Do you think it's unethical to play a game you already own, from a company that is shitty?

[happyninja42]

Fairly straightforward, just curious what other people's thoughts are on this, given the recent news the past few years about business practices and office culture in gaming.

To clarify, I'm not talking about buying new games from said companies, but simply playing ones you already bought. For example a single player game that there is zero way for them to further monetize your gaming experience. I personally think there is no conflict if it's impossible to "support" the company any further with your playing. Like single player games. However, I do think there is some merit to the idea, that games like Overwatch, that even if you don't ever spend money on the game again, the fact that it's a live service, your playing it, helps to support the game, by adding to the metrics that it's popular, and they should keep doing stuff like that. Thus, further fostering bad behavior. But, to use another Blizzard title, is there any further harm, if you boot up your copy of Warcraft 3 from years ago, and play it again?

I'm mostly in the camp of either no it's not unethical if the financial impact has already been done, with no further monetization possible. But, I slightly lean towards the "depends on if it's live service or not"


Just felt like tossing that out.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

No but voted Don't care.

To expand: do whatever you want with your money, but don't think you're being ethical for holding out on one company you accidentally found out has shitty business practices. They all do. You just don't want to boycott every consumer aspect of your life, so you deliberately avoid finding out until somebody else does it for you and it explodes on the news.

Your internet provider has shitty business practices. The streaming services you subscribe to have shitty business practices. The studios that make the movies and shows you like have covered up harrassment and abuse cases, cheated talent out of money, wrenched creative control, breached contracts. You probably use or wear many a product of slave labor. Animals have suffered torture and death in the elaboration of the medicine you've needed in your life. Your bank, your insurance, have probably bullied hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy. The businesses you patronize have probably run smaller defenseless businesses out of the market. I don't believe for a second any of your favorite brands or venues hasn't overworked or unjustly fired someone. And so on.

 

[Xprimentyl]

As you've stated, if I've already bought the game, they've gotten my unwitting support; can't really un-ring that bell. So no, I don't find it unethical to use my purchase. Unfortunate? Yes. Unethical? No.

 

[SilentPony]

Depends, have you ever watched a movie? Or had a drink? Or driven a car? Bad people are everywhere in history, past and present and 99.9999% of it goes unreported/unpunished. If you're removing a game you've already paid for because of the current actions of a game dev, fair enough, its a protest. But to remain ethically consistent, its only fair to judge everything in your life and decide if its moral to continue to use something you already own, based off the current actions of the creators.

 

[happyninja42]

Depends, have you ever watched a movie? Or had a drink? Or driven a car? Bad people are everywhere in history, past and present and 99.9999% of it goes unreported/unpunished. If you're removing a game you've already paid for because of the current actions of a game dev, fair enough, its a protest. But to remain ethically consistent, its only fair to judge everything in your life and decide if its moral to continue to use something you already own, based off the current actions of the creators.

There is a difference in having a meal, or drinking a drink, or driving a car, compared to video games though. Some of those things are essential items. I need food, I need water, I need a car to get to work so I can pay my bills and not be evicted (I would personally love a form of public transport, but my city doesn't have one that is practical). I don't need Overwatch. I don't need Fortnite. I don't need Farcry.
It's purely a luxury item, I won't die if I don't have a video game to play.

So I don't think it's as easy to do this, across all markets. I mean, for all I know, the insulin market is a horrible, despicable aspect of the medical industry, but I'm not going to expect diabetics to boycott insulin because of ethical reasons.

 

[BrawlMan]

Depends on the type of game and company in question. I have copies of Singularity, Prototype, Transformers: Fall of Cybertron, Transformers Devastation, Crash Trilogy, and Crash 4. The first 3 I got used years back, and the latter 3 I bought new, because: TD was developed by Platinum Games, and the developers for all the Crash games have a great track record. Due to scummy practices and treating their employees like shit, I have not bought a new Activision and EA game in years. I still have some old EA games, but that was back when they actually cared or at least pretended to give a shit. I still have my old Burnouts, Need for Speeds, and various one off games. I got Dead Space 1 & 2 used (fuck EA's online pass) and Shadows of the Damned used too. But once again, their developed not by the publisher, but by developers I like. The same applies to Ubisoft as well. The last game I touched from them new was Rayman Legends back in 2014.

Capcom for all their bumbling still try, have new blood, and have been mostly fair to their employees. They did have their screw ups, but with the new blood in at least, they've finally dug the shit hole they put themselves in. Sega, I rarely buy any of their games any more, because most of their IP they just sit on and do nothing with. They're starting to turn things around library wise, but there is a lot that still needs to be done. Streets of Rage 4, I love, but that was Guard Crush Games/DotEMU that developed it. Sega has not worked in-house for that franchise since the first game. All of the other games were outsourced. Just a heads up, Sega is partially owned/indebted to the Yakuza, so take what you will from that. Which explains some of their schemes and many bone headed decisions over the past two decades. Sega had crunch as well back in the early 2000s and treated the people who worked on a 2.5D Golden Axe that got cancelled like shit. The assholes at the top kept chaning ideas on a whim and expected the artists, programmers, and animators have it all done super fast. Sega go fuck themselves for that and several other things too.

I usually prefer games that aren't constant in your face live-services or trying too hard to be "art". Most of the best games are the smaller ones or those with a specific type of focus. I prefer smaller games to most bloated AAA games any way, so no loss on my part.

 

[SilentPony]

There is a difference in having a meal, or drinking a drink, or driving a car, compared to video games though. Some of those things are essential items. I need food, I need water, I need a car to get to work so I can pay my bills and not be evicted (I would personally love a form of public transport, but my city doesn't have one that is practical). I don't need Overwatch. I don't need Fortnite. I don't need Farcry.
It's purely a luxury item, I won't die if I don't have a video game to play.

So I don't think it's as easy to do this, across all markets. I mean, for all I know, the insulin market is a horrible, despicable aspect of the medical industry, but I'm not going to expect diabetics to boycott insulin because of ethical reasons.

I mean does it really count as a luxury if you already own it? Its not an optional purchase anymore, its simply something you own. In fact you should be putting more thought into food and cars and movies than already owned video games, because those are on-going purchases. You need food again! You can't slack off on the morality of the food industry just because you need to eat again. You can't ignore the horrors of the Hollywood film industry just because there's another Marvel moving coming out in a month.
But you already own Starcraft. You have the CD. The transaction is complete, there's no morality left to judge, its over. Play it or not, the ethical considerations were over and done with when you purchased the game. Blizzard isn't tracking installations of old games and using it as legal defense against their lawsuit.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

The thread title isn't the same question as the poll. To the thread title, yeah if I already own a game before any knowledge of potential wrongdoing happened then there's zero reason to feel guilty about continuing to play the game. The money has been spent, not playing the game would serve no purpose.

 

[Chimpzy]

For games I already own, which are virtually universally singleplayer? I'll still play them. Damage is already done, asshole company has my money. Not playing them anymore would not boycott anything and be rather pointless.

Anything after the company got on my shitlist tho? Proper fucked. I don't buy it. Ever. No, also not whenever they act like they're not shit by releasing something less shit. When you're on my shitlist, you're on my shitlist, and it'll take more than some lip service to get taken off of it. So far none ever did.

 

[laggyteabag]

Anything after the company got on my shitlist tho? Proper fucked. I don't buy it. Ever. No, also not whenever they act like they're not shit by releasing something less shit. When you're on my shitlist, you're on my shitlist, and it'll take more than some lip service to get taken off of it. So far none ever did.

Out of interest, who is on your shitlist, and what did they do to get there?

 

[happyninja42]

The thread title isn't the same question as the poll. To the thread title, yeah if I already own a game before any knowledge of potential wrongdoing happened then there's zero reason to feel guilty about continuing to play the game. The money has been spent, not playing the game would serve no purpose.

Well I can't edit the question in the poll itself, just tried. But the question being asked in the title, and my OP is the question being asked.

 

[happyninja42]

I mean does it really count as a luxury if you already own it? Its not an optional purchase anymore, its simply something you own. In fact you should be putting more thought into food and cars and movies than already owned video games, because those are on-going purchases. You need food again! You can't slack off on the morality of the food industry just because you need to eat again. You can't ignore the horrors of the Hollywood film industry just because there's another Marvel moving coming out in a month.
But you already own Starcraft. You have the CD. The transaction is complete, there's no morality left to judge, its over. Play it or not, the ethical considerations were over and done with when you purchased the game. Blizzard isn't tracking installations of old games and using it as legal defense against their lawsuit.

That's my whole question though. I have seen some people go so far as to not play old games by those companies, as a result of the company's behavior. It just seems like that scene in Straight Out of Compton, with the protestors burning the cds...that they already paid money for. Like you say, the damage has been done. So that part of the "ethical debate" is where I get fuzzy on the why. I was curious how prevalent that view was in the debate. Hence, the poll.

As to the question of food/cars/etc. I am actually trying to put more thought into the ethics of them, but I can't remove myself from them entirely, as they are far more essential than a video game. there is some level of necessary evil in some of those industries, but not all industries are essential to my survival.

 

[FennecZephyr]

Single player games are fine, but in MMOs and multiplayer games in general, you ARE the content. Playing those games even without monetary support is providing content for the people that do.

It doesn't matter if the chuddiest gamergate dudebro is in favor of what happened at Activision-Blizzard. Even he'd abandon the game if he can't find a match in CoD or a WoW party finder group in a timely manner.

 

[CriticalGaming]

At the end of the day you are just a customer trying to buy a product. Are people guilty that our smartphones are made by little Indonesian kids?

We are just customers buying a product off the shelf. And in so doing that means nothing more than we wanted the product and it is not our responsibility to control how the company handles it's internal culture. It's up to the governing bodies, OSHA, and the employee's themselves to control the culture of the company they work for. Because really what happens? You don't support a company, those devs get laid off and end up at another company and the cycle repeats.

I am real bummed about the Blizzard thing because I've been a fan of the games for a very long time. But to be honest with myself, IF wow was still incredible, I'd still be playing it. the player outrage is a build up from having shitty product from Blizzard for a long time now and they are using the lawsuit as an excuse to cut the chord. But make no mistake people would still be all over Blizzard games if they were still amazing. And that's their right.

Sometimes people just want to have fun and enjoy a thing without thinking about the blood that was required to make it. Just ask any girl who loves Diamonds

 

[McElroy]

I only care about the product.

 

[Xprimentyl]

At the end of the day you are just a customer trying to buy a product. Are people guilty that our smartphones are made by little Indonesian kids?

We are just customers buying a product off the shelf. And in so doing that means nothing more than we wanted the product and it is not our responsibility to control how the company handles it's internal culture. It's up to the governing bodies, OSHA, and the employee's themselves to control the culture of the company they work for. Because really what happens? You don't support a company, those devs get laid off and end up at another company and the cycle repeats.

I am real bummed about the Blizzard thing because I've been a fan of the games for a very long time. But to be honest with myself, IF wow was still incredible, I'd still be playing it. the player outrage is a build up from having shitty product from Blizzard for a long time now and they are using the lawsuit as an excuse to cut the chord. But make no mistake people would still be all over Blizzard games if they were still amazing. And that's their right.

Sometimes people just want to have fun and enjoy a thing without thinking about the blood that was required to make it. Just ask any girl who loves Diamonds

In the spirit of the OP, it's possible to be complicit in the bad behaviors of others even if our own intent isn't directly malicious.

If I buy a game and find out after the fact that the devs drank the mid-coitus sweat of pedophiles to fuel themselves, shame on them, but the damage has been done. My not playing the game after they've got my money changes/affects nothing. BUT, if I buy their next game or partake of in-game purchases that further support them in full awareness of their atrocities, I'm complicit in their actions; I can't in good faith dismiss my support because "it's just a product I want to enjoy, and I'm not a pedophile."

Like @Johnny Novgorod mentioned, anyone can dig deep enough into any company and find something upsetting, but there are levels of accountability we as consumers can't ignore just because those companies offer something we want.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Single player games are fine, but in MMOs and multiplayer games in general, you ARE the content. Playing those games even without monetary support is providing content for the people that do.

It doesn't matter if the chuddiest gamergate dudebro is in favor of what happened at Activision-Blizzard. Even he'd abandon the game if he can't find a match in CoD or a WoW party finder group in a timely manner.

This is an excellent point. Not a big MMO person, but I guess, in a way, you CAN provide content that tangentially supports shitty business practices.

 

[bobdark]

This reminds of the people that destroy the coolers, shoes, and consoles (etc) when a company does something as some sort of protest. If you bought the product already enjoy it, company already has your money.

 

[CriticalGaming]

In the spirit of the OP, it's possible to be complicit in the bad behaviors of others even if our own intent isn't directly malicious.

If I buy a game and find out after the fact that the devs drank the mid-coitus sweat of pedophiles to fuel themselves, shame on them, but the damage has been done. My not playing the game after they've got my money changes/affects nothing. BUT, if I buy their next game or partake of in-game purchases that further support them in full awareness of their atrocities, I'm complicit in their actions; I can't in good faith dismiss my support because "it's just a product I want to enjoy, and I'm not a pedophile."

Like @Johnny Novgorod mentioned, anyone can dig deep enough into any company and find something upsetting, but there are levels of accountability we as consumers can't ignore just because those companies offer something we want.

Which is fine until you literally can't buy anything that is made under completely ethical practices. Like smart phones and diamonds for example.

The OP did state that they already own the game so there is no harm playing something long after the fact, you are right on that point.

But in regards to future purchases, here is where my confliction comes in:

Let's use Blizzard as an example because they are obvious right now. Those allegations are fucked up certainly and the people within responsible should be fired (and it looks like they are cleaning house). Do you then further hate the company and all the people there (victims included) after the bad guys are gone? The company is just a name, it exists no matter who works within, so if something bad happens at the company do you forever shut yourself out of that company's products even if you really enjoy them?

And if Blizzard cleaned house and made good shit again, would it then be okay to support them or does the name have to remain forever tainted?

 

[Chimpzy]

Out of interest, who is on your shitlist, and what did they do to get there?

EA, Activision, Ubisoft and Konami. All for more or less the same reasons. For the WWII cemetery worth of devs and franchises I liked that died on their shores, which I could've been fine with had they been replaced with something, but none of them have done anything I give a rats ass about for years. For their shitty anti-consumer business practices, like mtx, always online, lootboxes, live services, and all the other revoltingly corporate bs. For being shitty employers, as has been shows rather frequently the past few years. And so on.

Oh, and in Konami's case for seeming so dismissive of the business that put them on the map.