They have the opportunity to right their wrong of bailing on the StopKillingGames campaign, but they’re likely more worried about appeasing the corpo publisher more than they are defending their supposed core mission.
Good to know but I’m not sure how that’s relevant to the principle originally being discussed.
The movement is about the legal right to keep what you paid for *period*. If you’re “fine” with publishers killing service games today, you’re just signaling to the industry that you’ll be fine with them adding mandatory online check-ins to your favorite single-player games tomorrow.
Apathy toward a principle usually ends with losing the privilege you thought was safe… Food for thought.
They have the opportunity to right their wrong of bailing on the StopKillingGames campaign, but they’re likely more worried about appeasing the corpo publisher more than they are defending their supposed core mission.
I don’t think they have even one game in their catalogue that StopKillingGames is about.
Not sure that was their point. It’s about the principal of it.
And in principle I’m fine with an online store that only sells conventional, offline singleplayer games to not give a pickle about service games.
Good to know but I’m not sure how that’s relevant to the principle originally being discussed.
The movement is about the legal right to keep what you paid for *period*. If you’re “fine” with publishers killing service games today, you’re just signaling to the industry that you’ll be fine with them adding mandatory online check-ins to your favorite single-player games tomorrow.
Apathy toward a principle usually ends with losing the privilege you thought was safe… Food for thought.
I really can’t bother.