Dead Game News: France vs. Valve + maybe the rest of the world

[@Hotrob_J]

I hate how Frenchmen keep just popping into existance out of the ether

[@Adam-xr6fj]

Hotrob Baguettes everywhere man...

[@planescaped]

I hate how they always emote as they walk around, making synchronized arm gestures and movements.

[@Bready_Player_Bun]

How else do you explain the French?

[@htf5555]

that explains napoleon suddenly commanding a grande armee

[@mrsabidji]

It's in our genes! It's not like we can help it! *makes synchronized arm gestures*

[@shards-of-glass-man]

>unforeseeable consequences Dammit Ross, you had one job so close

[@TheRogueWolf]

He didn't even tell us to prepare for them!

[@Accursed_Farms]

It's all a blur in my mind man.

[@ArcturusOTE]

@@Accursed_Farms Your free man's mind

[@chrissy1045]

Prepare for unforeseen catchphrases

[@Coconut-219]

Gordon Man: "Get ready for your past actions' effect which you have no prior expectations of"

[@theamazingsplatzmo4835]

I love this background just a random french man taking a walk around his town while the universe collapses around him

[@handsomebrick]

A French man who looks like the human Shrek from Shrek 2.

[@1m1nth3m0b2]

6 months in the future the world is falling apart. Maybe he is Rostramdamus and is predicting the future

[@croaker_]

"Playing a kids game with made up rules to make everything work" Ross, welcome to adulthood. You've seen behind the curtain. That's how the world works.

[@Accursed_Farms]

Yeah, not chess, but Calvinball.

[@WackoMcGoose]

"Welcome to Whose Rights Is It Anyway, where the laws are made up and your feelings don't matter unless you've got eight-figure pockets!"

[@TheLinkandmarioshow]

Only because people are too lazy to talk about how to fix it.

[@Coconut-219]

Money is weird, its just a physical incarnation of an abstract concept. The way we think the economy works is just made up bullshit based on people's feelings hidden under a layer of math that sounds smart but doesn't make any logical sense. Why do we create money out of nothing through stocks and then delete it again with inflation from interest? One of the few upsides I see to robots controlling everything is that maybe they will finally sort out the arbitrary nonsense in society with the power of math and logic.

[@MrSingularity44]

@@Coconut-219 Robots will probably exacerbate the problem, since they will be programmed to "make it work". We've seen how computers do that when you teach learn how to walk in virtual enviroments. They find some exploit or glitch to make their character fly across the screen at Mach 3, claim it is the most efficient way possible to walk and call it a day.

[@poposterous236]

Hope you're having a good day, Ross.

[@orcwarchiefreviews]

Hmmm im hope i see the day where all the 2000 game i own over the year's will work on all new computers and counsel with out re buying them but look like gog is the only way. Rigth now

[@l.ross.6400]

Thanks

[@jabberw0k812]

"Capitalism gets weird once you have an infinite supply of something." So true in so many ways.

[@coltglass1270]

Except there is not an infinite supply here.... The supply is limited by keys or what have you. The access is gained by purchasing a key for that game. I think the used value of a game would in turn add to the value of a company. Resale value of other items are considered. Why not digital property? I disagree with the video

[@Snarfindorf]

@@coltglass1270 Keys are infinite.

[@Tisulan]

@@coltglass1270 You are completely correct. There is not an infinite supply of video game copies. There are only as many copies as there are valid keys, and generating new keys takes fractions of a second to generate thousands of them! And surely they can't do this infinitely... right?! A resale market would add TONS of value to companies like Valve as well. Look at Microsoft! They have a thriving resale market in Windows keys that keeps them in business. Think about it, everytime you pay fifty cents on Ebay for a Windows 10 key, Microsoft profits hundreds of dollars!

[@omganotherun]

@@coltglass1270 The "goods" are digital. Being made of 1s and 0s, without the old restriction of primitive physical media, there is zero scarcity. That's an infinite supply. You don't need keys and no one can stop you from copying the data. With zero scarcity, it technically has zero value. That's a scary place to be for someone who makes video games for a living.

[@user-wt2dz5bx5m]

it's pretty weird with limited supply too, just in different ways

[@huismands]

Wow, seems like this court case could really cause a revolution in the games industry *A French revolution*

[@AlL-tk6kw]

the only heavy rain out of this will be a heavy reign of terror

[@ChrisMathers3501]

You could make a religion out of...No. Don't.

[@CrungleFunk]

Daniël Huisman He-he-hell yeah! Let’s roll out the guillotine!

[@dicas1988]

LMAO

[@salmaseelgrande]

I see that this french ruling also gives ownership for virtual goods to the consumer. Like skins in video games as a service and similar in game items sold in a in-game shop. With this ruling you can also sell your items to other user

[@marcg210]

That is very interesting, so this ruling makes lootboxes and things such as seen in the NBA2K trailer much more like actual gambling... I mean wasn't that part of their argument, you can't "cash out".

[@konstantin3001]

Can I just point out that your profile picture is kind of ironic?

[@cdcdrr]

That might actually be good for getting rid of lootboxes. If the 'cosmetic' items start to gain real value in euros, being able to get one out of a virtual slot machine and reselling it becomes so red hot, developers will move away for fear of jailtime. Ideally, they'll make those goodies unlockables that you cannot sell. But even a 1:1 sale/resale price is preferable to conning players out of thousands of their hard earned money or even their parents' money.

[@thechugg4372]

if only france cared about actually using the law to attack lootboxes and live services....

[@voidofspaceandtime4684]

+cdcdrr Eh, you can resell much of what you get from Valve games, yet the markets are stable unless something like the TF2 screwup happens.

[@theatomiclemon1]

Am I the only one weirdly satisfied that Ross could rub this ruling in the face of many of his critics? As the G-man says: "I have learned to ignore such naysayers, when quelling them was out of the question."

[@EvilSandwich]

This video in a nutshell. Ross: I am here, witnessing the biggest and greatest mixed bag in the history of the modern game industry.

[@AlL-tk6kw]

If it were an actual mixed bag, itd be filled with gem encrusted gold nuggets and fire breathing snapping turtles

[@EvilSandwich]

@@AlL-tk6kw In Ross's defense, danger aside, fire breathing snapping turtles sound really rad.

[@librarianseth5572]

The world is going nuts, so why not use a bit of that crazy for our benefit?

[@Kyntteri]

2:26 We are ignoring the true problem here. That hay cart on the right is equipped with anti-gravity system and no one is in awe.

[@Full_Throttle_Axolotl]

They live in a Ubisoft game, it's a common day to day occurrence

[@MrMatzetoni]

Also don't forget that wall on the right at 18:44

[@GunlessSnake]

As someone who is very simple-minded in how I approach life, I just want to say that I really get spun for a loop from all this. I just wish things were simple. You buy a game, you own it. Developer makes a game, they get to make money off it. It used to be so simple.

[@VI-pp4jo]

It still should be. The extra money is just their weakness showing through. Literally: Out of money? - Let's charge some more! Prove it's any deeper than that.

[@GunlessSnake]

@@VI-pp4jo All these legal tensions around consumer rights, battles between obsolescence and whatnot, it's all just a mess.

[@VI-pp4jo]

@@GunlessSnake Honestly can't be bothered to dig into that. It gets complicated once you do aka the more you know the less you know. It's as simple as first glance, that's just a reason to mask charging more money. Fuck'em. Money won't build great games.

[@TheD736]

Ross, you provide what journalists won’t. God speed you soldier scientist of fortune

[@legion999]

Did you know that Ross got this info from game journalists?

[@KingLich451]

just the info, not the rest of his opinions

[@TheD736]

I suppose it makes sense that he did. I was more refering to the pop journalists that capitalize more on sensationalism, but admittedly I didn’t specify. Thanks for catching my mistake, bro

[@nodakamakadon]

Games 'journalism' is an incestuous, unofficial arm of industry marketing.

[@theatomiclemon1]

@@nodakamakadon This.

[@guycrew728]

TLDR: RIP Gabe the Lemming.

[@Blei1986]

t. EGS :-/

[@SNOUPS4]

As a Frenchie, I can be your translator if you wish, Ross, gladly

[@TheAngryBogan]

say chouda!

[@HeartbrokenYT]

As a Frenchman who worked legal in a small amateur dev team for a few years I'd be glad to help

[@brandonmorel2658]

I know I'm late but watch the Game as a Servive is Fraud video, he has an email dedicated to this kind of thing.

[@Ossek]

I am so darn impressed with Ross' passion for this topic.

[@SuperBoyboys]

4:46 _Meanwhile, at the EU Copyright Law Cocktail Party_ French Lawyer: "Ah, Bonjour Monsieur Gaben..." German Lawyer: "Ja, now ve have your company by ze balls. You shall deliver unto us ze half-liffen drei?" Gaben: remain silent

[@k4yser]

"half-liffen drei", im dead

[@JackOfen]

"Halbes-Leben drei" *

[@proteus2103]

@@JackOfen ! Zat man ish a spy!

[@JackOfen]

@@proteus2103 A dutch spion, I jew it!

[@lewisford7438]

Read Gaben as Gahben because German

[@dickdastardly4835]

*Blockbuster's corpse rises from the grave*

[@handsomebrick]

Blockbuster was a stooge that sold out all the smaller rental companies to big publishers and studios, who then threw Blockbuster under the bus.

[@turtleperson3538]

@@sleepy5063 was that a fuckin Blood reference.

[@kerputnick]

cue the altered beast narrator

[@mac1991seth]

Literally walking for 27 minutes to talk about law. I love it :D

[@frank144p4]

“ Ross-Walkin’ “

[@StoneCresent]

Here is some more good news: the Japan Game Scenario Writers Association has announced an initiative to archive scripts for games that are no longer playable. This archive will be publicly accessible. (News via Siliconera)

[@jasohavents]

If I had to say you should raise awareness for anything. You should raise awareness for flash games possibly dying out. Official support for flash is getting the plug pulled on it in 2020, most browsers will no longer even allow the plugins to function. The availability of being able to play flash games will be entirely trivialized with very few people offering solutions. Its literally 20 years worth of content of animations, interactive media, and games that would be put on the chopping block. While a large portion of games are mediocre at least they're free. But even you have to admit some of them are classics, like when you reviewed Last Stand. Some people are suggesting that it's possible to get some flash players offline, but official ways of getting them might be removed, making it harder to get the programs. The best effort I've observed has been Newgrounds, they've released their own player as a response to this. And while it barely or just doesn't work (when I tried to run it, it failed); with almost no support for it up and running because it's so new and only in it's first version. They still have a long goal, but at least over a year to reach their goal. The fight to save flash games is a small, but very important one that we very well can win. All it will take is a little awareness and effort from some talented coders. There's quite a few communities still making and archiving flash content such as Newgrounds and Dagobah. I'd love to see interactive flash media as a whole preserved. It's part of the core games I played growing up. Thanks for reading.

[@Ilsyde]

Next up: you should be able to sell the albums you bought on itunes.

[@DirtyDwarfFTW]

And movie theater tickets.

[@legion999]

Oh no, that would really cut into Apple's profits!

[@seigeengine]

I mean, it does make sense. It's not like an album on itunes is less expensive than an actual physical album in the first place. It's not the consumer's fault the industry is hurt by technology shifts. The consumer should not be deprived of their rights just because those rights suddenly become even less profitable for companies.

[@lefr33man]

The ruling applies to any form a digital goods, so yes.

[@wilekrowan3610]

@@sedme0 That's interesting, I heard video game rental is forbidden in Japan.

[@icarvs_vivit]

Two words. Consumer suit. This is what we need in the US.

[@halo3odst]

*casually strolls though the frech revolution while talking about a market revoluion in france.*

[@gunja556]

lets hope that the AAA industry remembers that what goes around, comes around, and usually with extra force

[@NecromancyForKids]

Very interesting stuff. Also, gotta love all the glitching and clipping the characters make in this video.

[@crimsonharvest]

Thanks for fighting this fight Ross. As a gamer dude in your age cohort I've felt a lot of the same concern you express about the problem of dead games, even going back to the 80s. You're not alone out there but we're all as powerless as ever.

[@rogerbabin8175]

Not to be too negative but.... 3:43 Doesn't this Germany case continue to hurt the situation massively. Pointing to France as your legal precedence just means the opposition can point to Germany for theirs...bringing us back to square one.

[@fuckgoogle2554]

Meh, such contradictions would just be escalated to the EU level to harmonize the results, especially since this concerns businesses' and consumers' rights. They do it all the time, it's just that it tends to take years (or decades) to get done.

[@UnicornStorm]

nah, germans are stupid and don't understand the uncharted territory that is the internet.... as they (our leading politicians) call it. as soon as other EU countries implement this law they'd just adopt it, believing it to be sensible enough

[@fuckgoogle2554]

@@UnicornStorm True enough, most EU laws regarding anything digital tend to be massively influenced by French laws, for better or worse. The notorious GDPR for example was essentially the same as the pre-existing French data protection law, but with harsher punishments for negligent orgs. Which is cool in this instance, but French laws regarding copyright are absolutely retarded, and they're trying to push them up to the EU these days.

[@handsomebrick]

"Square one" was when there was only the German precedent.

[@gothound9479]

Something really relaxing about listening to Ross while watching Arno walk calmly through the hectic and chaotic streets of Paris Keep up the good work Ross!

[@luchianno]

Mandalore and Ross have synced periods! All heil the mold!

[@raynercoslop]

ALL HAIL THE MOLD! MOLD IS GOOD! MOLD IS LIFE!

[@JustSkram]

Now where is sseth

[@Bigngreen]

@@JustSkram hey hey People, Sseth here.

[@VargVikernes1488]

Holy Trinity of KZbin's video games-related content.

[@demizson576]

I don't get it. I mean, sure, that Sseth guy is clearly a bona fide intellectual man of culture (cough''hentai''cough) … but isn't his humor a bit on the juvenile racist/sexist side? (Especially when compared with Ross and Mandalore.)

[@youngthinker1]

The case against Steam, could be logically derived from hats. Hear me out: In Valve's own games, certain items gain monetary value: hats, skins, taunts, etc. These items can be used to purchase other games through Steam. If a digital product from Valve can be bought and sold for other products on the Steam store, than why can a owner of other games, not use them to trade for other products? The Devil's advocate being this logic by passes developers of the original games gaining any real value from their product. Which you cover in the video.

[@z-beeblebrox]

I mean hey, if you can buy a used game with a Subway gift card, why not hats?

[@jwanikpo]

so if they implement the "used game store" it would be in a similar way to their current market and a very small fraction of each transaction goes to both steam and the developer, so maayybe it wont hurt indies that much

[@MickeyD2012]

@@jwanikpo That would be illegal, that's like charging royalties on a used car sale.

[@youngthinker1]

@@jwanikpo that's a steam only thing though, and may only work if a legal framework exists for companies that go bankrupt or disband, so the money goes to the appropriate person.

[@thechugg4372]

Because hats are random, it's a gambling game, that's why there is a market for it.

[@SPTX.]

If anything it shows digital games have *NO VALUE* because the data is infinitely replicable, being able to resell your digital games means you're also able to keep it at the same time since you just have to keep a copy. It's no different from piracy and proves that when you pay for a digital game you actually pay for nothing because it didn't have production costs (not talking about the game, but the copy of it). This is why we NEED physical copies if we want an healthy business model for video games (without online DRMs, otherwise it's just as worthless as a digital copy and you bought overpriced cardboard and plastic instead of a game).

[@blamecanada8525]

This was not at all what I was expecting when he said a new video today

[@Mcaark]

I miss Total Biscuit, I would have bet anything he would have magnified this issue, even if he disagreed with Ross on it.

[@Wolf_Larsen]

Never forget that in his last moments, while he was dying from liver failure, Totalbiscuit was thinking of nothing but Fortnite. What a cruel fate, to have your final thoughts be of that puke-colored hellscape.

[@legion999]

Man, he was wrong about used games though

[@helios2939]

@@Wolf_Larsen He discussed Fortnite hours before passing, unless I'm not remembering correctly. To say that he "was thinking of nothing but Fortnite" feels a bit disingenuous on your part.

[@UnicornStorm]

@K19 I don't really like any version of his passing

[@ElectromagNick]

@@revu34 The real problen was people harassing his wife after his passing and actively celebrating it in her face. Personal opinions of the guy aside, you just don't do that.

[@cutekrizu8214]

I have to agree with you Ross, that this law is not helping at all, if anything, it's only complicating things. If this law passes, and valve is forced to implement some sort of g2a type used game market, one possibility, at least in my mind is that they put in a fee, and the extra money (or all the money) goes to the developer, that could help indie devs, and Valve could possibly dodge the attacks of people yelling "anti-consumer", since the money, or at least most of it would be going to the devs of the game, and not to Valve.

[@trevorc4413]

The Steam market already exists, and they take a 15% cut on sales on it. (10% to dev, 5% to Valve.) So, that's a reasonable starting point.

[@UnicornStorm]

sounds good

[@omnipotentnickname8918]

This ruling doesn't really threaten anything, and I don't think that it complicates things, either. The services of platforms which the games are already activated on are unavoidable for anyone doing a used game transaction, and so platforms can set their service fees for those transactions at anything they want, and so can see to it that they maintain their current revenue streams. And any 2nd-hand game sales should be subject to the same platform/publisher revenue-split ratio that new game sales are. Platforms can charge listing, payment processing, and 2nd-hand activation fees, and anyone wanting to make use of their purchased 2nd-hand game has no choice but to pay the platform's 2nd-hand activation fee before they can download and play their game from the platform the key is for. And minimum listing and 2nd-hand activation fees can make buying an indie or small-title game cheaper today from a "grey market" license reseller than it would be to buy a 2nd-hand copy of the game in a thriving 2nd-hand games market environment. There's no need for FUD in this, there are solutions for publishers, platforms, and for indie and small-title developers.

[@yyunko7764]

Ross, please get into contact with UFC que choisir, they're great guys and they definitely could use your expertise on this matter, they could give you the platform you need to act!

[@Accursed_Farms]

Email me if you have more info on the best procedure / way to go about it. It's a double challenge since I don't speak French, it might actually work better coming from a French citizen (or maybe I could do a shoutout to anyone in France who bought a copy of Darkspore or Battleforge to get the ball rolling.

[@yyunko7764]

@@Accursed_Farms I am not a part of it, I just know of their actions a bit. I am very busy with work so I'm probably not the kind of person you're looking for though, but you will definitely find someone good among their member. I am pretty sure they understand english so contacting them directly is definitely a viable option, they have an extensive array of options on their website to do so, here's a link for the one I think fits best : www.quechoisir.org/nous-contacter-n42652/reagir/ (the form is pretty self explanatory : name, family name, etc.) It's meant as a way to react to one of their article, you can just say you read the one on gaming rights and link your videos on the topic. They definitely don't fully know what they're doing, probably acting on customer complains, and tried to do their best, they usually act against obsolesence for stuff like microwave ovens, vacuum cleaners, stuff like this, or fuel prices.

[@calsifer666]

Every time I watch one of these videos all I can think of is Gordon Freeman behind the mic.

[@kyleduquesnay1429]

The frequency at which Ross and Mandalore post videos on the same day is somewhat strange.

[@Moritsune]

STOP KILLING GAMES

[@ferrumcivis]

Agreed, also good taste in pfp

[@T-74]

Christopher Simon bugger off. Granted, half life’s neglect is criminal but what about the rest of valves games? And if valve falls, STEAM FALLS.

[@Coconut-219]

The people's right to keep and bear games shall not be infringed.

[@shoomt7545]

BREAKING NEWS: Moritsune stop game killing by writing an angry comment

[@jasonbenjamin401]

Yes please. I would like to know that a game I love (Examples being the Crew and the Division...Both French/Ubisoft Titles BTW) will NOT be stolen from me. I ACTUALLY made in game purchases for both and will be losing all that investment along with the title. Keep up the fight braw!

[@philmysterious7176]

Well done. Really well thought. And I love that this whole video is just you walking through the streets of France in ass creed, lol, nice.

[@christophermorlock]

Anyone else disappointed the “long walk” didn’t end with him witnessing a guillotine execution? I feel like this was a lost opportunity, Ross!

[@Feasco]

Still, Filthy Parisian Simulator looks like it could be a hit

[@Accursed_Farms]

That would have delayed the video, I wasn't deep enough into the game for that. It was a struggle running that at over 30fps for me as it is.

[@Elanduli]

Stadia is here to stay and designed to kill games in a huge way. Here's why: Yes, Internet isn't quite where it needs to be to fully support Stadia. But if we recall Netflix, there were exactly the same concerns back then. The Internet couldn't handle it. Internally everything got upgraded to support it and home connections could kinda handle it. Around that time, Google tried to get into the business of FiberToTheHome (FTTH). Started up, built quite a bunch of connections and infrastructure and... the demand wasn't there. I'm not actually sure if that is their plan. But it seems to me very convenient and like quite the coincidence that they offer such a barely compressed picture requiring huge bandwidth to play with not settings to change that while also trying to break into the business of selling people super high bandwidth connections. Google really wants this to happen. And people don't seem to hate the concept either. And as far as some of their exclusive games go. They are designed to never run anywhere else than their servers. You will never see an executable. Which means there is no possible piracy. Game got removed from the store? Stadia shuts down? Good luck finding a way to keep playing these games. No crack, no DRM removal and no pirate on this planet will be able to revive it. Only actual industrial espionage can maybe get a game that will not run well on most systems. This is what killing pretty much all new games looks like. Not today. Not tomorrow. But these games are on life support just like all other online only games. Only that it is also impossible to reverse engineer the server because the entire game is on a server. You need to recreate every single thing to revive such a game. Good luck. With that.

[@shoomt7545]

the only way is to remake the game from scratch so god help you

[@nickiscoolbeans]

Stadia got OOFED

[@JeffSense]

This hasn't aged well.

[@JamesW6179]

Let's be honest: One of France's biggest boogeymen is "GAFA". You're probably unfamiliar with the term, but it's Google-Apple-Facebook-Amazon. France really wants these American companies hampered as much as possible, because France does not really have anything comparable. There's no way at all this will be overturned in a French court, because it's definitely French M.O. to chip away at these companies as much as possible. And Valve is being used as a lever to pry away at the big boys.

[@futonrevolution7671]

I certainly wasn't expected an Alpha Investments reference, but it makes a lot of sense for this topic.

[@Akaraut]

Ross: talking about a real interesting issue that could have lasting and long reaching consequences Me: Good lord the pop in on the npc character models is HORRIBLE

[@fyrentenimar]

Not just that, but the reused NPCs, the reused buildings (how many times did he go past a "A LARCHE MARION" or a "LIBRAIRIE"?), the inconsistency in the splashes when the character walks (sometimes they'll be there when he's walking on cobble stones, sometimes they won't be when he's walking through puddles).

[@returnofbeaux]

24:31 A chicken dropped onto the grass, at a very short distance, when Ross said "lower economic impact." Low impact indeed. I've been enjoying all of these optimization glitches and scenery popping, but that chicken impact was profound.

[@returnofbeaux]

@Bro Dowsky II Stealth chicken!

[@returnofbeaux]

@Bro Dowsky II He says "Australia" and the chicken instantly diappears down under!

[@returnofbeaux]

@Bro Dowsky II I'll pass the mic to someone who knows latin.

[@W4iteFlame]

I want "Game as service is a FRAUD" poster

[@Stonehawk]

idea: if a company needs cut cut and run, they are allowed to do so with no financial obligation... ... instead they must publish the source code and all assets, and release the game into the public domain.

[@k96man]

[EA falls over clutching at their heart]

[@arsenii_yavorskyi]

a law like that is extremely unlikely to happen.

[@handsomebrick]

They can't publish the source code because that would help the pirates. That's why Ross only wants them to have an end-of-life plan from the beginning, this is the most convenient solution for all parties, the problem is that these companies don't care at all about what is "most convenient for everyone" and only care about getting what they want.

[@handsomebrick]

@@bosstowndynamics5488 It still helps pirates because they can analyze the anti-piracy stuff they used and apply it to later games.

[@handsomebrick]

@@bosstowndynamics5488 The DRM is part of the game. Actually, there usually are a bunch of other proprietary programs on games now, I don't think it would even be legal for them to release source code.

[@inototen]

I hope that Steam don't switch to a subscription model after this... Unfortunately, I think this is the most likely option that they will take

[@seigeengine]

That's one fast way to sudoku themselves.

[@terner1234]

they'll probably just tank the fine

[@UnicornStorm]

they'd probably just implement a system where they still benefit from resells.... And they might kill their ludicrous deals

[@seanclark4071]

I truly wish I could do more for this issue, and will continue to rally what support I can for this cause, please keep up the good work Ross

[@duckshallrule6937]

You missed two groups that benefit being able to sell used games - cheap players who dont want to be at the mercy of games that refuse to lower their prices after a decade, and players who generally play a game once and never touch it again. As someone who both of these apply to, a used games market definitely appeals to me, though your point about indie games is quite valid

[@dirpyturtle69]

Duckshallrule So flippers? Those are the same category of seller and buyer and he covered it

[@duckshallrule6937]

@@dirpyturtle69 If by flipper you mean "literally anyone who ever wants to sell their game", sure. But when he brought it up he was talking about speed runners and people waiting for games to spike in value. I'm talking about people who slowly and steadily play a game until they complete it, then are done with it. Most people treat single player games like this.

[@TF2CrunchyFrog]

When I first read about the court ruling a little while ago, the first thing that popped into my mind was: "How is this resale thing even supposed to actually _work_ , in regard to multiplayer online games? I can see it for single player games without community content, because Valve already allows gifting games keys to other Steam users. But for games like i.e. Team Fortress 2 or Anthem or Borderlands 2, which in some cases may be Free-to-play, where you have a player account and profile, may have bought or unlocked additional victual items or content during time-limited in-game events or from early access, from promo codes or SHIFT codes, wouldn't that amount to selling your in-game profile, something which most game developers and publishers (which in case of third party games sold via Steam are not even Valve!) explicitely forbid in the games' EULA. If you want to resell it, what exactly is the _price_ for a free-to-play game where the account contains additional items? And does the money go from the buyer's to the seller's Steam wallet, or how the hell is that supposed to work? How do you separate a specific game's player account from the user's Steam account, Epic account, Blizzard BattleNet, or EA account?" While I, as an EU citizen, appreciate what the court was trying to do for consumer rights, I feel those lawyers and judges don't actually understand how online games work.

[@TF2CrunchyFrog]

Yes, I can totally see it for single player games you play through once.... but IMO it may hurt games developers since now people can just play it, resell it, and the person who buys it from you gives the money to you instead of buying their own copy. On the other hand, we take it as a granted right to resell printed books ir DVDs that we can own or or give them to a friend for free. *But physical items degrade.* There is a limit to how often you can resell a printed book, or how long a DVD survives without the material that carries the data degrading. And even the physical degradation of consumers goods doesn't happen quickly enought for the taste of companies, so they invented Planned Obsolescence and even Forced Obsolescence. Digital games or digital in-game items can be resold a thousand times without degrading. That's the issue, and I don't want games corporation to get the idea to start programming artificial obsolescence into games

[@TF2CrunchyFrog]

Question is, if you force companies to keep online multiplayer games going in perpetuity, as long as there are any number of active players, how is going to pay for the game servers and item servers? What if the community is only a few hundred players?

[@TF2CrunchyFrog]

So, if a game is F2P (like Fortnite) or used to have a price tag and later became F2P (like Team Fortress 2), and you got it for free, can the company claim you don't own it since you didn't pay anything for it? Even if you spent money on virtual items or DLC to support the developers so they will make more content and run the servers? What is the resale price if a game used to cost 60€ but then over time dropped in price (i.e. Overwatch) or you bought it price-reduced during a Steam sale, or got it for free on Epic Store while it was free for 1 week (which they do to draw people to the Epic Store).

[@TF2CrunchyFrog]

As someone who plays games on Steam, Blizzard BattleNet and Epic Store, and am an active member of the Team Fortress 2 community, I admit honestly: I do not want the Steam platform to die, because Valve has fostered a TF2 community where I made friends. Steam offers user profile pages, screenshot upload and sharing with friends, Workshops for 3D item modellers and animators and mod support, community pages for artists, the ability for users to create their own Steam Groups and Steam Guides... I don't have that anywhere else.

[@lm9029]

​@@TF2CrunchyFrog Late but here is my thoughts: 1. Steam and online stores usually keep track of how much you spend on a game. If a resell feature was added i imagen the maximum cost would be based on your total money spent in it but the money would be split between you the seller and the developer (not valve if 3rd party). Though i assume you could give your games away for free like when gifting something. I like the idea since it can give people a chance to play delisted games but at the same time i fear this will create a huge incentive for scammers to steal steam accounts from children and sell people's entire libraries. 2. Its easy to make a game work indefinetly without further support from the developers. Any multiplayer game that has private peer 2 peer server connections (LAN), bots and unlocked DRM would be future proof. Bought items would have to be available on your local install rather than your account with a connection only being required to trade and buy new items. The law would demand bots and local hosting to become standard once more as the minimum requirement. (It would be so easy for companies to abide by this law that they woulnt even need to try making a good offline experience as long as there exist a offline experience. The absolute minimum effort they'd need to do is making a empty kill box map with bots and all your items. It would look really unprofessional and not be a fraction as enjoyable as the games glory days but as far as the law is concerned thats totally fine as thats all they needed to do)

[@QwerTzyNub]

i don't think it would be a problem if they adjust the steam community market. they could give devs a cut off every game that gets resold

[@Zetimenvec]

I think one big possibility is that the publishers will turn themselves into rental services for games. You pay a subscription fee to have access to a catalog, maybe break it down by genre so if you want sports games it's 14.99 per month, if you want FPS's it's another 14.99 per month, etc etc. A sort of game-netflix publisher arises and starts pushing out games, buys liscences for older 3rd party games on PC, grows a large catalog that you have access to and get to keep playing so long as your license for the month is paid.

[@hydra7427]

The biggest problem I have with forcing Valve to allow the reselling of games is that it only makes existing security issues worse. Get your account hacked, and suddenly all your games are resold and the hacker pockets the money. I'm certainly FOR the games I bought on Steam to be treated as goods and not as simply part of a "subscription service" that I don't pay for and never signed up for, but at the same time I do not want them to be easily disposable.

[@seigeengine]

There are ways around that, mate. It's like you think nobody has ever had to deal with this kind of a problem before.

[@dirpyturtle69]

Yomarson That’s not how real life goods work I have insurance on my car if it gets stolen i get paid money to buy a new one. You know what happens when you get a digital good stolen? It’s gone forever and so is you’re credit card information. That’s on the company that’s responsible for security not me I shouldn’t have to deal with bullshit because epic or valve or EA makes it for hackers to steal someone’s account. That is nothing like physically Goods, someone can’t steal my skin and pretend to be me while he lives my life. You can’t steal my account to life but you can steal my steam account

[@hydra7427]

@Yomarson My car is not accessible from Russia or China. That's the issue here. I would prefer that Steam fix pre-existing account security issues first - like for example implementing a waiting period of 3 days in order to finalize traded items (or, now, games) - that minimize losing everything the minute that a hacker gets their hands on it. No matter how good security measures like email verification or some variation of an authentication is, there are ways to spoof them. Brakes on the process is necessary when thieves move at the speed of light.

[@thechugg4372]

@Yomarson that has nothing to do with one another, you think the thief want a car? He wants money, if your steam account isn't worth anything there is no point to try as hard.

[@SPTX.]

Have fun living in constant fear.

[@roninabs]

I suspect this issue is nested in the larger issue of copyright law in general, which to me is out of control. But going at it from this singular perspective is just about genius. One of the most well reasoned and argued videos I've seen on YT. Along with GaS Fraud video. Outstanding job.

[@ama1212]

2 years later absolutely nothing have changed :)

[@urchinowdelaresistance5109]

"Capitalism gets weird once you have an infinite supply of something" is definitely a quote to walk away with for political philosophy. Very insightful stuff as usual, keep fighting the good fight!

[@karenpojar2514]

On one hand, yes you should be able to sell things you own. On the other, digital goods to not expire or degrade with time. However, there are maintenance costs involved with hosting the files in the cloud along with cloud services (chat, friends list, reviews, downloading fresh copies of the game, etc). I would suspect we will start being charged maintenance fees for those soon, and/or download limits.

[@dirpyturtle69]

Karen Pojar Digital games still degrade in-fact they degrade more so than physical copy’s do. files get corrupted all the fucking time the fees they pay for server maintenance are the only thing stopping their files from breaking in half. And they definitely do expire if a game is online only that pretty much guarantees that it will only be around for a few years at best No company is going to start setting game download limits or charging players for maintenance because the first company that does is going to lose to the competition that doesn’t

[@rjc0234]

"A game sold by the publisher for $1 is still worth more to them than one sold for $50 used" then wise the hell up game publishers....

[@alexunderbluesky]

Also I was thinking about this, there is nothing stopping this logic to also apply to digital goods if you are allow to resell your digital game, why wouldn't you be allow to resell your rare mount.

[@WadWizard]

I guess the difficulty is that it seems right to me, when choosing between right and functional i usually choose right, but you bring up important points

[@alexanderrahl7034]

18:09 A similar argument was made during the war we had over WoW private servers. A TON of people criticized private servers with that very same logic after Nost went down. "Why play something that could get shut down and lose your progress at any time?" Our response at the time was because it was free, and there was no other option. People didnt get that we *wanted to play CLASSIC* they automatically assumed we would just "see the light" and go to legion But having to PAY for something with that risk guaranteed and set in stone? Nope. Market crash.

[@Boneworm852]

I can't help thinking of this video as Ross marching through the streets of 18th-century Paris saying all of this.

[@sciencesyfy]

As soon as it goes on sale for the price of a sandwich!

[@chugg159]

This is a good series, and it’s unique. I would hang on to this one. It doesn’t have to be frequent, but you definitely have to be the one to do it.

[@omganotherun]

In general, supporting people's property rights sounds like a good thing.

[@GoldenSun3DS]

Just give 10% of the used game sale to publisher/developer and 10% to the store (Steam in this case). The user gets 80% of their sale price. Problem solved. A physical used copy is worth less than a physical new copy because it can degrade and possibly eventually break. A digital copy, however, is exactly the same new or used. So there is absolutely NO reason not to buy the used copy if it's cheaper. Then there's the fact that the digital store has to facilitate these sales and maintain the servers to allow the games to be downloaded to the new customer. Giving part of every resale back to the developer and publisher is fair and might even result in even more profit than the no-resale system.

[@arsenii_yavorskyi]

@@addithehun4044 how exactly would this affect asset flips?

[@UnicornStorm]

@@addithehun4044 well.... broken games would just be returned, so steam as well as the dev loses money (because fees and stuff) but a lot of people would still resell even the most enjoyable game, simply because they're not interested in replaying a game they have already finished. But since people are already finishing short indie games and returning them on steam, allowing to resell it with a cut for the storefront as well as the dev/publisher might encourage some people to get a bit less back in exchange for the fun time they had. Also, this might encourage devs to think of better ways to include replayability

[@Spookyhoobster]

@@GoldenSun3DS The problem is that there's *no* incentive in buying a new strictly digital product, and the gaming industry's reliance on sales post launch. There's "some potential" for devs/publishers to make "a little" more money from getting a slice of the resale, but there's a huge potential for companies losing massive profits. Imagine a game launching at $60, and a week later people reselling at $50. It'd be smart for the publisher to do a 25% sale ($45) so they do, and the consumers that decide "I'm done with the game, I just want money to buy my next game" are selling at $40. Now with *disks* it would stop at $60 new, $50 used because there's a little bit of stigma and risk when it comes to disks (it could have scratches, imperfections, etc.) but there's none of that with digital products, and it's very likely the competition between sellers and resellers would be overall harmful.

[@GoldenSun3DS]

@@Spookyhoobster The problem with your point is that problem only exists if every consumer sells the game immediately. Let's say they sell to 1,000 customers. Now somehow all 1,000 people relist the game. If at any point in time, more than 1,000 people want to play the game, they have to buy a "new" copy or wait for a "used" copy to be available again. If they sell to 1,000 people, but only 500 relist it, then after those 500 "used" copies are sold, new customers have no choice but to buy a "new" copy. If it's a garbage game, it'll get resold a lot, but better games will be kept more often. This will encourage games to have higher quality and better replayability. If it's a high quality game, the "used" prices won't be much lower than the "new" prices. After all, the people selling their games will want the best price. The only competition is the "new" price since the "new" and "used" are literally identical. Even if it's the type of game where you beat it quickly and resell it, each resale would give back to the publisher/developer and get more people to experience it. More people experiencing it means more people talking about it, and thus more people wanting to try it. So even if it gets less "new" sales, it'll get a lot of "used" sales and pass a percentage of each "used" sale to the publisher/developer and the digital storefront. Everyone that would buy a new game and immediately relist after finishing it really just want a rental service, anyways. So this would not affect those customers.

[@StubzTurner]

The funny thing with Ubisoft and this court ruling is that they announced a subscription service on PC with Uplay at E3 this year. I think they might have saw this coming.

[@aqualung2000]

Thanks for all your work Ross. But I disagree with you regarding the ramifications of being allowed to re-sell the games you've bought.

[@DMarkwick]

Hi Ross. I enjoyed the video. Couple of serendipitous moments: ".. dropped a nuclear bomb on..." - guy in front of player drops a torch. "... push for changes... - player is pushing through a particularly narrow and crowded passage. Couple more. But you get the idea :) Now, I had seen your Games Service As A Fraud video, and agreed with it. While watching this video I saw a screenshot describing how Worlds Adrift has stopped being playable, and I own Worlds Adrift. I really enjoyed it, and now its gone. Didn't play the game for a couple of months, and now I cannot ever continue my personal Odyssey in my own unique floating skiff ever again. It's a lost dream I once had :( This is actually the first time this has happened to me, so now, although I agreed with you on general, principled but abstract reasons, I now agree with you for general, principled, actual and wounded reasons. Have a great day, and thank you for the video :)

[@chuckwood3426]

Ross, you seem to be misunderstanding a few details about the ruling: Here is how I understand it. First while the court did rule that Steam must allow people to resell games and ruled that Steam cant forbid it in its terms of service. They also ruled that Steam is in no way forced to implement code to facilitate resale of games. Second: The court ruled that steam preventing people from reselling their accounts were illegal. And it is already physically possible to resell your account. Albeit against Steams current rules. This means that; the only way to actually resell a used game after this ruling will be to sell your entire account with the game in it. If you have more than one game on your account it will be a package deal. I can imagine a future where some people have a separate account for every game they own just so they can resell it after they are done. But it wont be a lot of people who does that.

[@Accursed_Farms]

I did not see the part about how the court said Steam is not forced to implement code to facilitate resale of games. Do you have a source on that? It's possible you're right, but I would think the court might also see Steam doing nothing to allow aside from sell the entire account as a possible infringement also. If you only wish to sell ONE game, they still make it impossible, which could be interpreted as a "trespass to chattels" issue, which I'd be surprised if France has no laws against.

[@chuckwood3426]

@@Accursed_Farms My original line of though probably came from a throwaway line by the youtuber Bellular News. The idea is that the court only ruled on the legality of Steams terms of service. Not on anything else. As the only definitive rulings I can find in any articles is that they nullified several clauses in the ToS and forced Steam to inform its customers about the ruling. Courts tend to have very narrow rulings on things like this. But it could also be that the litigation have not finished yet. The problem is that I dont speak french so I cant look at the ruling itself I can only look at translations of articles about the ruling. So I cant be 100% sure. Here is the most informative translated article I found: www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/d6cclt/steam_valve_is_convicted_in_france_for_banning/f0rxlfj/

[@chuckwood3426]

Also there is a legal difference between the statements: "You have the right to resell your games" and "You have the right to compel a third party to spend development time and money to help you facilitate the resale of your games." Finally you could argue that DRM is a just as big an obstacle to reselling your games as Steam not having implemented a framework. After all, if there was not DRM you could just copy your game data and sell it to someone else.

[@Yetoob8lWuxUQnpAahSqEpYkyZ]

I'm glad that you exist and form words the way you do.

[@Disthron]

8:36 Developers have never charged higher prices to account for used games. Games should be cheaper because they don't incur the overhead costs of printing, shipping, renting a store or paying the people who work there. Also, any extra profit is not going to the Developers, it's going to the publishers.

[@zombiegandhi8405]

A problem I can see with the ability to sell the digital good, is how many people would utilize a platform like G2A to do so. If G2A is already a gray market, with substantial laundering of illicit funds, then adding that to other digital marketplaces, I'd imagine, would make that money all the more difficult to trace; especially for those smaller dev teams who might not have the resources in the first place to look into those fraudulent purchases. Would Steam only allow games purchased via Steam to be bought and sold? Would this create even more of those gray/black markets?

[@NCRLouTenant]

Honestly I'm just glad to hear that other people are recognizing the threat to the Indie market this can pose.

[@EricMichaelLP]

I don’t think this came into my sub box when you posted it. :o but I noticed it now that you uploaded your game dungeon video! Thank god! :D

[@vernacular3289]

I kept getting distracted by Ubisoft's unparalleled quality: 0:00 - 27:20 LOD and object pop-in throughout 1:51 Man on the right walks over the wagon, Man on the left switches clothes 2:27 Levitating wagon 4:12 Group of people floating, probably witches 4:29 Woman in distance pops into existence while walking over a stack of barrels 4:39 Piece of paper floats through protagonist's head 4:45 Man clips upward through the body he is carrying 5:08 Floating boards hovering over the road 7:18 Man on right in front of door is waving a flag that doesn't exist yet, flag also pops out of existence while he's waving it At some point my eyes were tired so I just listened to the video in a background tab.

[@NinjaNezumi]

You are fucking awesome, and I am here to support you! I only just found out about your videos, but I have believed the same thing for many years and have been screaming to the wind as well.

[@HeadsFullOfEyeballs]

It's almost as if traditional capitalistic notions of "property" break down when confronted with things that can be infinitely replicated for free. See "intellectual property" law for the kinds of absurdities you end up with when you try to squeeze these new phenomena into the old corset so that capital owners can keep making money the way they're used to.

[@HeadsFullOfEyeballs]

@Max William Lauf Yeah, the porn industry is interesting to watch because they have no lobbying power. So they just have to deal with whatever technological and social change throws at them, instead of legislating their preferred status quo the way the mainstream media industry can.

[@PutkisenSetä]

Porn streaming is mostly piracy, with publishers stealing money from their own performers. Don't be too surprised if Ubisoft gets into the business of fuckery.

[@arminkuburas1696]

I'm sorry if I want to own what I bought. This isn't about infite replication. This is about me owning what I own.

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

@@arminkuburas1696 It is, but thats merely symptomatic of the underlyi g issue of IP being infinitely replicable, and as such worthless.

[@schlafanzyk]

@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 That's not true though. Infinite reproduction still requires effort (bandwidth, storage, etc.) the same way finite and physical reproduction does. It's just that the cost of the Nth reproduction falls off much faster. To reproduce IP you own a license to, you still have to acquire it in the first place, copy it and have, as well as maintain, a medium for backup. That's not nothing. All of that must be 100% legal as long as it is for your own private use. Creating backup copies for video games and circumvention of copy-protection has been ruled legal for a reason. As long as you own the original game, making an "illegal copy" for yourself is perfectly legal. If you didn't have the right to make sure you own a permanent copy of the licensed product, even when the physical medium breaks down, then the license itself would be worthless as you are not even allowed to maintain it. It would be like buying a car but not being allowed to put any gas in it after driving it off the lot. If that was the case, people would stop buying cars. Same thing would happen with games if developers didn't hide their nefarious business practices. The only reason games aren't dying left and right is because customers have been intentionally kept in the dark about the reality, that you don't own the games you buy - which is fraud.

[@darthdangermouse1453]

This is indeed a complicated situation, being able to resell your games would definitely put ownership on your digitally owned games, but on the other hand, people will absolutely abuse this feature for their own gain through some method.

[@seigeengine]

You act like the idea of being able to sell things you own is a novel concept.

[@CThyran]

@@seigeengine With a digital item you can nigh infinitely copy it without any labor. It's not as simple as selling a used game or car.

[@seigeengine]

We're not talking about copying digital files, mate. Stop bitching about your rekt asshole, you dumb fuck.

[@CThyran]

@@seigeengine He was taking about digital games you mouth breathing neanderthal.

[@ihateyougoog1elol]

@@CThyran CDs are a physical good you can resell but contain easily accessible digital data that can be infinitely recopied without labor and that market did fine until it got eclipsed technologically. It's not as foreign as you think.

[@lionocyborg6030]

Is the price of that GOG sale at 8:46 shown in dollars just for convenience? I thought Poland used Zloty. Then again, it's pounds where I come from so who am I to talk?

[@solidsnake7256]

This could be a Google-backed plot to terrorize game publishers/devs and get them on Stadia, a "safer" alternative.

[@TheseAreOurGames]

There's something i haven't seen mentioned yet is, if valve were to be forced to open up a used games store, they might in turn also open themselves up to the same kind of illegitimate buyers you see on G2A and the likes. Given how they've managed moderation of Steam Greenlight and Direct, i'm not sure if this'd pan out well for consumers.

[@_EVANERV_]

There is one interesting perspective you are not seeing here. What happens to my steam library of 400+ games when I die? Currently you can not do anything. As far as I know, when you die, your digital library dies with you. But if the French ruling is passed, this technically means you can pass on your digital game library to family or friends. To me, this is sort of an important issue and I'm very glad they ruled this way.

[@NotMoreZombies]

I mean you could just tell your family your Steam password on your deathbed.

[@_EVANERV_]

@@DoomguyIsGrinningAtYou. Technically you can, legally you can not. So say you have a lawyer draft out a will for you, currently you can not put your steam library in your will as it doesn't really belong to you. Unless the ruling passes, you don't legally own any game in your library.

[@_EVANERV_]

@@NotMoreZombies Sure that could work, but if steam ever finds out someone is accessing your account after your death, chances are both your account and that person's account will be banned as that action is illegal. For now at least, you can not legally draft a will that bequeaths your steam library upon your death to another person; unless the ruling is passed and your respective region adopts such law.

[@DoomguyIsGrinningAtYou.]

@@_EVANERV_ Doesn't...? :/

[@DoomguyIsGrinningAtYou.]

@@_EVANERV_ Is there supposed to be period there or???

[@Yotrymp]

There's a separate but related issue to consider. Even physical copies of games, even if they never need an update to run properly, will eventually break or become unreadable. I guess it's like any other art medium, where only the most important/substantial art pieces survive because they are being maintained by conservators. But with videogames, the physical media have much shorter lifespans. And of course, as said in the "Games as a service" video, downloaded/updated games have much shorter lifespans. Say goodbye to most modern games, because they're too complicated and large of files to save them all for future emulation.

[@ImSquiggs]

The whole concept of a "digital used game market" is really interesting. Even after listening to all this I'm not 100% sure how I feel about it, all I know is it feels really significant. Depending on how this plays out, it really could be the biggest thing to happen to the structure of gaming in the last decade.

[@wipje41]

Soooo, where are the Google Play apps resellers? Apple store? Autodesk licences? I think this kind of ruling might be VERY bad for small developers. I like that people get paid for honest work. Used digital goods are bullshit because there's no such thing and just should be called piracy IMO. I'm glad you made a video for it Ross. For some reason I think there's a lobby behind this that doesn't like Valve too much or something. I get weird vibes from this.

[@dirpyturtle69]

Ah yes the old “you bought it but you don’t own it” argument. What a dumbass this law is specifically for video games because that’s what’s drummed up attention for it. And as a developer I can tell that this won’t kill off small devs. make good games and people will want to keep them not resale them, this will only effect asset flippers and big game company’s pumping out increasingly worse games every year

[@Sewblon]

8:00 I think that you are getting the mechanism wrong on how non-resellable games --> lower prices. Game companies don't really raise prices to account for used games. They charge whatever price maximizes profits, which in software is going to be whatever price maximizes revenue, because most costs are fixed costs. Rather, what is happening is that if games can be resold, then they are more valuable to the consumer, by definition. So people will be willing to pay more for them. If games can't be resold, then people just won't be willing to pay as much for them, because they know that that money they spend is gone forever. So companies just won't be able to get away with charging as much. Back to the larger issue. I see being able to re-sell your digital games as a positive, specifically because of de-listed games. If a game ever gets de-listed from its digital market place, then the only way for it to reach new people is through piracy and a secondary market. So legalizing re-sale is the easiest way to create a legal way for new players to experience de-listed games, and like you said in Games as a service is Fraud, the important element in all this is preserving history. Sure shortening the length of time that it takes the copyright to expire, or abolishing the practice of copyrighting all together, would make it even easier to introduce new people to games that aren't being sold by the original creators anymore. But until that happens, a digital secondary market is a good way to introduce old games to new people and keep our history alive. But I honestly think that we can't put all our eggs in the basket of litigation. Sure there was a victory in the french courts. But there was a defeat in a case with almost identical facts in the German courts. We need to also put pressure on lawmakers. Otherwise, if a ruling that game makers don't like gets upheld by the courts, then game companies will just lean on legislators to pass laws that undo those decisions. Sure companies have more money to spend on lobbying than consumers. But, consumers have more numbers, which legislators need to get re-elected. Edit: I discussed this decision with my dad, and he pointed out that it has a problem that you didn't quite touch on. When you sell a used digital game, how do you prove that you have actually transferred title? How do you prove that the game no longer functions on the selling party's computer? In other words, how do you prove that you transferred the license, rather than merely copying the game?

[@ihateyougoog1elol]

"In other words, how do you prove that you transferred the license, rather than merely copying the game?" I know this is an old comment, but there's no requirement to do this for physical media either. I can rip a CD and sell it and no one has to check that I don't have a copy somewhere. It's illegal if I do that, but it doesn't require a verification process to make sure I didn't. An option on steam to resell wouldn't NEED to have anything more than that, though of course valve is in the business of DRM and they could be dicks about it.

[@0Enigmatic0]

I'm entirely pro-consumer and that you own everything you buy. But with digital goods, like you pointed out, you don't just get one of that good, you essentially get an infinite supply. You can copy whatever you bought and then sell it. I mean this can apply to music, programs, movies, games, etc from Amazon, iTunes, GoG, etc. And I guess people were already buying things then sharing them for free on torrent sites, so there is some precedent for people spreading what they've bought while it's still on the market, but I can really see it hurting indie developers if in steam you saw "Buy New: $10, Buy Used: $0.08". Or even if used was one penny cheaper, most people would save that one penny because why not. This really doesn't work with supply demand anymore, you don't necessarily lose a physical good when you sell it now. Maybe steam will have to change its pricing model to comply with this if it gains traction

[@bearmandev]

I could listen to Ross rant and rave for ages on end.

[@chocoloutre]

Talking about dead game, Battleborn's community keep more and more active since few weeks, and someone even created a petition, that seems in good way! Gathered, player can to help to show they reject game closure! :D

[@justsomeloserlol]

I am in no way a legal expert, but i see this as a fairly common sense approach: Things like games bought and downloaded from a digital storefront are sold with a perpetual license, you own that instance of the code and can re-download it to any device that you own, but you may not in any way, shape or form redistribute that instance of the code, be it through re-selling or piracy. it would be best that they get classified as a "digital good" rather than just a "good" that way they can be treated as a good without being able to be re-sold

[@DoomguyIsGrinningAtYou.]

Interesting... That's all I have to say about it cause I'm clueless.

[@UnicornStorm]

well, you can rip a music CD and resell it, so this isn't a problem unique to digital goods, but I'd agree that an infinitely downloadable game needs some restriction to reselling it. maybe only allow reselling games that haven't been downloaded in a state to play without a launcher. So, selling steam games is fine, selling GOG games would only work if you only a) played the game through gog galaxy and b) gog galaxy wasn't just a fancy new way to click one the .exe of a stand alone game

[@CaroFDoom]

What I find weird is that Valve don't want to implement a system where they could just take a cut off every used game sale on their platform the same way they do with csgo skins on the community market. The person buying the game pays 20% more, Valve can share that with the developers of the game and everyone is happy. The guy buying the game gets his product, the guy selling the game gets some cash, the developers get a cut from a used game sale and Valve continue making profit while doing almost nothing.

[@bunkerdown8494]

I think reselling games on steam would really harm smaller developers but I dont really know enough to know for sure, they need the money Edit: I got to the part in the video and now I feel smart haha yes

[@SnakeEater7771]

That could be easily solved by letting Devs take a small % from each used game sale

[@taekinuru2]

SnakeEater7771 yeah that works I feel. They get let’s say 50% from the main sale then like 25% out of each resale of that file. If a game’s played briefly then resold rather than refunded the developer gets an effective 75% rather than 50% now and a POSSIBLE future 50% when some new user buys directly. This ultimately opens up gaming as prices for used games works out cheaper, allowing for a more liquid marketplace. Maybe

[@VARO548]

@@taekinuru2 They are still earning less with the change which is the opposite of what small developers/indie devs want (they are already not earning enough). I am all for owning your software but not this way. I would have supported something more in the line of what GOG is doing instead of whatever france proposed

[@jabberw0k812]

I really wonder how much of an effect it would have. When it comes to the more indie indies, I feel like a lot of their consumers are from a community that actively wants to support them.

[@dregothic]

@@SnakeEater7771 How do you justify that though? Does Ford or GM get a sale of every used car? If you sell your PC does every manufacture of each part get a part of the sale? In this case if we are saying these games are used products then you selling it get all the proceeds. I can see Steam charging for you to use say a market they setup but otherwise the developer would have no rights to it. So in the end indie dev's would take a hit.

[@RemyNote]

In my opinion, there are no good law for digital copies of goods. A game-key is not the same as a game-cartridge. Re-selling old books is trivial. Re-selling a digital copy is not. How do you move the ownership? The same goes for games. This is also why this court-case is (much) bigger than just games. Can you re-sell your songs on iTunes? Your eBooks on Amazon? The law is outdated. And the result of this is likely a new law, related to digital goods.

[@KabutoZombie]

ross you keep saying "more money goes to the developers" but that's not how it works at all. more often than not money from game sales goes to the publishers NOT the developers, they already got their wage and that's that. unless of course it's an indie game that was self-published.

[@cpitts385]

Kabuto Zombie I know the odds of him seeing this comment are low but I hope he does, because he’s missing out on a key price of information that would probably change his mind on this topic.

[@ImTheBestJamie]

I think he actually understood that. He talked about how triple-A games would for the most part be fine either way, meaning that the ones that would be most effected and therefore be getting more or less money depending on how things turn out here would be indie games that are self published.

[@KabutoZombie]

except that games as a service is something pushed by publishers and mostly AAA ones. when was the last time you needed to sign in to some DRM to play cave story?

[@ImTheBestJamie]

@@KabutoZombie Right but the law wouldnt just apply to games as a service, but all games, including games like cave story. It would mean that the next time someone wanted to buy cave story they would need to choose between buying an original copy of cave story or a cheaper functionally identical second hand copy of cave story. If enforced this ruling basically means that it would make it concrete and absolute that you own a game sold to you as "games as a service", but it would also make EVERY game resalable, including games that are very much not games as a service. Having games be made resalable or locked out of resale would have more of an impact on indie games and less of an impact on triple A games. Having games be definitely absolutely owned in every respect OTHER than resalability (ie under the effect of other consumer protection laws) would have more of an impact on games as a service than on other games. Hence "mixed bag." This putting more money in devs pocket things was in regards to the ability to resell games(which is bad for indies) but not the idea of considering games owned products as opposed to services(which is bad for games as a service).

[@KabutoZombie]

I don't see much harm in this. 20 or so years ago when DRM wasn't a thing that's how people would look for games. All my first games were hand me downs from my cousins, something like this is very hard to do nowadays. You should absolutely have ownership of the product you paid for. It's then up to the consumer to support a developer by buying fresh if they can afford to.

[@albertamalachi3560]

Dead Game News. I subscribed to you on THAT channel. Fancy finding you here.

[@do0myk]

only now, 2 years after, i got it why he did choose this specific game as a background im fucking stupid

[@BlazeHedgehog]

Somehow I missed this video until now. I'm curious about what will happen to the indie market as well, should this come about. I think what we'll see is a lot less low-effort indie games, aka the kinds that get thrown up on Steam for an asking price of $2 or less. I think prices for indie games overall will go up, to discourage oversaturating the market with previously-owned copies. That's not the worst outcome, given I think the race to the bottom of the market is hurting the value of games as a whole.