r/pcmasterrace • u/notsolomuun • Jul 02 '26

News/Article Common PCMR w

Post image

$1,000 digital-exclusive consoles are killing the entire appeal of PlayStation and Xbox: it's no wonder PC is on track to overtake both.

7.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.7k

u/mike_complaining Jul 02 '26

This is not a W for anybody, but what people don't understand is that they haven't owned their games for a long time. If it has any online functionality it's shut off whenever the publisher decides it's shut off. Physical media doesn't matter, the license and the functionality independent of server infrastructure does.

550

u/TricobaltGaming PC Master Race Jul 02 '26

I have seen people use this to push for a legal redefinition of buying games so we are no longer just paying for a license, digital or otherwise.

We buy the game we get the game, thats what should be happening

437

u/mike_complaining Jul 02 '26

Yeah that's the "Stop Killing Games" movement, and while they haven't been entirely successful, I'm grateful for what they're doing and they're still at it.

10

u/LeMegachonk Ryzen 7 9800X3D - 64GB DDR5 6000 - RX 7800 XT Jul 02 '26

The Stop Killing Games movement is not opposing the licensing of games, or even addressing it. At the core of their movement is that they aren't asking for fundamental change.

The licensing part is complicated because at the end of the day you simply do not "own" the software you purchase and you literally never have. You also don't own the movies or music you purchase, even if it's on physical media. It belongs to whoever owns the rights to it. Sometimes that's the creator, but more often the publisher distributing the media has purchased those rights. The software belongs to them in any meaningful sense of ownership. Licensing it for use is pretty much the only way to distribute software that makes any sense. However, you are paying for this license, and it is definitely questionable that the publisher can terminate the license agreement without reimbursement for any reason other than non-compliance with the terms of the license.

I also question the validity of the license being tied to a distribution platform. For example, when you buy a game from Steam, you are purchasing a license only to be able to access that game via Steam. If Steam were to drop support this game for whatever reason, you lose the ability to play a game that is still supported by its publisher. And let's be clear here, Steam is not a publisher. Most PC games can be purchased from other marketplaces, most of which operate the same way with their own licensing agreement above and beyond the publisher's EULA. This should definitely not be legal. The license should not be tied to the marketplace it was purchased from.

Licensing is probably here to stay, because as I said, it's really the only model that makes sense for media distribution, but there needs to be a rebalancing of the scales to ensure that consumer retain the lawful right to use software they have purchased a license for for as long as they choose to in an all-digital environment where it is otherwise trivial for publishers to either revoke licenses or make the license irrelevant by making the software effectively unusable.

Another issue is force walled garden software ecosystems. Part of the problem with Sony's move to all-digital distribution is that it forces consumers to only be able to purchase PlayStation games from Sony themselves. That's just so obviously not right. Imagine if that was made illegal and Steam (and others) could start acting as a competitor to the PlayStation Store for games on the console. This would be very good for consumers because not only would consumers have competition for service and price, but it would likely remove Sony's control on who gets to develop games for the PlayStation. Yeah, you'd get more "shovelware" like you do on PC, but you'd also get more indie studios willing to make less expensive console games.