Quote:
Originally Posted by Riou 
Many big game studios rather limit the sharing and resale of game copies. EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Valve, and the rest would rather have people purchase software directly from them. There is a battle between software publishers and retail stores such Gamestop and Game with used games.
What do you think about games that require online accounts to play? Starcraft, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2, and BF3 come to mind. Those games have no resale ability.
Many big game studios rather limit the sharing and resale of game copies. EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Valve, and the rest would rather have people purchase software directly from them. There is a battle between software publishers and retail stores such Gamestop and Game with used games.
What do you think about games that require online accounts to play? Starcraft, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2, and BF3 come to mind. Those games have no resale ability.
That has basically nothing to do with the only point I'm making.
That being traditional software licencing gives the end customer direct ownership/control over their licence whereas Steam type DRM uses your money to grant ownership and control to a middle man that directly controls how you use software you spent money on.
Whether other companies do similar or not is irrelevant. I'm not discussing a company, I'm discussing a business model.
It's-a tu maaach
(12 items) |
|
It's-a tu maaach
(12 items) |
I don't know why people got the idea that because a company tells you "this is our way" that it should be (morally or legally), let alone has to be (sheople should stop supporting products that they don't like the terms of, but they don't... and in many cases these EULA's are legally gray), that way.
