California, the biggest state in the US when it comes to both population and the sheer volume of tech companies squeezed into its borders, has just passed the country’s most extreme right to repair bill in the US (via Ars Technica). It’s the third state to pass such a bill, but goes further than either Minnesota or New York in that it forces companies to support their products for longer. But while it will cover gaming PCs and laptops, games console manufacturers get a free pass.
…
There are exceptions, however, and it seems like games consoles are somehow exempt from this right to repair requirement. Guess someone’s been lobbying against the inclusion of consoles, eh? The bill itself talks specifically about an “electronic or appliance product” or just a “product”, but stipulates that doesn’t include a video game console.
“‘Video game console’ means a computing device, including its components and peripherals, that is primarily used by consumers for playing video games, such as a console machine, a handheld console device, or another device or system. ‘Video game console’ does not include a general or an all-purpose computer, which includes, but is not limited to, a desktop computer, laptop, tablet, or cell phone.”
So, that means your Xbox, PlayStation, and Switch consoles are all seemingly exempt from having to offer long term support, but at least in the computing space your PC and laptop will be covered.
It reminds me of the absolute insane stuff arcade manufacturers would do to keep control over everything.
Capcom used to sell full blown arcade systems where the game’s ROM was actually volatile - in 2 years, it would vanish. You needed to pay them a monthly fee so that a technician would come up with a special device capable of rewriting the data periodically.
EnterprisingGreedy manufacturers will absolutely devise a way to classify computers, laptops, tablets, and phones as “game consoles”.HP tomorrow “introducing our new gaming inkjet printer”
printerscanner, which requires ink cartridges to functionAt this point I think they will just sell them for less than 50$ and still earn as much money by shrinkflation.
Game consoles are like proprietary PCs with some of the features removed. If PCs are included, couldn’t you argue game consoles are too?
Moat electronics are proprietary computers with limited features. Consoles make no sense as an exception.
I mean what features are removed exactly? They have all the components needed to install windows/mac/linux and hook up a mouse and keyboard. I really don’t see any distinction besides they come with gamepads and a gaming oriented OS instead of keyboards and a more general OS.
Nintendo is a mob level boss.
deleted by creator
game console for sure, as the rest of the have the capability as well but it’s general focus is gaming.
Can’t install a general computer OS on any other “console” out of the box though.
I wouldn’t expect Valve to have a problem with conforming to right-to-repair laws anyway. I have a hard time imagining they’re taking a bath on hardware that you can completely remove their storefront from.
But general focus isn’t a specific legal term is it? Like what about gaming laptops? Isn’t that the same thing? I haven’t read the law so idk if it creates that specificity.
Oh that would be amazing. If I had control over my game console.
Ok, hear me out. My intuition tells me its because consoles are subsidized. The manufacturer loses money or breakes even in order to make money back in the games sold. I think Nintendo is an exception. So having the additional expense of having to support them harms the hardware subsidy model.
Gotta admit… That sounds like a “them” problem. If they want to sell it at a loss, that’s on them. Make console prices more expensive.
Bring more gamers to the PC & Steam Deck.
Maybe, but why should that exempt them? If the model doesn’t work anymore then it doesn’t work. Who cares. They’ll still sell consoles and make money. They might cost more upfront or something, but they’ll still sell them.
deleted by creator
I assume that they managed to get it exempted based on piracy concerns.
Frying your console’s motherboard attempting to install a mod chip is not a big deal if you can replace it yourself on the cheap.
Even better, it would mean those selling mod chips could just buy the motherboards and sell pre modded motherboards.
Wouldn’t that be an argument for right-to-repair? If the user has to buy another console because theirs broke, the company has made twice the loss for the same number of games bought (or fewer, because the user has less money to spend on games). Reparing looks like a win-win here.
Nintendo has been the only game company I’ve seen be directly vocal against the Right to Repair stuff. 🤔
Extreme? Fuck off, lol
As much of a bummer as that is, I don’t think there has ever been any major cases of someone just replacing parts for their console and not selling it. What is a company like sintendo gonna do if you replace the screen on your switch with a 3rd party screen or open it up to replace any parts but don’t end up selling it?
I think they’re more concerned about mod chips and having to sell replacement motherboards to fix botched jobs.
Does anyone know the reasoning used for the exception? From the article, it was clearly a deliberate decision. But I do not see any reason why it was needed.
I’m guessing piracy.
Me when I can’t scam the consumers by selling cheap electronics that I will support only until the next model.
