Austin LukeDigital games are on the rise, and it is predicted that by 2028 their number will exceed the number of physical copies. Convenience associated with purchases and libraries in digital format makes them attractive for millions of representatives of the gaming industry, but this form of media consumption is not deprived of shortcomings.
Since content is regulated and distributed by the platform, the question of ownership of such games has become a subject of disputes for many. The recent incident again caused these disputes after EA banned the account of one of the users for abnormitative vocabulary.
Whether other game platforms prohibit speaking "STFU" In online chat? Or is it just EA so sensitive?
In a message published by Theevan3d on Reddit, the user claims to receive a permanent ban from EA. As the reason for the ban, he indicated that EA did not like the message written in Apex Legends.
I wonder that this is not the first ban for this user. In the past, EA has already temporarily banned him for such messages that violate the company’s conduct of the company during game sessions.
According to the user, as a result of the last ban, he lost access to the EA application, which does not allow him to play in single -user games. Thus, past purchases made by the user are inaccessible.
On Reddit and other platforms, many were surprised by this story.
Their opinion that digital games never guarantee property rights have strengthened, while others are outraged that such a large publisher forbade the player access to bought games for trifle reason.
In the modern era, online games are popular than ever, which encourages publishers to invest in a more stringent moderation of these sessions. In addition to EA, publishers such as Activision are very serious about the toxicity problem during the network game.
However, in this case, the punishment turned out to be too serious and led to serious consequences for the player Apex Legends.
Well, banning the network part is okay, but disconnect from single games, completely awesome
So solitary games lie on "Network" account? Right. Alas.
banned any part of the fucking. for the sake of these banks and censorship, the entire social unit is demolished to horseradish.
Well, here in different ways you can belong to the ban of the network part, as for me there is enough disconnecting the voice and text chat, but there are just a girl of girls, apparently, which is very offended when some kind of unknown noun from the game in a text chat promises to reduce them Mommy somewhere, to be honest, such things cause nothing more than a smile, and sometimes pride, if I am angry, then I played well, in the same War Thunder, just a kaef when they start to write to you with a three-story obscenity, yes, yes, yes And at one time, he spent a lot of time in srachs in the BF3 text chat, it was a separate "gameplay" And it amused me, therefore I personally think that Max. Punishment for this, turn off the chat and that’s all, but apparently there are deeply vulnerable people who apparently live in the world of pink ponies and do not want someone to get into it with mats, so they whine dofig and demand the most severe punishment, well, well, well, They banned the network part, but to block access to all the games in general, it is a dumpness and just as for me a violation of consumer rights or buyer, it is worth paying attention to these things from the law, the store writes in your rules when you buy the product, You should give you access to him anyway.
Not in any case. If you buy a game in a number, then you actually buy only a license for the right to use. Lose access to the account, lose this license.
And how and why it is possible to lose access to the site indicated in the EULA site, and not a specific game.
Only the exception of the GOGs, where you buy a copy there, and you can even make a physical copy.
Damn, well, forbid access to chat. In extreme cases, he is a specific line to the game.
In the voice chat of the apex, sometimes such inadequate come across that the ears are already withering. This does not happen particularly, but still happens. I just block them and all.
It’s you about the French?
Yes, I agree, I have been playing without voice for a long time .The toxics were sick.
If the account is quite expensive with many games, then it makes sense to sue them, because it was actually illegally deprived of property.
Chat communication is public activity and participation in society.
And games, especially single games, is a product, ownership of which goes from the seller to the buyer. But in the agreements on online games, an interpretation is often found that they transfer not ownership, but the right to use the results of their work. In many games with the online mode, over the last year there have been updates to user agreements. I stumbled upon this in F1 22 last year. And in a year I met a similar update in several more games. And this is such nonsense..
After all, buying a book you do not buy the right to read the book, but buy the finished product of intellectual activity, which the publisher printed and transferred to you for personal use. You can write on each page of the book what you want, you can transfer the book or even burn it, throw it away, etc.D. You can fully exercise the right to use your property that you bought.
In games (especially with the support of the multiplayer), for some reason, the ownership is not transferred to the fullest (well, is it nonsense?). It turns out for violation of the norms of behavior for which quite legitimate methods of punishment are prescribed, publishers arbitrarily use blocking, in fact depriving the purchased products. For me this is a robbery. For rudeness or insult there is a legal punishment. And the punishment in this case must be appointed by the court.
They seem to be so sensitive in matters of racism, gender delirium and self -expression, but so stupid that they cannot establish the process of determining violations and a legal system of punishment. Instead, complete chaos is allowed.
The punishment for the insult should not be confiscated ownership of the product completely. I believe that there should be a punishment for violation of public behavior norms from society (in games for this they just throw it in MUT). Or in extreme cases there is a banner of multiplayer, but not a complete restriction. You can also introduce fines.
Cooked – you sit without a multiplayer for a certain period or pay a fine.