By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - A major part of the digital/physical debate that people forget

Shadow1980 said:

Obviously owning a copy doesn't confer you any rights to the actual intellectual property. In other words, I own my copy of Halo 4, but I don't own the IP that is Halo 4. But that copy is my property, in accordance with law that, if you bothered to read it, is quite clear. So when you say as in you did in the other thread, that "[The] publisher can still take away your rights to play the game, if not the disc, if they so wish," you are stating a complete and utter falsehood. Sure, there's still some things that I cannot do with my copies, namely make copies for public distribution (copyright literally is "the right to make copies"), but many forms of personal property have restrictions on use. For example, there are certain modifications to automobiles that are illegal. In any case, MS can no more confiscate or render useless my copy of Halo 4 than Ford can come and confiscate or render useless my Ranger that is fully paid off and in my name (and incidentally, motor vehicles are a kind of IP; if I manufactured and sold clones of my Ranger, Ford could sue me). My property is mine to do with as I see fit in accordance with law. And unlike you, I can actually cite law to support my case. Unless you can cite any sort of law or current legal precedent that supports your notion that my games, CDs, movies, and books are not really mine, then your argument doesn't hold water. And until you can do just that, I'm done with this conversation. I've wasted enough time with it as it is.

Sounds good to me. We obviously are not on the same page, and never will be. Good day to you.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
Shadow1980 said:
VanceIX said:

The law clearly states your ability to sell and lend such copies. It does not say that you have direct ownership over the copyrighted content on the disc. The content on the disc, however, is liscenced to you by the company, and I'm sure that the courts would take their side on this. 

There is a narrow scope of actions available to games on disc. Even courts disagree on what people are allowed to do with licensed content. It is not nearly as clear cut as you make it out to be. Laws are very vague, as of now corporations will continue to "license" games out instead of selling them. There is a big distinction.

Obviously owning a copy doesn't confer you any rights to the actual intellectual property. In other words, I own my copy of Halo 4, but I don't own the IP that is Halo 4. But that copy is my property, in accordance with law that, if you bothered to read it, is quite clear. So when you say as in you did in the other thread, that "[The] publisher can still take away your rights to play the game, if not the disc, if they so wish," you are stating a complete and utter falsehood. Sure, there's still some things that I cannot do with my copies, namely make copies for public distribution (copyright literally is "the right to make copies"), but many forms of personal property have restrictions on use. For example, there are certain modifications to automobiles that are illegal. In any case, MS can no more confiscate or render useless my copy of Halo 4 than Ford can come and confiscate or render useless my Ranger that is fully paid off and in my name (and incidentally, motor vehicles are a kind of IP; if I manufactured and sold clones of my Ranger, Ford could sue me). My property is mine to do with as I see fit in accordance with law. And unlike you, I can actually cite law to support my case. Unless you can cite any sort of law or current legal precedent that supports your notion that my games, CDs, movies, and books are not really mine, then your argument doesn't hold water. And until you can do just that, I'm done with this conversation. I've wasted enough time with it as it is.

That comparison makes no sense.

Car modifications are not illegal because of IP and copyrights from manufacturers, but because of laws made by a country, in which they find certain mods a matter of public safety. (as can clearly be seen from the link you yourself provided).

And true, nobody will come after your physical copy of a game, but they can certainly render it useless in parts or as a whole by shutting down services used to play parts of the game. 

As I said before, I really don't mind or care if people prefer discs, but outside a very small minority of collectors of games and consoles. 

It seems that console owners (percentage-wise) are the last remaining disc luddites, desperately clinging to outdated technology to have a sense of relevance. Most used reason is playing games 10-20 years from now....as if those games will not still be available.

It's as if I wanted to watch Gone with the Wind, I need a movie theater projector and a stack if film reels. Or if I wanted to listen to CCR I needed an 8-track player. Guess what, I can still watch old movies and listen to old music without need for ancient technology --- it's all right there, one download away...



It's not about the license ownership for me. It about 1's and 0's on a hard drive Vs. a tangible game I can rub all over my naked body. Same reason I invest in silver bullion instead of just stocks.




8th gen predictions. (made early 2014)
PS4: 60-65m
WiiU: 30-35m
X1: 30-35m
3DS: 80-85m
PSV: 15-20m

I've converted to Digital thanks the Nintendo and their digital promo ($5 back for every $50), and its likely i wont be turning back. however i will buy retail for games I'm unsure that I'll like, and or know i will trade in after being done (Assassins creed i.e.).



Burek said:

That comparison makes no sense.

Car modifications are not illegal because of IP and copyrights from manufacturers, but because of laws made by a country, in which they find certain mods a matter of public safety. (as can clearly be seen from the link you yourself provided).

And true, nobody will come after your physical copy of a game, but they can certainly render it useless in parts or as a whole by shutting down services used to play parts of the game. 

As I said before, I really don't mind or care if people prefer discs, but outside a very small minority of collectors of games and consoles. 

It seems that console owners (percentage-wise) are the last remaining disc luddites, desperately clinging to outdated technology to have a sense of relevance. Most used reason is playing games 10-20 years from now....as if those games will not still be available.

It's as if I wanted to watch Gone with the Wind, I need a movie theater projector and a stack if film reels. Or if I wanted to listen to CCR I needed an 8-track player. Guess what, I can still watch old movies and listen to old music without need for ancient technology --- it's all right there, one download away...

Neither does yours. Does every game get a remaster each generation, far from it. Not all movies do either. Plus that outdated technology still provides the best quality, most extras, and most sound/subtitle/version options for watching movies. I can't download a 40GB game, neither can I download the 15 disc extended cut special edittion Lotr box set.

Yes multiplayer servers can be shut down, doesn't effect local play. Always online games are a different matter.

Remasters and emulators aren't always better. See the Flashback remake, or the whole Star wars controversy.



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:

Neither does yours. Does every game get a remaster each generation, far from it. Not all movies do either. Plus that outdated technology still provides the best quality, most extras, and most sound/subtitle/version options for watching movies. I can't download a 40GB game, neither can I download the 15 disc extended cut special edittion Lotr box set.

Yes multiplayer servers can be shut down, doesn't effect local play. Always online games are a different matter.

Remasters and emulators aren't always better. See the Flashback remake, or the whole Star wars controversy.

Of course not everything gets a remaster. We live in capitalism, so it only makes sense to make remakes and remasters of things that will probably be profitable. If a game is popular, it will be available in the future. If it's Ride to Hell, it will not, and the existing discs will be ground into plastic pellets.

How does outdated technology provide the best quality? If you're talking about games in particular, the downloadable and disc versions are completely the same, they are both digital. If you're talking about my examples, surely it's better to watch a downloaded Citizen Kane than to watch it on a 70 year old film reel.

Why can't you download a 40GB game? I download them all the time, and have had no problems ever.

Naturally, you cannot download a disc-set, because it's a disc-set. Maybe in the future they will make it possible for you to download and 3D print the discs, but surely that's gotta be expensive.

And why are online games a different matter? They are still games. or are we now just picking the games to fit our little perception of ownership? Those games were made, sold at $60, owned and played from disc. Good luck playing your Titanfall on X360 or APB on PS3 in 10 years...

 

As I said, I really don't mind people using discs, I actually support their decision 100%, but them going around making up excuses (mostly to comfort themselves as they are afraid of progress and changes) and belittling digital is ludicrous.



OP is as subjective as even possible and by no means a major part for everyone.
It is about the small things in life. You either look at it and say it's generally better to "own" digital games or you say you want to browse through your physical library instead of a list with "download again" buttons.
Lots of things are "better" but people don't want to use them because they like the old fashioned/more comfortable way better. You could save tons if you didn't own a car. But people tend to want a car so they are a bit more flexible while they mostly don't do things they couldn't do without a car. They own it just because (although you could just rent/share a car when you really need one which is way cheaper than owning one). The small things. Quality of life. Emotions. Psychology.
It's never about logic or general consensus.



Burek said:
SvennoJ said:

Neither does yours. Does every game get a remaster each generation, far from it. Not all movies do either. Plus that outdated technology still provides the best quality, most extras, and most sound/subtitle/version options for watching movies. I can't download a 40GB game, neither can I download the 15 disc extended cut special edittion Lotr box set.

Yes multiplayer servers can be shut down, doesn't effect local play. Always online games are a different matter.

Remasters and emulators aren't always better. See the Flashback remake, or the whole Star wars controversy.

Of course not everything gets a remaster. We live in capitalism, so it only makes sense to make remakes and remasters of things that will probably be profitable. If a game is popular, it will be available in the future. If it's Ride to Hell, it will not, and the existing discs will be ground into plastic pellets.

How does outdated technology provide the best quality? If you're talking about games in particular, the downloadable and disc versions are completely the same, they are both digital. If you're talking about my examples, surely it's better to watch a downloaded Citizen Kane than to watch it on a 70 year old film reel.

Why can't you download a 40GB game? I download them all the time, and have had no problems ever.

Naturally, you cannot download a disc-set, because it's a disc-set. Maybe in the future they will make it possible for you to download and 3D print the discs, but surely that's gotta be expensive.

And why are online games a different matter? They are still games. or are we now just picking the games to fit our little perception of ownership? Those games were made, sold at $60, owned and played from disc. Good luck playing your Titanfall on X360 or APB on PS3 in 10 years...

 

As I said, I really don't mind people using discs, I actually support their decision 100%, but them going around making up excuses (mostly to comfort themselves as they are afraid of progress and changes) and belittling digital is ludicrous.

Can't download it because of bandwidth caps. I don't have 40GB spare in any month.
And a blu-ray version of Citizen Kane is better than a download. http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Citizen-Kane-Blu-ray/7744/#Review
Some games still offer extras in the physical edition, it has become rare though with the push to digital parity, which is a shame imo.

Ofcourse online games are a different matter, you need to be online. You do not buy nor own the server to play it on. You do not get the console either with the purchase of the disc. Titanfall clearly states you need an internet connection and xbox live to play.
(Btw when I still bought pc games they had the option of hosting your own server, and play on 4 pcs at the same time, all with 1 disc. Nowadays Steam offers a slight discount when you buy a 4 pack to play with friends, screw that)

I don't mind people choosing the convenience of digital, but calling people that prefer physical afraid of progress or change or desperately clinging to outdated technology to have a sense of relevance, wth?

And what if I like stuff that's not profitable enough for a remake/remaster/resale/virtual store. Sorry too bad? The existing discs are not shred to plastic, they end up in second hand stores, ebay, garage sales.



SvennoJ said:

Can't download it because of bandwidth caps. I don't have 40GB spare in any month.

And a blu-ray version of Citizen Kane is better than a download. http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Citizen-Kane-Blu-ray/7744/#Review
Some games still offer extras in the physical edition, it has become rare though with the push to digital parity, which is a shame imo.

Ofcourse online games are a different matter, you need to be online. You do not buy nor own the server to play it on. You do not get the console either with the purchase of the disc. Titanfall clearly states you need an internet connection and xbox live to play.
(Btw when I still bought pc games they had the option of hosting your own server, and play on 4 pcs at the same time, all with 1 disc. Nowadays Steam offers a slight discount when you buy a 4 pack to play with friends, screw that)

I don't mind people choosing the convenience of digital, but calling people that prefer physical afraid of progress or change or desperately clinging to outdated technology to have a sense of relevance, wth?

And what if I like stuff that's not profitable enough for a remake/remaster/resale/virtual store. Sorry too bad? The existing discs are not shred to plastic, they end up in second hand stores, ebay, garage sales.

So the problem is not in digital games, it's on you for choosing a capped download from your ISP. 

Also, Citizen Kane was not originally released on disc, so I have no clue why the comparison between bluray and download. 

If you cannot understand that the examples I use are to show that the technology advances throughout the years, I cannot help it.

You know, there are Amish who refuse to use any 20th century technology. I see people desperately clinging to outdated, cumbersome technology as modern day Amish. I still respect them as I respect Amish for insisting on their way of life...maybe one day there will be tourists coming to view disc collections in people's houses...a museum tour of sorts...



Burek said:

So the problem is not in digital games, it's on you for choosing a capped download from your ISP. 

Also, Citizen Kane was not originally released on disc, so I have no clue why the comparison between bluray and download. 

If you cannot understand that the examples I use are to show that the technology advances throughout the years, I cannot help it.

You know, there are Amish who refuse to use any 20th century technology. I see people desperately clinging to outdated, cumbersome technology as modern day Amish. I still respect them as I respect Amish for insisting on their way of life...maybe one day there will be tourists coming to view disc collections in people's houses...a museum tour of sorts...

Yes I should sell my house and move to a major city in a country with uncapped bandwidth at high speeds.

You automatically assume digital is better, that is not the case for me. I have no problem with technology advancing, I had HD ready tv in '02, HD cable in '03, HD-DVD in '05,  full 1080p tv in '06 and have been replacing my favorite Laserdiscs and DVDs with blu-ray since then. I will do it again as soon as I can afford a 4K projector and 4K blu-ray becomes available. I have tried digital many times but so far it's simply a step backwards in quality + available options and feels like you don't get anything for it. Even streaming 4K is at a lower bitrate than blu-ray offers for 1080p.

For games, well I've already explained myself for those.