Bobby Kotick Says California Law is "Beyond Absurd"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I may not agree with some of the man's policies, but damned if it isn't nice to know the biggest dog in the yard who doesn't have a console for sale is throwing his hat in the ring for this fight. Bobby Kotick is a mean vicious opponent to have, and having him in our corner against the bass-ackward law means that much more weight, that much more money, that much more print in our favor.
Cripes, at this point, if he wants to run against Arnie, I'll get everyone I know to vote him in. Goodness knows CA could use some real leadership, as oppossed to leadership that thinks this is worth their time and energy.
Cripes, at this point, if he wants to run against Arnie, I'll get everyone I know to vote him in. Goodness knows CA could use some real leadership, as oppossed to leadership that thinks this is worth their time and energy.
Okay, this is insane. I've been coming here a while and I've tried not to register just so I don't get pulled into another forum (and, especially not on a topic that I've written about elsewhere) but I have to comment here.
Very few people in this debate are actually in it due to the merits of the case. This case is pretty much "control" vs. "money". The people on "our" side are not on our side because they care about the First Amendment. They care about the money flow into their coffers. Despite what Extra Credits said, this is true for the ESA and the ECA as well. It is, in it's own way, fascinating to see gamers leaping to the defense of an industry that:
a) is trying to crack down on the SCOURGE of buying pre-owned games
b) have jumped down our throats everytime we dare to try to sell any virtual items over Ebay
c) will, quite happily, support another Ninth Circuit ruling which states that you can't sell your copy of AutoCAD over Ebay.
d) gleefully support draconian DRM measures designed to punish you for wanting to play the game you purchased
e) is moving to a download-only format where you are really only leasing your games with no right of ownership whatsoever.
I realize we're all gamers here. I realize that the government winning is, perhaps, the greater evil her but let's not canonize any one side here. The battleline is between large corporate interests versus the government and our only choice is between which evil we're willing to support. The only real difference between Bobby Kotick and the heads of game corporations such as Ubisoft or EA is that Bobby Kotick doesn't know when to shut up.
Very few people in this debate are actually in it due to the merits of the case. This case is pretty much "control" vs. "money". The people on "our" side are not on our side because they care about the First Amendment. They care about the money flow into their coffers. Despite what Extra Credits said, this is true for the ESA and the ECA as well. It is, in it's own way, fascinating to see gamers leaping to the defense of an industry that:
a) is trying to crack down on the SCOURGE of buying pre-owned games
b) have jumped down our throats everytime we dare to try to sell any virtual items over Ebay
c) will, quite happily, support another Ninth Circuit ruling which states that you can't sell your copy of AutoCAD over Ebay.
d) gleefully support draconian DRM measures designed to punish you for wanting to play the game you purchased
e) is moving to a download-only format where you are really only leasing your games with no right of ownership whatsoever.
I realize we're all gamers here. I realize that the government winning is, perhaps, the greater evil her but let's not canonize any one side here. The battleline is between large corporate interests versus the government and our only choice is between which evil we're willing to support. The only real difference between Bobby Kotick and the heads of game corporations such as Ubisoft or EA is that Bobby Kotick doesn't know when to shut up.
Actually he's concerned that Call of Duty won't be on Wal-Mart shelves anymore. 12 year olds shouldn't be buying CoD anyway.Retardinator said:
Is this even a surprise? I mean, given his position of course he's on our side. Hell, I'm willing to bet he didn't even write that. It still doesn't make up for the other ridiculous crap he's said and done.
I am primarily worried about gun bans. The other stuff really bothers me, like ACTA and game banning, and the appointment of James Holdren, but I am primarily worried about gun bans. That is the point at which a country becomes less worried about a future government oppressing the people, and it becomes more worried about the people abusing any potential power they may be given.Cynical skeptic said:
