I’m glad it’s highlighted on Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown in particular, because that was the first game I’d bought from Ubisoft in years, and the extra launcher deterred me from considering buying any of their other games for a long while still. EA still has launchers on older games like It Takes Two and A Way Out and Dragon Age II and Inquisition that create obstacles for LInux compatibility and offline play, but newer titles like Split Fiction and The Veilguard no longer have the extra launcher problem. It’s good to see Ubisoft following this trend, and hopefully they can stop standing in the way of their own success.
I find he’s dramatizing the dichotomy, but I always found this arranged argument lacking.
Imagine you have a budding farmhand, a hard-working local, in mind when you go to the local farmers’ market to “support local farms”. But that’s wrong, isn’t it? Because the farm owner pays that hand a static salary. Their exact success or revenue off one extra bag of apples isn’t going into that hand’s pocket.
But it’s also related; that farmhand has better job stability, more chance of a bonus, less pressure to advertise well, if the farm is making a comfortable salary.
Now, the one part I’ll admit is this logic doesn’t work as well in corporate atmospheres; where CEOs fire as many people as possible, reward no one for good performance, and would rather fudge numbers than sell a good product.
But I’d also wager a lot of commenters shortcutting their logic to “company bad, pirate games” aren’t always taking a critical investigative eye to how companies treat their people. After all, “I get free game” is a strong motivator to believe a certain way.
The videogame industry specifically is a bit unique I think I’m that most of the time the majority of the artists just get laid off after a large project gets released so there really isn’t any job stability, chance of bonuses, loyalty, etc.
I would never pirate an Indy game but Ubisoft, EA, rockstar, fuck em.
So you agree with the person you’re replying to, and the two paragraphs before this one are irrelevant to what’s being talked about?
Are you prepared to assert and prove that every single company over a certain revenue is exactly the same?
I’ve come into conversations with preconceived “large company slop” feelings towards a large brand, only for a person there to remark “My brother works for that company. He says they get great benefits, and are generally treated very well.”
Sometimes the bullshit is only on the consumer side, in which case it only makes sense to avoid them because you’re getting a bad product. If you insist the product is bad, and that you’re stealing the bad product that you somehow want, in order to support the mistreated employees, who are actually being treated okay, then maybe it turns out there’s not much logic behind the protest action of pirating?
I’ve seen pirates use the same generic excuse for midsize indie publishers that have no such reason to be hated - so it’s disappointing to see people don’t actually think those things through.
So in this conversation about a specific company, and how this specific company behaves, and someone commenting on pirating from this specific company, why am I being expected to extend that to every compy?
I’m not making a specific defense to Ubisoft, but I do get ticked by the generalized claim “The artist already got paid”, which is what I started to reply to. In many cases, it’s a disingenuous and misleading way to excuse piracy.