Forums > MobyGames > To Greg Mueller and/or Gamefly Product Manager (3)
piltdown_man (243444) on 10/13/2013 3:15 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Tomorrow will be December 1st, that's about two months since you posted the following "The fact that we've lost the support of the approvers I can't consider anything less than a failure on my part though, and for that I'm sorry. I can only tell you that we are working on Moby and we do want to make it something you'll enjoy using and be proud of once again. We'll be getting some updates out soon and we'll be sure to post here to let you know if you're still around."
The broken Personal Message system is not a high priority issue. Many people are communicating via Facebook, IRC, other sites' forums or direct e-mail and the notifications from approvers seem to be working just fine. The only PM I want to send is to erav to thank him/her for continuing to approve stuff. (Thanks again erav)
The site's mission is to store details of games and game reviews, therefore problems which prevent this are the highest priority. For me the top three problems are:
1 - If anything interrupts the submission of a game then the submission cannot be resumed, it goes into a kind of limbo until the housekeeping processes delete it. Given that the site is now less stable and I have already lost data this is my number one problem.
2 - It is not possible to submit a game to the database if the developer / publisher / etc is not already known because the company submission screen crashes / fails / hangs when moving on to the second screen.
3 - It is no longer possible to enter game reviews. I can enter the text on the first screen but the system crashes / fails / hangs when moving on to the second screen.
Where do these bugs feature in your priority list and when can I expect to see them completed?
Rola (8482) on 10/13/2013 4:36 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
"This is your admin RyeGrinder speaking. As you know, GameFly is a huge corporation bigger than Google, outsourcing in China, where we carry Internets on floppies. So be patient, updating such website is no small matter, it will take approx. only half the time as refitting the aircraft carrier Liaoning... please refrain from any Duke Nukem Forever jokes.
Keep Calm and Carry On. Nothing to look here, move along.
Eat. Sleep. Contribute. Obey."
Rola (8482) on 10/13/2013 8:51 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Satire can be helpful, it can open people's eyes, make them understand how absurd the situation is.
I don't know how it works in Portugal but in Poland it helped us to survive the commie period while retaining sanity (at least some of it). Sadly, this fine art died on us.
Before you tell me to "calm down" next time, check my posts from the last weeks and try to find me swearing etc.
Apparently you've missed my not-helpful posts from the previous month where I was painstakingly listing bugs of the new design.
Nélio (1976) on 10/14/2013 4:55 AM · Permalink · Report
Rola,
I found your post hilarious. Yes, satire can be helpful and I'm a big fan of sarcasm. I just don't like all this negativity and I think I'm entitled to an opinion.
When I told you to calm down was because it seemed you took what I said rather personally, when it wasn't my intention. I was generalizing given what I saw in the forum. All of you have my utmost respect for what you've done for MobyGames through the years.
But you (and I don't mean just YOU specifically) should accept that some of us still have hope that things will get better. It's not that the site is actually dead - you can still browse and find a ton of information here. I'm still using it almost daily.
So yes, I have hope that in the course of the next few months things will improve, with bugs being gradually fixed. Of course there's a great chance that I'm dead wrong here, but I want to stay positive about this.
Indra was here (20750) on 10/14/2013 5:41 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Nélio wrote--]Of course there's a great chance that I'm dead wrong here, but I want to stay positive about this. [/Q --end Nélio wrote--]Apply as an approver. Your opinion will pretty much change pretty fast. :p
Just ask erav and Fred.
Giu's Brain (503) on 10/14/2013 2:41 PM · Permalink · Report
... and it's not as if it's the first time the MG community gets royally screwed.
András Gregorik (59) on 10/14/2013 2:20 PM · Permalink · Report
Staying positive or being negative is no longer the issue here, Nelio.
Check the Wikipedia article: the exodus of the cream of the crop is a historical fact now.
There's not much to hope for on MG when the community has moved on.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 12/1/2013 4:30 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Nélio wrote--]I found your post hilarious. Yes, satire can be helpful and I'm a big fan of sarcasm. I just don't like all this negativity and I think I'm entitled to an opinion. [/Q --end Nélio wrote--]
At this point I think it's safe to say that, regarding this situation, anything but negativity is just self-delusion. Personally it was a pretty big deal that even I ended up completely giving up on the site, because I thought I'd be the last to give up hope (and I almost am). I've stayed 100% optimistic through all the previous crises and exoduses (had to look up that plural; still looks weird).
The use the site still has, as you mention browsing the stuff that's already in the database, does not go beyond what an archived version of the site doesn't offer as well. The site simply disappearing tomorrow wouldn't be such a big deal to me anymore, because apart from the forums, almost anything that still works and can still be used, also works if you visit the latest snapshot at the Internet Archive instead. Not only have many people understandably given up trying to contribute. most of the contribution process is also broken. There is just no way for the site to grow and be updated anymore.
I don't understand how you can still hope for bugs being fixed, seeing as for two and a half months not a single one has been fixed, not even of the most pressing ones that break the site! There can be absolutely no doubt that not a single person is paid to do anything on the site anymore. Gamefly hired some inexperienced teenager to do a redesign so they could place bigger ads, but nobody has touched anything since.
I would gladly share your optimism for a resurrection of the site, but the sad truth is that it's completely out of their hands. If they handed over the database (screw the code) I wouldn't doubt for a minute that the community would come up with a better, resurrected site to continue the work. But nothing of the sorts can happen without GameFly making making it happen, and there's just no way that they're going to do it; they couldn't have made that more clear.
Edit: I haven't been on the forums for one-and-a-half months, which is why I thought your post was more recent than it was. A bit of optimism was (barely) understandable back then :)
Cavalary (11448) on 10/13/2013 11:07 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Nélio wrote--]That's really helpful, Rola. [/Q --end Nélio wrote--]
Actually, what's really "helpful" are things like the OP, proving to GameFly that they still have little slaves more than willing to put up with their shit and keep working regardless, and most likely take any breadcrumb which may be thrown their way at some point as a godsent.
piltdown_man (243444) on 10/14/2013 8:51 AM · Permalink · Report
I'm not on strike! :-P It's just that there are fundamental showstoppers that prevent me from submitting many of my games to this database. I'm submitting all my games elsewhere now but I'll still put some 'easy' games on moby for old times sake.
piltdown_man (243444) on 11/30/2013 10:15 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
When I started this post I still had hope that the site would be fixed. Now I'm not sure that I care any more.
It was good while it lasted. Thanks to Corn Popper and others for starting it and to everyone else who helped me over the years, especially the much maligned reviewers.
For what its worth I found the people over at videogamesgeek to be really friendly but the moby experience has kinda put me off the whole game database / review thing so I'm selling my games collection and am moving on.
Erm .... Things change, I'm back.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/1/2013 2:05 AM · Permalink · Report
NO WAY
This is the most criminal outcome of the whole fiasco yet! You and I briefly shared a beat of obscure games that couldn't be usefully discussed with anyone else here. Now I will once again be alone in them 8)
Karsa Orlong (151778) on 12/1/2013 2:26 AM · Permalink · Report
The most accurate and reliable Contributor is gone. Thus, the PC platform is dead as there is literally no one adding the new games left....
Thanks for all Your effort Graham. It's been a real pleasure working with You.
Karsa Orlong (151778) on 12/2/2013 11:06 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
GTramp Sciere was the one who convinced some people three years ago to not go away and who was fighting for this site ever since. As You can see the redesign destroyed all his efforts and somehow proved that he was wrong. He gave to this site a lot of months (literally) of his life and now it's all gone. No wonder, therefore, that he does not want to look here anymore. But honestly who would expect that GF will destroy this site and turn it into a retro graveyard. What's the point for GF to keep not up to date game site? In the interest of GF was taking care of the MG database development - to use it for its mother sale site. Retro site is no use for them at any point. Dead retro site is just a waste of money. Sciere actually never believed it will finish that way. But it ended and there is nothing he can do to change it. So why stay? MG will never recover under the wings of GF at any circumstances. As there are no works in progress this site is as good as dead already. Only the buyout would give some hopes, but this won't happen...
Look at my avatar - left head is Jim Leonard and the right one Brian Hirt. The only two persons responsible for MG death.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 12/2/2013 8:27 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Well yes, if an active MobyGames had any value at all to GameFly, they wouldn't have left it this broken for almost three months. They would have one developer at least fix the minimum of bugs in the contribution process, so that people who still wanted to work on the site could do so. But they haven't even done that little. Staying and waiting for anything to happen is truly pointless now.
Whatever trust in the site there was has been irreversibly destroyed, GF wouldn't be able to revive MG even if they rolled back to the old site tomorrow. The main people who kept the site alive are gone. It was a good lesson for all involved, I don't think anyone involved will ever contribute to a database again if the data isn't free. And that's the least likely thing GF would do. The site is their "asset" and liberating it would go against their instincts; they don't think far enough to realise that it would eventually be in their own best interest too. Long-term planning, customer relations, public image, or just common decency are not part of the vocabulary of insipid, corrupt manager types. (I'm not saying all managers are insipid and corrupt; but it certainly seems to fit those involved in this mess).
Havoc Crow (29906) on 12/3/2013 6:54 AM · Permalink · Report
And to think that, this very summer, I was eagerly contributing a batch of games to MG, and expected to be doing the same for the foreseeable future. I even had a list of games (more than 100) I was going to contribute when I would feel less lazy. Now all of this... like tears in the rain. Heck, even today I keep running into interesting games I'd love to contribute to the database, but I see little point in doing so anymore.
...Oh my gosh, what is going to happen to all the hopelessly obscure games? What other website can help us to keep them from being forgotten?
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/3/2013 8:39 PM · Permalink · Report
Maybe we should start a MobyRefugees group blog where we just submit game entries that would have been submitted here? Do you prefer blogger or wordpress?
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/3/2013 8:38 PM · Permalink · Report
I had my suspicions when the new owners were announced as a used game retailer. "What do they care about our primary focus on so-old-they're-unrentable-games?" Indeed.
Trixter (8954) on 12/5/2013 4:34 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Karsa Orlong wrote--] Look at my avatar - left head is Jim Leonard and the right one Brian Hirt. The only two persons responsible for MG death. [/Q --end Karsa Orlong wrote--]
Also responsible for MG life. I'm curious if people would have preferred MG never existed at all.
Edit: Actually, never mind, I don't want more harassing phone calls to my house.
Karsa Orlong (151778) on 12/5/2013 6:58 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Trixter wrote--] Actually, never mind[/Q --end Trixter wrote--]
Never mind, never give a f... That's an attitude.
I will be honest with You, in a mild form - You have no moral right to be here, to place any comments or to look for excuses. You sold Your child behind the back of the community for a sack of money. That's all what counts and that's how you're judged by others. There were other solutions, You have chosen the best for You. That's fine. Face it, be happy, but out of respect for the community, do not show up here anymore please.
Parf (7871) on 12/5/2013 10:05 PM · Permalink · Report
To be fair... MG was great when it was up and running and I had great fun here. But seriously, how anyone can defend what's currently going on with "start your own site then" is quite fascinating, regardless of which position this person has/had around here.
I don't blame anyone for selling this site as I'm sure as it grew it got more and more expensive to keep it on its feet. I do blame the new owners for royally mistreating what once was so great though. Kind of like buying Mona Lisa and leave it sitting on the porch in the rain... I'm sure it wasn't cheap to acquire, but no one will be able to enjoy it if it's ruined.
chirinea (47516) on 12/5/2013 10:33 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Parf wrote--]To be fair... MG was great when it was up and running and I had great fun here. But seriously, how anyone can defend what's currently going on with "start your own site then" is quite fascinating, regardless of which position this person has/had around here.
I don't blame anyone for selling this site as I'm sure as it grew it got more and more expensive to keep it on its feet. I do blame the new owners for royally mistreating what once was so great though. Kind of like buying Mona Lisa and leave it sitting on the porch in the rain... I'm sure it wasn't cheap to acquire, but no one will be able to enjoy it if it's ruined. [/Q --end Parf wrote--]Quoted for truth.
Trixter (8954) on 12/6/2013 3:34 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Parf wrote--]But seriously, how anyone can defend what's currently going on with "start your own site then" is quite fascinating, regardless of which position this person has/had around here. [/quote]
I was defending my decision to sell with that statement, not GameFly's handling of the situation (which I have been very disappointed by). My statement was meant to get people thinking about what is involved, how much time is necessary, and what money is needed to start a project like this. In today's world, starting something like mobygames is actually much easier than it was in 1998. We predated wikipedia (we almost predated wikis themselves) and had to write our own infrastructure from scratch. There were no cheap VPS or dedicated hosting plans. Bandwidth was terribly expensive. We paid for everything out of our own pockets and there were many months where advertising and sales referrals did not pay the bills and we had to come up with thousands of dollars of our own savings to keep the lights on. We built the servers, racked them, drove to the datacenter in the middle of the night to fix them when they went down. We spent our own money to go to classic gaming expo, GDC, and other shows for the simple cause of letting people know about the site. We spent our own money buying games from ebay, flea markets, local shops, just to ensure we had good images and information for key historically-relevant games.
If anyone were to start their own site today, it will be much, much easier than when we did it. But they will still have their own set of problems.
[quote]I do blame the new owners for royally mistreating what once was so great though [/Q]
I feel the same way.
It is difficult to receive personal attacks over this because there were many more details and reasons leading up to why the sale was made, but I don't want to divulge them all because I value my friendship with one of the guys and don't want to do anything that would hurt that, and also because I want to avoid the potential situation of one of the other guys suing me for libel. Maybe in several years I will write something up, but until then, I guess I have to be a punching bag for frustrated people.
MAT (241141) on 12/6/2013 4:57 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
I can't blame Brian or Jim for ruining the site. I mean, it was only natural that project of such magnitude cannot be maintained by two people on their own, unless they were multi-millionaires.
It just seems that, alas, they sent it to the wrong company. This is the second time I see something I loved since the day I found out about it being neglected and/or dismantled by the new buyer. First time was in 2003 when EA shut down Westwood Studios they bought in 1998.
I wish company like Google bought MobyGames. Someone who can afford it and can use it in one way or another. No doubt their gmail and other free services are much much bigger. The only hope for us would be for GameFly to sell it to someone who cares or can use it somehow, even if that means putting a gazillion banners and ads on it.
Can't in no way be angry at Brian or Jim, their only option when this site became too big to maintain was to shut it down or sold to someone who can afford further maintenance.
What I don't understand from GameFly is why don't they just rollback to the old design that seemed to have worked, instead of leaving this unusable version of the site.
No further progress, no rollback to the way it worked. What was the point of updating something to nothing and leave it that way?
I'll add few last words of wisdom which many of you will probably agree with... GAMEFLY SUCKS A$$!!! AND IF NOONE EVER BUYS A GAME FROM THEM AND COMPANY GOES BANKRUPT, IT WILL BE TOO SOON!!!
By the way, did you notice that all our emails are no longer obfuscated but very open to spamming... way to go turning mobygames into a nice site for getting people's emails for spamming.
Karsa Orlong (151778) on 12/6/2013 6:53 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
You don't catch it, do You? Nobody blames you for the present situation. The problem is that you sold MG behind the back the community, without consulting about the available options. You have chosen the best option for You and You left. You were right to do so, but at this point You no longer have any connection with this site because You sold your rights, labor and everything else. The way You conduct was bad, the choice of the buyer was bad and now we suffer the consequences. That's all.
And no, I won't start a new site, as this is no work for one-two persons team, but You should know that in a first place. I won't move to other non commercial site, cos all of them will finish same way - will be sold to commercial owner. It's obvious. There is no point to start over again each time something has changed. But the changes can be done with vision and lack of vision was the bigger problem here on MG for at least last 5 years. The project was exceeded, you decided to leave. Alright. But the chosen route turned out to be wrong. For all but two of yours.
Cavalary (11448) on 12/6/2013 2:31 PM · Permalink · Report
Nobody's blaming you for what you did to start the site, but for what you did to end it. Can't use the distant past to defend the recent one, much less the present. In the early ears, you were probably some sort of gaming heroes on-line, but then at least a couple of years before the sale things were obviously getting very rocky and you weren't finding solutions or properly involving the community in looking for one. And when you finally picked one, it was the right one only for you, but the wrongest one for the community. (For the site, depends, at least it assured that it'll still exist, but perhaps for the community and for the vision that MG stood for it might have been better to allow the site to poof after freeing the data, so someone could move it somewhere else and try to start over. Or even move it into another existing project.)
Daniel Saner (3503) on 12/7/2013 2:32 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Cavalary wrote--]perhaps for the community and for the vision that MG stood for it might have been better to allow the site to poof after freeing the data, so someone could move it somewhere else and try to start over.[/Q --end Cavalary wrote--]
I'm uncomfortable with the general hostility towards Jim that arises again; but this, I agree with 100%. Running a site is expensive and takes a lot of time, no doubt. I'm surprised they kept at it for that long, in retrospect, because few web projects do. But the data belonged to them, and just holding on to data costs nothing.
The time before the end, when the sale was considered, wasn't the web's early days anymore. Releasing the data would have meant making a ZIP file and uploading it to a free file host. The Internet Archive was around too, or various other organisations that would've actually given a shit about the amassed data. The dataset legally belonged to Jim and Brian (I assume), and morally to all the contributors. The "moral obligation" would've been to reach a decision that also considered what the contributors thought should happen with the data, and to at least ask their opinion. But we weren't even told. No one did as much as take 2 minutes of their time to come to the public forums and, post-NDA, tell us. "Hey guys, unfortunately after all these years we can no longer afford to run this site on our own, so we sold it to Gamefly as we think this will best ensure its future." See? I did it in 15 seconds. There's no way of looking at it in which Gamefly are the only ones who screwed the community over.
Игги Друге (46654) on 12/7/2013 12:28 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Trixter wrote--]I encourage you to start your own games metadata site. [/Q --end Trixter wrote--]
I encourage you to start your own games metadata site. You could call it TrixterGames and do whatever you want with it.
Because the day you are no longer the main contributor, it is no longer your own site.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/8/2013 6:36 AM · Permalink · Report
The antagonism to Jim is basically on the grounds that his poor choice of exit strategy from this expensive hobby experiment has resulted in not only the destruction of a unique and important resource but also a decade of our free time; the users feel that being so heavily-invested in the site (only with their lives, and some -- I'm looking at you, star-studded donators -- also with money) they should have had some input regarding What To Do With The Site. It's true, there were worse fates possible for the site and its hot gooey content, but it's also not hard to imagine better ones. It stings of cosmic injustice that the one responsible for signing away the site's fate wasn't someone active on the site to the bitter end, but just someone who happened to be part of a cadre who got the ball rolling a long time ago before ducking in again to basically tell everyone that the party's over and the lights were being turned out.
The thing that stings to me is that for years I've advocated for other gaming historians to abandon their independent efforts and to join the team one here -- but they never trusted that under outside custody their work would be safe from the ravages of time. I didn't want to believe that their scholarship had a better chance of persisting into the future on their own rather than as a team, but I have been corrected.
Perhaps the way to get GameFly to shine a light in our corner is to agitate on ShackNews, spamming every new post with comments asking why the owners think so little of their investment here as to not roll back their broken design after months of discontent. (Or maybe that is just a way to get ShackNews comments disabled?)
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/8/2013 6:39 AM · Permalink · Report
Or we could consolidate the facts and go to some game industry media; our situation was fodder for a great deal of forum gossip but Why Did GameFly Destroy This Unique Resource wasn't a story that ever ran on any gaming journalism sites I could see.
Foxhack (32098) on 12/8/2013 8:58 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Or we could consolidate the facts and go to some game industry media; our situation was fodder for a great deal of forum gossip but Why Did GameFly Destroy This Unique Resource wasn't a story that ever ran on any gaming journalism sites I could see. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] I tried to get the word out. I sent emails and tweets all over.
Nobody. Fucking. Cared. Why would they? It's not like this would make them any money.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 12/9/2013 3:55 AM · Permalink · Report
We need some quotes from Warren Spector and Jason Scott, maybe renowned Moby user J.Ro, then someone will pick up the story.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 12/10/2013 9:13 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Foxhack wrote--]Nobody. Fucking. Cared. Why would they? It's not like this would make them any money.[/Q --end Foxhack wrote--]
Yeah, you wouldn't see this happen like that for movies, or music, or books. Imagine the shitstorm in the effective communities if IMDb, Discogs, or Goodreads were to be broken or quasi-shut-down.
Hundreds of thousands of people rely on those pretty irreplacable resources for their collection management and shopping. For games, collecting is pretty much still only done by a few crazy nerds...
I don't know if video games are simply too young as a medium and still need to grow that kind of culture, but it's one of the main things that bothers me about this industry: nobody giving a shit about back catalogues, anything that's older than 1-2 years. You can still buy so much of all the recorded music, movies and books that have ever been produced, there are reissue labels, etc. publishers actually care about their history and back catalogue and try to keep stuff available in some form to people who are interested. Look at game publishers and they pretty much eradicate any indication that they had anything to do with a game that they brought out more than 3 years ago. If publishers care not one iota about their back catalogue, how can the public?
Parf (7871) on 12/10/2013 11:40 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start hooby wrote--] I mean, the way this is going to be successful for gamefly is to make their customers happy, right? [/Q --end hooby wrote--]
I'm quite certain that slim chance at gaining back some goodwill has swiftly left and been replaced with (I assume) a whole bunch of newly gained bad will instead for the company. I'm not a PC gamer, but let's just say there's one company who won't be seeing any of my (or if I can help it, friends... Well, anyone online really) money in any foreseeable future.
Nélio (1976) on 12/10/2013 11:48 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Daniel Saner wrote--] [Q2 --start Foxhack wrote--]Nobody. Fucking. Cared. Why would they? It's not like this would make them any money. [/Q2 --end Foxhack wrote--]
Yeah, you wouldn't see this happen like that for movies, or music, or books. Imagine the shitstorm in the effective communities if IMDb, Discogs, or Goodreads were to be broken or quasi-shut-down.
Hundreds of thousands of people rely on those pretty irreplacable resources for their collection management and shopping. For games, collecting is pretty much still only done by a few crazy nerds...
I don't know if video games are simply too young as a medium and still need to grow that kind of culture, but it's one of the main things that bothers me about this industry: nobody giving a shit about back catalogues, anything that's older than 1-2 years. You can still buy so much of all the recorded music, movies and books that have ever been produced, there are reissue labels, etc. publishers actually care about their history and back catalogue and try to keep stuff available in some form to people who are interested. Look at game publishers and they pretty much eradicate any indication that they had anything to do with a game that they brought out more than 3 years ago. If publishers care not one iota about their back catalogue, how can the public? [/Q --end Daniel Saner wrote--] This. Absolutely this. I've always wondered that and, through the years, I never understood why a website like MobyGames didn't have a million active users every day.
Rola (8482) on 12/11/2013 2:05 PM · Permalink · Report
I'd say it's because this medium is the most technical - and as such it ages at the fastest rate. IT people care only about the latest stuff - computer history in general (not just games) is poorly documented because of this. Think of computer hardware with little-to-no reference on the net!
With the rampant piracy in PC world, which enables you to acquire a game effortlessly, can you expect true collectors, who spend hard cash on rare items? My impression is that mainstream collecting (read: I'm not talking about a tight group of hobbyists hoarding 30-year-old computer hardware) is only true for console gamers. Coincidence?
Fred VT (25949) on 12/11/2013 2:39 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]I'd say it's because this medium is the most technical - and as such it ages at the fastest rate. IT people care only about the latest stuff - computer history in general (not just games) is poorly documented because of this. Think of computer hardware with little-to-no reference on the net!
With the rampant piracy in PC world, which enables you to acquire a game effortlessly, can you expect true collectors, who spend hard cash on rare items? My impression is that mainstream collecting (read: I'm not talking about a tight group of hobbyists hoarding 30-year-old computer hardware) is only true for console gamers. Coincidence? [/Q --end Rola wrote--]
Might be, it is true in my case: I am a game collector and a console gamer. PC covers an array of games so vast and with such a huge difference in hardware and software that it is not as appealing to me. Also DLCs and Digital-only releases are a nightmare for me XD
MAT (241141) on 12/12/2013 8:45 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start The Last Approver has deserted wrote--] Might be, it is true in my case: I am a game collector and a console gamer. PC covers an array of games so vast and with such a huge difference in hardware and software that it is not as appealing to me. Also DLCs and Digital-only releases are a nightmare for me XD [/Q --end The Last Approver has deserted wrote--]
I second all this. I was primarily computer gamer in the days of ZX, Amstrad, Amiga and PC DOS/Win95, but back then in my country there were no original games to buy and I probably didn't care much anyway. Only started caring about it when I could buy an original game, mostly thanks to the rise of Internet, so my collection started to get biger and bigger since cca 1995. But ever since I first entered the world of consoles around 2003, it was PS2 then Xbox then GC and later what not, the PC installation, hardware troubles, and lately all those online crap like Ubisoft and whatnot was more than worth tackling with, which is why I focused on consoles and handhelds. And yeah, DLCs suck a$$, never figured out why people would pay for something they can't even backup or play afterwards (afterwards = when service or a platform becomes obsolete). GoG.com is the only digital distributor that presents no problem since you don't need to be online to play once you buy and/or download the game.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 12/11/2013 3:31 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]With the rampant piracy in PC world, which enables you to acquire a game effortlessly, can you expect true collectors, who spend hard cash on rare items? My impression is that mainstream collecting (read: I'm not talking about a tight group of hobbyists hoarding 30-year-old computer hardware) is only true for console gamers. Coincidence?[/Q --end Rola wrote--]
Let me digress :)
Understandable considering console games are pretty neatly arranged into generations. At one point there stop being new official releases, and there is a complete set that you can take as a basis for collecting. On the PC it is just one magnificent mess of continuous development and evolution (which is good!) But if the used-games crackdown for consoles does come at one point, it will become much worse than for the PC, mainly because pirating is more difficult. Think of piracy what you will, but it over the last 30 years it has proven to be the most important force in preventing 99% of vintage software from being lost forever. There is simply no way to preserve software and not break the law. If I recall correctly, the first commercial Apple II software will start entering the public domain over 100 years from now. Thank you, Walt Disney.
Still, piracy is just a cheap product. Compare vintage films that have entered public domain. You can download these legally everywhere, stream them on YouTube, etc. but it's still no comparison to what you can get commercially in terms of packaging, bonus features, added information and extras, maybe new transfers -- everyone can sell it, but publishers are trying to outdo each other in what they offer. That's why I think copyright has been degraded into legalising monopolies for lazy-fuck companies. You own the exlusive distribution rights, so why even bother doing something nice with it? Slap your trashy transfer on a DVD and go.
14 years of copy protection was plenty, for any media. And probably still way too long for software. But lawmakers are neither flexible nor intelligent for this, and most importantly, way too spineless. Some lobbyists ask for a law, threatening layoffs and tax loss. US politicians comply and implement the law against the people's wishes. And the rest of the world obediently harmonise their own legislation with it.
Well, it still doesn't explain why it is so much worse for games, because every other media industry is subject to the same laws. But think of what would be if people weren't brazen enough to pirate like they do, and show disproportionate legislation the finger; it would be so much more bleak than it is even today.