When I get bored with the conversation/tired of arguing I will simply tersely agree with you and then stop responding. I’m too old for this stuff.

  • 5 Posts
  • 52 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
Cake day: March 8th, 2024
  • mycodesucks@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.ml•Uncle Sam is at it again
    6·
    9 days ago

    It’s easy to say that when you’re an outside party who doesn’t understand or care about the underlying issues. Not to minimize the issue with the metaphor, but have you ever fought with a sibling or someone else at school and your disinterested parent our authority figure told you to both to stop without addressing any of either of your underlying problems? How well did it work?

    Pretending that “just stop it” deals with the realities of a complex history of real grievances and legitimate causes for anger and retribution on both sides is the most magical of magical thinking, and it doesn’t help that third party negotiators usually start their peace proceedings by learning NOTHING about the history of distrust and anger building up over decades, picking a side to ride or die with, and then declaring the issue fixed as soon as someone signs an agreement.

  • mycodesucks@lemmy.worldtoGames@sh.itjust.works•Helldivers 2 received over 14,000 negative reviews today due to an update that will require PSN accounts next week.English
    1·
    15 days ago

    This is Sony’s decision. It is a material change to the product that was sold. It is not the same as a patch or a nerf. It has rendered the product unplayable. Yes, you can make the argument that it was listed on the page from the beginning that an account was required, but it is also the case that EULAs are actually not legally binding contracts. Sony has made a unilateral decision, and as a result it does not matter whether a person is finished with the game or not. This is a change to the actual contract, which was the purchase of a game to use in perpetuity for the length of time that it is available on steam. Sony has made this decision, customers don’t have to justify the reason that they don’t like the change. It is a change. They are counting on people letting it slide, because most of the time that is how businesses do business.

    Also, you should really stop standing up for giant corporations. Sony doesn’t need your help. They have teams of lawyers whose job it is to argue with valve over whether they need to give refunds. They may also end up having to deal with class action lawsuits, and potential legal issues with 177 countries which may have completely different laws of consumer protection than the US. That is not your responsibility.

    Besides, one of the pillars of capitalism is rational self-interest, and that goes both ways, not just in the business side. If you can get a refund for something because a company has made a bad decision about how they do their business, why do you care about whether it’s fair or not to the company? They sure don’t care about whether it’s fair to you. Are you a Sony lawyer? Are you the “be nice to big companies police”? Let Sony and Valve, and possibly the court system, worry about what their legal obligations are, and you worry about your personal decision of whether you are going to take advantage of your legal rights. Don’t start judging whether others should or shouldn’t do the same.

  • mycodesucks@lemmy.worldtoHelldivers 2@lemmy.ca•Helldivers now delisted in 177 countriesEnglish
    4·
    15 days ago

    It seems like it has been listed as a requirement on the store page since launch, although Steam’s age check breaks the wayback machine. If it’s true, that means they knew this was coming. They still allowed it to be sold, probably maliciously in the intent of building out a player base to improve the buzz of the game early, and making a few bucks with the intent of then hoping the affected users would be too few to make a stink when the change was made. The bigger player base at the start allowed the game to build a following in a way that would’ve been harder with a release limited to PSN countries.

    Every single thing points to this being an intentional, nasty, anti-consumer decision. Best case scenario the angry customers would’ve been few and it wouldn’t have mattered, worst case scenario would be exactly what’s happening now, but this was factored in. Most customers will just create a PSN account and continue playing, and let’s say refunds go to 90% of the players in non-PSN countries and 10% of PSN country players demand refunds in solidarity… The remaining 90% of PSN country players + the 10% of non-PSN country players that are leaving their money behind is likely still more money than they would’ve had if they had launched it with the PSN requirement enforced. Regardless of how this shakes out, Sony is going to come out the other end of this with more money than they would have had by limiting it from the start - not everyone is going to request a refund… and those that don’t? That’s free money for Sony they never would’ve had.

    Is it POSSIBLE it’s just a tone-deaf decision they didn’t think through completely? Sure. Do I think it’s likely, given the size of the company and the way modern big game companies squeeze and manipulate customers with a callousness bordering on disdain? I wouldn’t put my money on it.