DUST Search - Am I the only watching the "Xbox One presentation"?

Baal Roo wrote:

Karl Koekwaus wrote:

Baal Roo wrote:

Karl Koekwaus wrote:

I wonder how lending games to friends is going to work, do they need to pay money to play them too?

They should.

If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it.

Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy?

Lending something is not piracy, as you don't duplicate the media. If I loan it to someone, I can't play it anymore.

http://n4g.com/news/1261976/no-live-tv-kinect-functions-outside-us-at-launch-for-xbox-one

guess that was half of the features down the drain.

The argument against piracy isn't about whether or not you can replay your game, rewatch your movie, or reread your book. It's about people paying for the right to consume the media. Again, it's not MY argument, but it is THE argument.

It's illegal to pirate a copy of a game, book, movie, etc because the person who will be getting the product for free is not paying for the content. THAT is the supposed problem of piracy. I don't care if you can't reread your book or replay your game, you already read it, or already played it. You consumed the media, and now someone else is consuming the media for free.

The physical medium is no longer relevant to discussion of piracy and intellectual rights, because we've seen time and time again that the digital information devoid of a physical delivery medium consistently priced AT or ABOVE the price of the same information when it is delivered to us attached to a physical medium. The only difference between a CD and a FLAC digital album is the medium the information is being held on. For a video game (for example), if you buy the newest CoD at gamestop delivered to you on a $0.10 piece of plastic, you pay $59.99, if you buy the newest CoD straight from PSN, without the plastic container, you still pay $59.99.

It follows then that what we are paying for is the digital rights in each case, not the piece of plastic the game comes on.

If, for the digital medium, the rules are that we are paying for "the right to consume", then it follows that a video game purchased on a plastic disc should be viewed within the same context. If you are pro-lending, the natural and obvious logical conclusion is that you are pro-piracy. I personally am both.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Icy TIG3R Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz Noir. Mercenary Group 156	Posted - 2013.05.21 20:19:00 - [1] - Quote It looks like **, CoD Ghosts looks like trash for a supposed next Gen game, Xbox 1 sounds stupider than Wii U, always connection can suck a **, and it honestly fails pretty hard. "Fantasy Football on my XBOX? NEXT GEN IS HERE?!"
Icy TIG3R Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz Noir. Mercenary Group 157	Posted - 2013.05.21 22:17:00 - [2] - Quote Baal Roo wrote: Karl Koekwaus wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Karl Koekwaus wrote: I wonder how lending games to friends is going to work, do they need to pay money to play them too? They should. If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it. Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy? Lending something is not piracy, as you don't duplicate the media. If I loan it to someone, I can't play it anymore. http://n4g.com/news/1261976/no-live-tv-kinect-functions-outside-us-at-launch-for-xbox-one guess that was half of the features down the drain. The argument against piracy isn't about whether or not you can replay your game, rewatch your movie, or reread your book. It's about people paying for the right to consume the media. Again, it's not MY argument, but it is THE argument. It's illegal to pirate a copy of a game, book, movie, etc because the person who will be getting the product for free is not paying for the content. THAT is the supposed problem of piracy. I don't care if you can't reread your book or replay your game, you already read it, or already played it. You consumed the media, and now someone else is consuming the media for free. The physical medium is no longer relevant to discussion of piracy and intellectual rights, because we've seen time and time again that the digital information devoid of a physical delivery medium consistently priced AT or ABOVE the price of the same information when it is delivered to us attached to a physical medium. The only difference between a CD and a FLAC digital album is the medium the information is being held on. For a video game (for example), if you buy the newest CoD at gamestop delivered to you on a $0.10 piece of plastic, you pay $59.99, if you buy the newest CoD straight from PSN, without the plastic container, you still pay $59.99. It follows then that what we are paying for is the digital rights in each case, not the piece of plastic the game comes on. If, for the digital medium, the rules are that we are paying for "the right to consume", then it follows that a video game purchased on a plastic disc should be viewed within the same context. If you are pro-lending, the natural and obvious logical conclusion is that you are pro-piracy. I personally am both. Baal are you trolling or just stupid? When I buy something, I have the right to do whatever the f*** I want to do with it. End of story. They've already implemented online passes, in which you pay for the ability to use the online service. In that same definition that you're using, NOTHING you have belongs to you, you merely "rent" it. People like you are sending the industry down the drain.