This is self explanatory; to all who do not support the idea of ownership, there shall be no more funding, regardless of their game’s quality.
Advice:
buy from GOG, avoid single player games which require internet connection or 3 party launchers.
Repost from reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/StopKillingGames/comments/1ugzirg/stoppayinggames/
At this point I think it’s safe to assume all large companies are evil and so piracy of any software/media/etc created by a large company is the moral thing to do.
It really sucks but I think this is the case. I can’t even read an ebook half the time with proper ownership. It’s either Amazon exclusive and then I don’t own it, or it happens to go on kobo/humble bundle DRM free. Every now and again the author sells things direct DRM free and I’ll buy from them.
I’m not giving Amazon a penny for their ebook scam library where they can change anything on a whim. It’s some serious 1984 shit, they can change the contents of the ebook whenever they want.
You can de-DRM your kobo ebooks i think. They havent blocked pc downloads like amazon did.
I dont worry much about kobo, they havent tried to do anything egregiously anti-consumer to me
I don’t worry about kobo, but I can’t find everything on there. Since Dungeon Crawler Carl is only on Amazon it seems like he has a publishing deal with them or something. It just sucks I can’t actually buy to own those books without getting physical copies.
I get that. I just buy the physical book if kobo dont deal.
I think it’s weird that people are okay with libraries for books, but when it comes to video games I’m suddenly entitled and have a moral obligation to give artists my money.
Librarians don’t get dressed up in balaclavas and hit their nearest book store to get more books. No you’re not entitled to artist‘s work for free.
Do you think video game piracy involves knocking off a GameStop?
This is a bad argument. Many libraries do have movies, and I’ve seen several with video games.
People wouldn’t make movies or games if they didn’t get money for it.
What you seem to be after is called “slavery”.
You have to elaborate on how it’s a bad argument. The existence of games at libraries doesn’t contradict what I’m saying at all.
People argue it’s immoral to pirate games because the artists must be compensated, but no one says that about buying used media or loaning from the library even though the artist still receives nothing.
Both loaning and used sales are shown to increase new book sales, so why wouldn’t the same be true for games?
You said that piracy is a moral imperative under these circumstances, and I’m going further to say it was never immoral in the first place.
Also of note is that libraries can’t loan out games for which there is no physical copy, which means big publishers are actively killing library availability as well.
Authors do get payed from libraries.
Source: am author, get yearly royalties from libraries.
Still surprised “Jorking with Gorkur” sells as well as it does.
Sells better than “Ferkin’ with Gherkin”, that’s for sure.
This apparently varies by country. In countries where it’s not the case, the library system is not killing book sales or authorship.
To elaborate, how it worked for me is, when I published my book digitally, the store offered me to set a price for a “Library copy”. They recommend making this a higher price than the base copy, and then a digital library service will let people rent that copy out infinitely. Many authors take the default arrangement, since they’re just happy to have more people reading the work, BUT want to put a basic limiter on it (limited borrow copies) since we’re in the age of script kiddies, resellers, opportunistic collectors, etc.