• @gennygameshark
    link
    1158 months ago

    Ubisoft needs to get comfortable with the idea of people not buying their games then 😝

  • @Mango
    link
    788 months ago

    I am the guy who started this meme! Praise me!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    708 months ago

    From my understanding theft has always been to take something and after the other party doesn’t have it anymore. This never applied to piracy.

    For example: I used to pirate games back in school as I didn’t have the money to buy them. So there is no financial loss for the company. Yet they still frame it as bank robbery or something. “You wouldn’t download a car”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      308 months ago

      Hollywood was so adamant about “not downloading a car”.

      Now they are the ones downloading actors.

    • Po Tay Toes
      link
      fedilink
      228 months ago

      Its based on the false assumption that you would actually buy every single piece of media if you didn’t chose to copy it.

      It’s all fake and people accept it. Such is the world.

    • Lev_Astov
      link
      198 months ago

      Thepiratebay guy made an art project at one point that was a Raspberry Pi that did nothing but copy one song over and over again while keeping a running tally on a display of how much value it had “stolen” from the record industry by doing so.

    • @grue
      link
      English
      118 months ago

      “You wouldn’t download a car”

      I not only would, I did!

      • @grue
        link
        English
        58 months ago

        It never applied to copyright infringement, which is often disparaged as “piracy.”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          58 months ago

          Right, but I’m saying “piracy” has the same problem as “theft”. Copyright infringement is even less related to the traditional meaning of piracy than it is to theft.

  • @GeneralEmergency
    link
    30
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    If I had a penny for every time I saw this quote decontextualised. I’d have enough to buy a Ubisoft game.

    Which is kinda sad that it’s been that often.

      • @GeneralEmergency
        link
        6
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Thank you Valve

        (For the Gamers reading. I am making reference to the fact that steam has already got gamers used to not owning their games)

    • @Pogbom
      link
      188 months ago

      Listen, I’m super smart and I definitely know what the right context is, but could you explain it for our dumber friends here?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        298 months ago

        The exec said that in order for subscription gaming to be profitable, then customers would have to be okay with not owning their games. It was posed more of a hypothetical instead of a sinister plan. Now would they prefer subscription model? Absolutely. Do they expect it to work rn? The exec doesn’t think so.

  • @SlopppyEngineer
    link
    308 months ago

    Next year Ubisoft is complaining how people start a subscription just before the holiday and cancel after the holiday, with people playing dozens of games in a short period. This destroys their cash flows and shows great disrespect for the developers.

  • @grue
    link
    English
    258 months ago

    Copyright itself was never ownership to begin with, and ideas were never property. Copyright is nothing more than a means an end, with the end being to enrich the Public Domain. It exists for the express purpose “to Promote the Progress of Science and the Useful Arts” and nothing else.

    This is the moral basis for the Copyright Clause, in Thomas Jefferson’s own words:

    It has been pretended by some (and in England especially) that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions; & not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs. but while it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all, it would be singular to admit a natural, and even an hereditary right to inventions. it is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. by an universal law indeed, whatever, whether fixed or moveable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property, for the moment, of him who occupies it; but when he relinquishes the occupation the property goes with it. stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society. it would be curious then if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property. if nature has made any one thing less susceptible, than all others, of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an Idea; which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the reciever cannot dispossess himself of it. it’s peculiar character too is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. he who recieves an idea from me, recieves instruction himself, without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, recieves light without darkening me. that ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benvolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point; and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement, or exclusive appropriation. inventions then cannot in nature be a subject of property. society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility. but this may, or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from any body.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      88 months ago

      Holy shit, mic drop.

      Also, is that Jefferson’s original capitalization? I never would have figured him for the type to think he’s too cool for normal capitalization rules.

      • @grue
        link
        English
        78 months ago

        Also, is that Jefferson’s original capitalization? I never would have figured him for the type to think he’s too cool for normal capitalization rules.

        Here’s a picture of it (the first page, anyway, which isn’t the same as the part I quoted). It appears that he, indeed, wasn’t in the habit of capitalizing the first word of sentences. 'Course, it was so long ago that I’m not sure if it really was a normal rule at the time (especially for handwritten correspondence, as opposed to typeset publications).

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          48 months ago

          Yeah, I know things like capitalization and punctuation were a lot more idiosyncratic at the time, but I can’t recall ever seeing that particular quirk before in historical writing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    238 months ago

    It sounds like they are saying get comfortable with piracy. How else would you want to play a game without owning it?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    208 months ago

    I understand the slogan and why it is used, but I have never had any moral qualms about pirating the intellectual property of a billion-dollar corporation, call me weird.

    • @Viking_Hippie
      link
      158 months ago

      You’re weird.

      I agree with you completely, just complying with your request.

    • @rockSlayer
      link
      9
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Basically when it comes to streaming services, what are you paying for? You aren’t getting anything except temporary access that can be revoked at any time. What the slogan is saying is pretty simple in that regard: if we aren’t buying anything but access, then you aren’t stealing when sailing the seas

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        58 months ago

        I completely agree, what I’m saying is that even if I could actually buy it, or when this was possible, I would still not have ethical problems with “sailing the seas” nor do I think anyone should have those problems, I say again, the intellectual property belongs to billion-dollar companies

        • @LemmysMum
          link
          18 months ago

          If they’re making a profit then the product and distribution has been paid for by those with means, all costs have been covered, all employees, producers and suppliers have been paid an adequate and fair compensation for their contribution.

            • @LemmysMum
              link
              18 months ago

              If it’s not adequate and fair why is there a profit margin?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                18 months ago

                because they use their bargaining power to pay something not even remotely close to what a rational person would consider fair, not even to those who actually produce what they market (I’m talking about musicians, film scriptwriters or software developers) and even more so all employees, producers and suppliers

                • @LemmysMum
                  link
                  18 months ago

                  Sounds like a problem. Maybe you should fix it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    188 months ago

    Eh… piracy wasn’t theft even before this, because you’re not taking it away from someone else.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    158 months ago

    Yes please ubisoft make another generic assassin’s creed game that is like all the others and charge me for it on a subscription based model.

    This simulation of a simulation of a game is as important as office365 with teams at least.

    I think they have a solid business case there, congrats ubi.

    • Final Remix
      link
      38 months ago

      I can’t wait to find towers to unlock the map collectathon.

      • @JargonWagon
        link
        2
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I still really want to play Black Flag, ngl. I think I have a weakness for sea songs. Maybe I should play more Sea of Thieves instead.

  • NutWrench
    link
    118 months ago

    Ubisoft needs to “get comfortable” with gamers not giving them any money.

  • @Landmammals
    link
    78 months ago

    I like game pass as an option for playing games that I don’t want to spend $60 on. But I also want the option to own it forever.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Subscription models are great when they’re not trying to fuck you. There are upsides and downsides, but if you have options between subscribing with a one-click unsub or buying games and you choose subscribe, it might just be for good reason.

      I got Game Pass because I wasn’t sure I’d like Starfield. I now have 20 games installed (including Starfield) and just pause game pass when work is too busy for me to get value out of it. I’m at about $70 total spend. Yeah that’s more than starfield, but I’ve enjoyed close to $500 in games, some of which I either wouldn’t have bought and love or WOULD have bought and am glad I didn’t.

      But if somebody makes you pay $20/mo for Dildo Simulator, and colors and sizes are paid DLC, then they’re just trying to fuck you.

      • @Landmammals
        link
        18 months ago

        Yeah, but if you had bought starfield at full retail price there’s a pretty good chance you’d have regrets about it.

        I absolutely don’t mind spending a couple bucks a month to try a bunch of games. If there’s something I like and want to play a lot, I’ll eventually buy it.

  • @Surp
    link
    78 months ago

    I mean Ubisoft doesn’t make good games who gives a shit.