ESSAY: Why it's not just about the games

[Meg]

Whaaaaaat? Really? Companies releasing DLC for purchase or taking artistic license with their own materials is the equivalent to the oppression of women or taxation without representation?? I could not possibly disagree more with you on this!

It's not the equivalent. It's not even in the same boat, but the point I was trying to make is that the state of the games industry is a symptom of a larger issue.

You don't need to buy DLC. You know that, right? Hell, you don't need to buy video games in the first place, especially not from developers you don't like or who you believe overcharge for a basic product. Further, I seriously doubt video game companies are offering DLC because men have lost their integrity and there's a recession, or whatever. They're doing it because Xbox, PS3 and PCs have the capacity to download and store information. Meaning a game can hit the shelves and six months later the company can offer new levels or a different ending without re-releasing the game. You can always watch for free on Youtube if it's that important.

Wow really? I had no idea I had the choice to not buy DLC. That explains why I never do. Oh sure, with the Internet companies can release new content after a game has been out for a while to add more playtime. That's all fine and good, but withholding content that could be on the disc (or in some cases is locked on the disc) just so you can charge more for it is wrong.

Larger society is going through a lot of BS. The worldwide economy is in the crapper, young people are feeling increasingly screwed over by older generations and government forces, there are no jobs for anyone without a master's and even then they pay hardly covers the student loan bill, drugs are still illegal, etc... None of that has anything to do with game companies releasing DLC or rebooting their popular game series.

I'm sorry for not realizing that over arching problems can't seep into other parts of life.

I find it rather ironic you chose

Atlas Shrugged as your call to arms. John Galt would likely side with the game companies in this debate - after all, they produced something with their resources, and you're upset because it wasn't to your liking or because they realized they could profit off some extras rather than offering said extras for free. That's pretty entitled of you.

I didn't choose Atlas Shrugged as my "call to arms." I simply referenced the image of Atlas not being able to bare the weight of the world anymore and so letting it go. I was using a metaphor to explain where I was going with my essay. Nothing more.

 

[V's patron]

@meg- who is that chick besides ayn rand.?
I dont see dlcs as a problem as you couldjust not buy them and there are some interesting applications for it.
You could give out demos as downloadable dlcs.

 

[Virago]

It's not the equivalent. It's not even in the same boat, but the point I was trying to make is that the state of the games industry is a symptom of a larger issue.

That's not the way it came across, not at all. This is exactly what you wrote:

"The developers [...] are the higher power. Gamers [...] are the lower power. Throughout history there is a cycle of “the higher power” slowing but surely abusing the lower power which causes tension. At first many on the lower end won’t think it’s that bad and the higher power tightens its grip. Eventually more and more people of the lower power get angry enough at their situation and rebel. For example, the American Revolution was started because the colonies were being taxed heavily. [...] Let’s look at another example. The first wave of American feminism was centered around women gaining the right to vote. Women had been silenced for years, with Freud’s theories dominating psychology. Eventually women (alongside some men) had enough and fought for their right. They eventually won and things were looking good for American women. [...]"

If you're *not* trying to draw some equivalence here, you didn't communicate it very well.

Wow really? I had no idea I had the choice to not buy DLC. That explains why I never do. Oh sure, with the Internet companies can release new content after a game has been out for a while to add more playtime. That's all fine and good, but withholding content that could be on the disc (or in some cases is locked on the disc) just so you can charge more for it is wrong.

Ok, then don't buy it. Maybe we're just not playing the same games because I've never played a game where I needed to pay additional money to access information already on the disc. If that's what you're talking about, I agree it's not right. But it's also not "downloadable content" - it's DRM running amok.

I'm sorry for not realizing that over arching problems can't seep into other parts of life.

Oh gosh. Really? I would argue that game companies are offering DLC and reboots in spite of the crappy economy rather than because of it. After all, a game like DmC or several hours of new content are business risks a company is hoping will pan out.

I didn't choose Atlas Shrugged as my "call to arms." I simply referenced the image of Atlas not being able to bare the weight of the world anymore and so letting it go. I was using a metaphor to explain where I was going with my essay. Nothing more.

Great. What were you trying to say then? That gamers hold the world on their shoulders?

Once again, Galt felt he and people like him were Atlas. They have the thankless job of holding the world together while being scorned for their efforts. Galt and Atlas, again, would likely have more sympathy for the game companies that take the business risks and create things, rather than gamers who (seem to) expect handouts.

 

[CoolDemon]

After all, a game like DmC or several hours of new content are business risks a company is hoping will pan out.

DmC is not a risk. It's a "reboot" of DMC. A risk is making a new IP.

 

[Meg]

Great. What were you trying to say then? That gamers hold the world on their shoulders?

Once again, Galt felt he and people like him were Atlas. They have the thankless job of holding the world together while being scorned for their efforts. Galt and Atlas, again, would likely have more sympathy for the game companies that take the business risks and create things, rather than gamers who (seem to) expect handouts.

You are looking way to deeply into this. I liked that passage in the book. I thought the image of Atlas shrugging to hold up the world was powerful. That's what I used it. I wasn't trying to draw parallels between Atlas and Galt and gamers.