Support NeoGAF

[Dr. Claus]

Then don't buy it. It is a simple as that. If there are enough of you that feel the same way who withheld their purchases, then surely the industry will have no choice but to take notice and change their business practices. Also, I don't think I have seen a single person here that said they don't care about always online "tell" you or anyone that you must enjoy it, opposed to pretty much all of the so-called anti-online people attempting to attack or bully those who don't agree with them.

Just some food for thought.

There is a difference between someone who doesn't care, which is perfectly OK, and someone who is *actively defending* it. Why would anyone *actively defend* the loss of consumer rights? Or the loss of rights in general? Its fucking retarded!

 

[Havoc2049]

Whether there is a real choice or a perceived one, they are still making an active choice against their own interests and his point stands.

Bah, it was just a little tongue in cheek sarcasm and the reality of what actually gets accomplished. No need to take it so serious.

 

[Danjin44]

There is a difference between someone who doesn't care, which is perfectly OK, and someone who is *actively defending* it. Why would anyone *actively defend* the loss of consumer rights? Or the loss of rights in general? Its fucking retarded!

I agree, if it has SP option then being online only doesn't benefit anyone because it will come the time when server will shut down and you no longer have access to SP mode, so basically your copy becomes as useful as used paper towel.

Again if its MP only or MMO then online only make sense but if your game has SP mode then there is no fucking reason the game should be online only.

 

[Tams]

1. If there's no need for it to be online, then I don't want it online. On principle, but also for security reasons - and no, that isn't paranoia.

2. Sometimes I do use devices without Internet connection for various reasons.

3. Also 2. Imagine you were, say, in Turkey. Perhaps you have electricity back but the Internet isn't going to be fixed for a long while. Playing a game would be nice, no?

 

[Humdinger]

I live in an older home that only has one working cable outlet. The working outlet is in my "office," which contains my desk and PC. When I want to plug my console in online, I string a cable from the router in the office to the living room. It's not a big deal -- I do it every month or so, just to check for updates and whatnot -- but I don't want to have a cord strung from my office to living room permanently. It's unattractive, and someone could trip over it. So, for this reason (and others), I don't like the idea of having to be plugged in online all the time.

Other reasons? I'm a single player gamer, and it annoys me to have to be online all the time. I've got no interest in multiplayer gaming, and I don't need a corporation checking on me or my gaming. Just leave me in peace to play my game.

 

[Superkewl]

There is a difference between someone who doesn't care, which is perfectly OK, and someone who is *actively defending* it. Why would anyone *actively defend* the loss of consumer rights? Or the loss of rights in general? Its fucking retarded!

I absolutely agree...and I don't see anyone here actually defending it. Just a bunch of people freaking out and a handful of people who say they don't give a shit.

EDIT: I quickly rescanned the thread just to make sure I am not talking out of my ass, but who here is actually defending it? I couldn't find anyone defending it. Maybe I missed the post, it is possible. The OP wasn't defending it. He/She said and I quote "This is absolutely not a big deal to me" AKA I don't give a shit. Maybe I missed it. Show me the person defending it and we will call them retard together.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Is that what I said, or have I explicitly said, I care, I want to know more.

Because some of us want to be able to own and replay a game we bought 5, 10, even 20 years later. Always online kills that. $70 is a lot of money for 1 game. This is an awful trend!

 

[Dr. Claus]

I absolutely agree...and I don't see anyone here actually defending it. Just a bunch of people freaking out and a handful of people who say they don't give a shit.

EDIT: I quickly rescanned the thread just to make sure I am not talking out of my ass, but who here is actually defending it? I couldn't find anyone defending it. Maybe I missed the post, it is possible. The OP wasn't defending it. He/She said and I quote "This is absolutely not a big deal to me" AKA I don't give a shit. Maybe I missed it. Show me the person defending it and we will call them retard together.

They clearly are defending it, mate. They dismiss any concerns people have, reassert it "isn't a big deal", in an effort to minimize the problems people have and then we have the title. The literal title is as blatant as you can get. Referring to people being against it as "antagonism"? This isn't hidden.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Always online is not necessary unless maybe it’s an MMO or multiplayer game. It’s just another way companies are trying to take our freedom, control, ownership and consumer rights away. I feel it should not be a requirement for a single player game. I actually think the way the Souls game handle offline and online is creative. The game will still function perfectly fine offline, but if you play online it can give you a few advantages and the world even feels a tad more alive.

 

[Superkewl]

They clearly are defending it, mate. They dismiss any concerns people have, reassert it "isn't a big deal", in an effort to minimize the problems people have and then we have the title. The literal title is as blatant as you can get. Referring to people being against it as "antagonism"? This isn't hidden.

The OP was merely inquiring, as there have been multiple threads recently of games that are coming out that require online, and people are frothing at the mouth over it. I took it for what it was...a query.

You seem too invested in fighting for the sake of fighting, so I am going to check out and go back to lurking. I hope you find inner peace.

 

[nkarafo]

Social standards change and something becomes unacceptable in the game? - now censored and you can't play it as was.
Subject matter of the game now deemed "problematic" or called to be banned by left of right wing nuts pushing their own ideology? - now the game is gone.
Game no longer profitable enough and requires "support" from the community in the form of MTX or subscription access? - you're now back behind a pay wall
Game no longer generating "enough" profit? - gone, servers shut down.
Game getting a new "remastered" version that the publisher wants you to pay for? - your copy is now gone. Servers closed due to not being "viable"
Publisher no longer in a good financial state or going bankrupt? - gone, your game's owner is no longer around to let you play it.
Publisher going bankrupt so another has bought the rights? - enjoy a new pay gate to access it or accept having to pay for it all over again on their branded service.
Get identified playing in a manner that is deemed "problematic" or not in the way the publisher deems "right"? - your access is now gone
Say something "socially unacceptable" on social media or outside of the game sphere that can be traced back to you - your game and access is now gone. Give it time. We're getting there.

Add another one in the list:

Did some license in the game you bought expired because the publisher didn't want to refresh (because of some actor or music label)? - Your game is now gone or (at best) modified to remove licensed content.

 

[Tams]

EDIT: I quickly rescanned the thread just to make sure I am not talking out of my ass, but who here is actually defending it? I couldn't find anyone defending it. Maybe I missed the post, it is possible. The OP wasn't defending it. He/She said and I quote "This is absolutely not a big deal to me" AKA I don't give a shit. Maybe I missed it. Show me the person defending it and we will call them retard together.

Because indifference is not a neutral stance.

 

[marquimvfs]

I don't want always online single player games because I play my SNES games to this day, and want to do the same with every game I could buy in the future. Simple as that. If there's any threat of a discontinued service affecting my ability to play the games I brought, I say fuck' em.

 

[nkarafo]

I'm guessing the latter. I refuse to believe there are genuinely people like OP in the gaming community who actively fight against their own interests and rights. I simply refuse.

Even using the word "antagonism" for this is baffling. It almost sounds like its framed in a negative context.

Maybe the OP is a stock holder of some major publisher. So he is fighting for his own interests after all.

I absolutely agree...and I don't see anyone here actually defending it. Just a bunch of people freaking out and a handful of people who say they don't give a shit.

EDIT: I quickly rescanned the thread just to make sure I am not talking out of my ass, but who here is actually defending it? I couldn't find anyone defending it. Maybe I missed the post, it is possible. The OP wasn't defending it. He/She said and I quote "This is absolutely not a big deal to me" AKA I don't give a shit. Maybe I missed it. Show me the person defending it and we will call them retard together.

The OP literally defended it by saying it reduces piracy.

 

[Dr. Claus]

The OP was merely inquiring, as there have been multiple threads recently of games that are coming out that require online, and people are frothing at the mouth over it. I took it for what it was...a query.

You seem too invested in fighting for the sake of fighting, so I am going to check out and go back to lurking. I hope you find inner peace.