4 ms·
Can't say I support this. Legislative bodies should be dealing with actual problems in the world that meaningfully make the lives of regular people worse, not g
by selectively 5mo ago
Can't say I support this. Legislative bodies should be dealing with actual problems in the world that meaningfully make the lives of regular people worse, not gamer entitlement.
- scott_w 5mo agoNot being able to use a product that was purchased is an “actual problem” that “makes the lives of regular people worse.” This is going to blow your mind, but this kind of stuff is EXACTLY what people elect governments to do.
- selectively 5mo agoYou were able to use it. Nothing lasts forever. People need help with a world that is hell, not video game related problems.
- scott_w 5mo agoI don’t know where you’re from but in the UK, consumer protection law sets requirements that your goods last a reasonable length of time. Under your logic, a TV manufacturer could have their TV self destruct after 3 months and you’d be fine with it? Governments should do nothing because “it’s just TV, you can get another.”
- iteria 5mo agoIf my TV costed $50 and I got 3 months out of it, I'd be like, "yeah, that's about right". We don't expect investments that low to last a generation. Just because you bought a game 5 years after release and then it shutdown 3 months later, doesn't mean it's a scam anymore than coming across an old DVD years after creation and finding that it either doesn't play media or plays it distorted.
- scott_w 5mo agoWhen the game was released is irrelevant. I assure you that you’d be pretty pissed if you paid £50 for a TV and it stopped working after only three months. You can claim otherwise but I’ll call you a lying bullshitter. > coming across an old DVD years after creation This isn’t remotely the same thing so I don’t know why you brought it up
- pessimizer 5mo agoThe law is exactly the place to deal with entitlements.