@murderusone 1.) DRM, license checks, 'always online' connectivity, and restrictions on free trade for consumers purchasing the games have literally zero... read again: Z-E-R-O to do with the progress of new gameplay ideas, nor are any of these policies in any way, shape, or form, a forward step for gamers, or consumers in general. And you can't outline any credible benefit for these that holds up to the standard of being able to share/trade/resell/loan our game purchases as we see fit, with our own free will.
2.) Microsoft's (and many 3rd parties as well) fantasy of being able to rake in cash after the initial sale of a game by funneling cash back to it's publisher every time it's traded in a virtual market is a symptom of the digital age moving away from centuries of fully functional, time-tested free market principals. They see digital content as a way to make cash ad infintum by abusing terms like 'intellectual property' and 'licensing rights' to brainwash consumers into believing they never owned the game in the first place. The truth however, just as resilient as it has been since VCR's, cassette tapes, DVD's, and other transferable media devices, is that we DO however own at least licensing rights of COPIES of media in our possession. While it's generally been a violation of licensing rights to copy and give away media because of copyright laws and customer agreements when purchasing transferable media, Microsoft took it a step further, and seeks to enter into the digital market a paradigm shift in licensing rights that restricts our trade and resale of media we buy with our hard earned dollars.
Losing such rights violates free market principals. Just because someone holds the creative rights to the original idea, doesn't mean that once they set it loose in the wilds of the free market that they can dictate how we use our purchases. They get their money with the first purchase. And if they think piracy is bad now (it's only got worse since the advent of digital media), it will increase exponentially if they keep trying to tighten the noose on it.
@felixvarela07 @supernaught360 You think a man with the intellectual acumen, a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley, a master's from San Francisco State University and a Ph.D. in Child Psychology from the University of Hawaii... is a complete moron...?
Might want to take a look in the mirror. This man knows exactly what he's doing, who he serves, and how to go about it. Just because this Bill didn't get traction doesn't mean another won't.
This man is a demon. That's what I'm calling them now. Not the mythological, leather-winged creatures of superstition, but people who by the laws of nature and biochemistry have sacrificed all sense of reality in favor of an emotional (not intellectual) tether to their power, their money, and their extreme fear of losing both to satisfy some arcane notion of righteousness.
Look at him. Look at those of his ilk when they inject toxic commentary and legislation that diminishes our freedoms of speech, privacy and expression. This is what the face of evil looks like. This is the enemy. They're coming for a lot more than our video-games. We need to be louder than ever before to protect this simple pastime.
Of the countless gamers out there, millions, and then some, only the tiniest fraction have ever been associated with video-games - and such associations defeat logic and reason, as much so if one were to blame movies, T.V. shows, or any of a myriad of personal interests in the realm of fantasy or pretend-play.
... and they choose a logical fallacy, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, to prop their evil machinations to dominate and control what we do via their political platforms.
It's certainly better than 5, which scored an 8.5 on this very site, To put the 4.5 score into context, go look at other games on this site that have scored 4/4.5/5. Sad day for gaming journalism is what this is. I finished 2 of the campaigns, and already have found more value in RE:6's gameplay, story, graphics and style than it's nearest shooter OR survival horror competitor (including Dead Space)I'll be posting an honest assessment after I complete the game for anyone interested in the opinion of a gamer who's played through every Resident Evil game developed.Sadly, Mr. VanOrd was expecting such ridiculously high quality from RE:6, that his world came crumbling down when it wasn't the second coming. Here's some more bad news Mr. VanOrd: The rest of the games coming out this Holiday Season? They're not going to offer anywhere NEAR the value of this title. Remember I said that.
They need to get rid of copyright laws. Then the decision belongs to the people, instead of lawyers and fascist government hacks. Consumers will buy the best version, the companies that make lower quality versions will eventually be weeded out. As consumers, do we really CARE if there's developers trying to cash in on someone else's idea? The internet is at the point where it's easy to differentiate between the quality of shared 'ideas'.It's not the governments nor the lawyers jobs to decide which people are 'dumb' about buying lower quality trash, people need to take some responsibility for themselves. This entire article outlines the insanity of trying to measure and control 'thought' and 'intent'.
If the editor can precisely explain how a game can be 'used' in the first place... The transferable media it's imprinted onto can be used (cartridge, disc, card, etc.), but the game? No.
That said, I agree with the notion of not buying games based on principle (haven't bought a madden title in years because of their monopoly of the NFL license) but rewarding Gamestop for huge mark-ups on 'used' games, along with weak trade-in values for said games seems to throw any notion of 'principle' out the window. But that's much harder to do for addicted gaming hobbyists, right? to simply not buy the game in the first place? As with anything else, however, the harder route is generally the more 'principled'.
supernaught360's comments