Quoting: liamdawe

1. I critisized Liam for the way he unfairly chided average people for not buying games at full price (when we should since we want to support linux gaming) with the following arguments, roughly:

To make it clear, I am in no way demanding people always pay 100% full price as you are suggesting I am @buenaventura. I've not said that anywhere actually. I've repeatedly talked about waiting for sales rather clearly.

I am suggesting, because that's what all of this is, suggestions, not demands, that people use legitimate websites and not dubious resellers.

Sorry, I did clarify earlier that you said also games on sale. Anyhow, it does not matter - I think that moralizing over how people spend their money is irrelevant, as said - or if you have to, consider the other side of the issue (ie rich people paying (for them) pocket change) equally. But preferably, give us information about how we can purchase games in the best way for the linux developers (as you did).

My talk about moral issues was mostly in response to your comments about people feeling "entitled" etc., which is (to me) repugnant. They are entitled to culture (UDHR), and if they cannot get it 100% legitimately, that is not an entirely personal problem of the buyer, but a problem for example of the structure of pricing systems, state support for artists etc. It is (somewhat, a little) like blaming abuse victims because they are annoying the person abusing them.

Edit: and by posting your article, you help people purchase things legitimately, no matter who they are. But you also uneccesarily and unfairly make them (potentially) feel bad.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TuxeeYou're putting quite some effort to justify your illegal copies. I've heard these same arguments for decades (I suppose some time in the 80ies of the last century I might have used them for myself), but for the last 25 years I've bought all my games - and yes, I wasn't "filthy rich" then, as I am not now.
You can surely point out why "not being able to afford computer games" is the pinnacle of discrimination, and why "not being able to afford a spacious apartment" or "only high quality organic food" or "a decent family car" or "a second car since they neighbor has one, too" are not.<SNIP>
WTF? We are talking about "paying for computer games" and you bring in the "declaration of human rights". You are either completely dense or one badass troll.

I do not have to justify my purchases, no - and no, we were not talking about "paying for computer games".

1. I critisized Liam for the way he unfairly chided average people for not buying games at full price (when we should since we want to support linux gaming) with the following arguments, roughly:
* One should not moralize, it is if nothing else an ineffective way of supporting linux gaming
* If one needs to moralize, one should be fair (ie. why not also chide rich people for not supporting linux gaming as much as they should considering their income)
* Thinking that people should be able to pay what they can afford for culture is not communism, it is common practice (humble bundle, patreon, libraries, state funds for authors, free education etc.) and it is morally defensible (IMO) for example by relating to the UDHR [External Link] like:

Quoting: UDHREveryone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration,
without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."(art.2) + "Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled
to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in
accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic,
social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development
of his personality." (art. 22) and "Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits." (art 27)

I bring it in since most people can relate to it, it is a sound basis of argument.

The point is, I guess, that it is pointless to chide rich people for not paying more (since they do sometimes already (humble bundle), and since why should one? It will not help, and it is not relevant). Conversely, it is equally (if not more) pointless to chide poor people from not paying premium. What is however useful, is of course to inform people how they should purchase games for maximum benefit to the (linux) game developers.

Edit: It is also difficult (IMO) to morally defend Liam's sentence about this, eg. see UDHR.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GrimfistAnd a final final note to all people who defend shady deals because you are poor, turn your situation around and start making your own games.

I am! (Trying). I am currently enrolled in this (free) course: https://www.coursera.org/learn/game-design/ [External Link] , since I've often started game projects but stopped half way. It is very fun and friendly, and possible to do without committing much real time (I continually think about games anyway, this way it is semi productive).

I do know some programming and I have many ideas, so yeah! I also recommend the Godot game engine [External Link] as a nice free way to start, it is quite easy to learn and intuitive in its design (check tutorial [External Link]).

I also express my creativity in music, published under CC0 licenses at my soundcloud [External Link] (warning, you will hate it), using free sounds found at freesound.org [External Link] , produced with lmms [External Link], with all album/song pictures gotten from pixabay [External Link]. Under linux obv.

All these tools and stuff, for free? Isn't that a communist utopia? No, it's just the way it is, DEAL WITH IT ;) YOUR LOCAL LIBRARY IS COMING TO GET YOU!

Quoting: ColomboHey, buenaventura, you accuse other of trolling, but you didn't do anything else. You are telling everyone that "people should have right to" but you didn't even stopped for a while and told us why should people have right to products of work of other people.

No, and why should I? I have referred to the universal declaration of human rights, which I suspect many subscribe to (in principle at least). You are clearly trying to steer this into something it is not.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: lvlarkWell then, I'll touch both. Both sides follow human nature in always wanting more and not wanting to give away what they have (maybe some will find these things easier than others, within either side). Both sides should try to learn to be satisfied easier.

Sure, that is one way of thinking of "human nature". That stuff is very academic and very complex so probably we should not dwell there.

Quoting: lvlarkAnd as to the equalisation debate you're hinting at (which is a far broader political discussion): Most civilised countries have that to some extent. When it comes to digital media, as I've alluded to, there's plenty of free things out there. So it's not a matter of making sure average/poor people have enough digital media to have some entertainment need covered, because there's already ways to cover that. Expanding and providing easier access to those free options is something that could be worked on.

I am hinting at a debate, but I do not really want to engage in it here (as you say, it is pretty pointless eh?). The specific issue of Liams article (which I liked, except for the moralizing part), is however possible to debate here.

I thought of another analogy/connection: Patreon. That is a system for people to be able to support for example Liam and get some (semi-nominal) benefits; as soon as I get rich, I will surely contribute there, more than 10 dollars even! However, we would not want him to require say 10 dollars to view GoL at all, would we? Similarly, one can discuss games and game pricing systems. Now I must eat.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ColomboRight. Communists. Why should rich people have games? Lets take games from everyone! They everyone will be equal!

That is not helpful, just trolly. If my sentiments are communist, then I guess libraries and humble bundles alike should be considered communist. In any case, we are still talking concretely about a rather specific issue, and should not be trolled into scream-fest ideological battles.

Edit: (I do love the edit button): And the issue is, in the interest of
1. fairness (fair access to culture, spec. games)
2. supporting gaming on linux
is it relevant/fair to chide poor people for not paying full premium for (linux) games, while ignoring rich peoples lackluster contribution?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: lvlark

Quoting: buenaventurathe issue of rich people not paying more is not included at all (when that issue is probably (in raw cash) a lot bigger).

That is an issue I'm not touching with a ten foot pole. At least, not on any internet forum, not even GOL's.

Well then I guess you shouldn't touch the inverse either :P

Edit: that is, why is it OK to rant about average people not paying full (or sale) price for a game, but not to rant about rich people not paying a lot more than full price? Especially when the latter problem is, as said, in cash terms likely a lot bigger.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: buenaventuraI'm not the one who started the debate about philosophy/morality, was I?

I honestly think we should stop that part of the discussion here. We won't solve this problem. :)

No I agree, we wont of course :P The central critizism of the article I have, (as I edited in after realizing that my comment was vague), is the focus on poor people paying to little for games, while the issue of rich people not paying more is not included at all (when that issue is probably (in raw cash) a lot bigger).

Edit: actually the Humble Bundle is pretty good at illustrating this - there, rich people ARE able to pay extra (alot actually) to support developers. Such systems could be expanded.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: lvlarkAs Liam said, it's a matter of having the people that develop those 'common goods' get paid. They aren't paid out of common funds, are they?

No, and that is too bad. Although, some are (there are for example, in my country, state and regional/local funds for supporting small game developers, musicians, authors, poets etc.). And libraries, they are generally funded (at least here) by common funds. It is not a very big stretch to imagine such systems enlarged and empowered.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweOffensive to pay private entities? How are developers supposed to survive exactly? Pay them in exposure, a handshake? Be realistic. This is the world we live on, money driven, let's not get carried away with star trek visions of a no money future.

I'm not the one who started the debate about philosophy/morality, was I? When talking about morality or ideas, blaming your bias on "that's just how it is today" is limiting. Sure, a developer will not (in fact) get any money immediately if I buy from g2a, that is just a fact.

However, whether it is RIGHT to buy something from g2a (and thus whether you can critisize someone morally for doing so) depends on your idea of fairness or justice or morality, not on how it is today. You started the moralizing, I'm just moralizing back.

Edit: what I am trying to say is, essentially, it is unjust to blame poor people for buying cheap games/pirating, when at least as much blame (if not alot more) should be put on rich people not paying extra.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: kingofrodeoI just wanted to say this:
I own about 300 games for Linux on Steam and about 50 more on GOG. I only buy and play games on my Linux machine (the only pne I own other than am Android tablet). Currently I can afford to buy games... hell I even buy games I know I won't play.
I used to pirate when I was young and poor, and that's why nowadays I like to support many developers even though I have little time to play. I don't feel ashamed really. What was I supposed to do? All my friends were playing with the cool stuff, so should I be looking at my room's white walls just for the sake of it?
Sure, if you can afford but pirate or buy stolen keys then you're a prick.

Rather than pirating games or staring at white walls, there are so many other things people can do. This is again entitlement issues. So your friends were playing games, which must mean you should too right? That's childrens false logic.

Well, why should certain kids have a wider choice than others? Surely the best way to distribute cultural goods is by asking people what they want - it is a matter of taste, after all. Their choice should not be limited by income, gender, nationality, religion etc. If there are physical limitations (like not enough people fitting in an concert) that is something to think about, however with digital copies of games, there should be no problem.

View this comment - View article - View full comments