Rozalia1 said:
Linking in the region lock article while hiding behind "well its legal in certain countries". Egging on people to go purchase and app that clearly was not within the rules... each has those little defenses to look upstanding... but when you see it enough times especially in the relatively small time frame... yeah I don't buy that as credible.
There is nothing illegal about circumventing region lock in the way these people did it anywhere in civilized world, meanwhile some countries were specified where courts have already ruled it to be peoples rights.
Just because
you didnt like it does not make it illegal.
Rozalia1 said:
Here we go again. Some companies were created by them and would the talent still exist in the world? Yes but the likelihood of them getting together, having the same funding, and making the same game is so low it might as well be zero. However we can't forget they do provide jobs too so would all those people be in work anyway? Well I suppose they could all make some cheap indie tat but forgive me if I'd rather have the exclusives over that.
Additionally some games are made due to the competition and wanting to have something comparable (Halo - Killzone, Final Fantasy - Wild Arms, and many more), if that competition isn't there than would those games be made?
There have been many "unconventional" games given support for years, would they have received it without them? Would EA/or whoever you like allow a studio making a game that is clearly not going to be profitable to the levels to require many years of slow development... get the time needed?
Other games like Gravity Rush get made to push the hardware features on the device... and it all goes on.
I can safely say things would be different as its common sense. You however need some evidence if you're going to prove things would remain the "same" or "better". So as I don't think you have alternate reality vision, nor could you show me that vision even if you had... this goes nowhere.
your forgetting the reason why those companies were created. that is to make profit. they would be created just as well to make profit even if it was on a different platform. while the resulting IPs may not be exactly same, thats as big of an argument as "choosing not to buy a game means developers wont develop that precise ip 10 years later", as in, completely pointless.
The job provider defence is often used when industry is afraid the consumers may want things to get better. its as bad of a defence as it always were. just providing a job, that is according to some surveys one of the most mentally demanding jobs with little pay, is not enough of a reason to support you. If a shit company goes bancrupt this does not mean that a better one cannot take its place. removal of bad companies is essential to betterment of human livehoods, and hiding under "buh provides jobs" is as good as doing same for slavery.
oh and dont act like EA or Ubisoft is the only publisher willing to support games. Look no further than Paradox to see it support fan made projects making them into full games even though they never end up being financia success.
Soviet Heavy said:
I'm still holding out for the Steam OS thats actually going to be optimized for gaming.
Steam OS is just a restricted linux fork. not going to happen.
Ark of the Covetor said:
perhaps they're attempting to pry people loose from Win7 so they don't have a repeat of the WinXP situation, in preparation for fucking us up the bum when Win11 rolls around in a couple of years.
Thats the prevalent theory. The costs of having to keep supporting old OS for a long time may be higher than the costs of upgrading everyone for free. And after that they have a singular OS that they keep upgrading and everyone is up on same OS without any way to get out of that grasp. Basically an always online DRM for OS
Hairless Mammoth said:
Though, I still don't get why people think the 1 year free upgrade only lets you use Win 10 for one year. Has that subscription software trend that Office 365 and Adobe Creative Cloud started made everyone more paranoid than me? (I don't blame them for being paranoid, with today's shady tech trends, but I do blame them for not reading a very important and plainly spelled out detail right in the middle of the article.)
During the conference MS representative kept repeating "windows as service" which is exactly how they call 365 - office as service.
wizzy555 said:
Actually the good thing about this one OS for all devices shtick is that it motivates them to reduce resource usage (for the smaller devices). Windows 8 for all its faults removed aero to decrease graphics usage on tablets and by some accounts reduced the RAM usage.
the problem is though - thanks to removal of aero there is no way to properly setup desktop interface anymore. you either get the transparency bullshit or you get letters that cannot be read (dark grey letters on black background). the only way to avoid that is the high contrast themes, which goes back to XP style looks more than 7.
