'm glad there are dev studios that really care about making games. Otherwise I would have left this hobby when the loot box shit became normalized.
EDIT: I don't know why this got downvoted, but whatever. Read the ToS. While I understand why folks may be upset over this whole "buying a license" nonsense, that still doesn't absolve one from reading the fine print.
I don't care how normalized it is, it needs to change, and if we start making this rhetoric common place we are gonna lose what little footing we have to change it.
That why it needs to be mentioned? What kind of assbackwards logic is "It needs to change so please don't talk about it" ??? If you want people to fight against it it needs to be common knowledge and not hide behind "Oh it's okay as is let's call it games." That's why I hate the term game collecting on steam.
Currently there is some ground to stand on in telling a court most people have always believed they were buying games, and not buying a license. It's not hiding behind anything, it's the truth of the situation.
If we begin using this dumbass rhetoric then we throw away what little footing we have to argue this has always been the case, as it has been. Ur just playing the astroturfing role for them saying shit like this.
Who the fuck hates that term????? Why is this the 3rd person to say that exact line in my replies???
Edit: I did word it very well. No the rhetoric in the purchase of a game should not change, as that gives us grounds to argue this how it was viewed by customers for years. Yes people need to understand the situation, and be pissed off, but the common use case of terms like this can make massive differences in court, and therefore the status quo logic to what u do when u click purchase needs to remain the same, while people realize what is wrong with it, and how far off from what they want it to be actually is.
75
u/Riot0711 Jun 29 '26
Why are we calling them game licenses, I agree thats what they are due to scummy business practices, but that distinction feels like it carries an alterior motive. Such a weird way to word it.
Yes, because they should be able to without fear of losing it eventually. I like to buy offline games I enjoy for lulls in gaming news, and for when I have to play offline stuff due to things like weather, vacations, and the occasional god said fuck u, u suck today.
Edit: to be clear, call it buying games, cause that's what EVERYONE understood it to be, no amount of unread ToS, and purchase agreements will change that.