Yea.... He goes on about how you dont own the game on steam because valve can... patch it so that it doesnt work.
But then says well lets play a game on gamepass. I mean I guess that DOES solve the "patch it so that the game no longer works" problem. Just dont own anything.
The point is that when using a subscription service to access a game, like Microsoft's gamepass, you explicitly know that what you're paying for is temporary access to a game. Where as when you buy a game on many of these store fronts it doesn't seem like like you are only buying temporary access, but it is in fact what you are getting just with possibly a slightly longer timeframe.
I mean... Maybe? He's talking about games that no longer work on windows 98. But how many games are on microsoft's gamepass that are from 25-30 years ago? Does Microsoft support old games like that?
Or is this an apples and oranges situation where microsoft doesn't "break trust" because they dont even offer you the ability to play the game.
Also I would love a example of a game that no longer works at all.
Yes, it's the latter. I know I'm getting temporary access to some games, whereas with Steam it looks like I'm getting permanent access when I'm really not.
Tbf, it’s a totally valid argument. It’s a bit like going to a library that costs monthly fee rather than buying books that get auto-disabled arbitrarily in the future (hmm Bezos?).
It’s false advertising when you ”buy” things with modern DRM, no? Maybe he’s tired of the hypocrisy.