it is exactly the same. GAAS games. as i mentioned above they are games that require always online connection. the game developer can turn the server off and stop the game at any point.
it literally says in the TOS you own nothing, you have access to the game. so it is exactly that of a subscription.
I never once said we should be able to sell this one. Its obviously in the tos for years now. I stated nft/ blockchain games are the future of gaming. I also pointed out in inaccuracies in your comment because subscription services and owning in game assets are 2 completely different things and require different technologies.
you never replied to anything i said before at all. you therefore never pointed out any innacuracies in anything i said.
also you are missing the point that this game is a GAME AS A SERVICE. we are paying for access to the service. not for owning anything. exactly the same as a subscription to a streaming service as opposed to buying DVDs
We are spending money and time for an account that we can't sell to anyone else because if we do it the account could be permanently banned, what means that isn't our account. Legally we can't even give it to another person... Maybe the money that we spend is kabam's money. That is ridiculous and this is why I say that our account doesn't have any value because the value from any inversion falls through what another person can pay for this one.
Except for the part about being ridiculous, this is 100% true.
1. You are not allowed to sell accounts. 2. Sold accounts could be banned if detected. 3. Your game account is something you register for, but do not own or have any ownership stake in (see: TOS Section 10). 4. You technically cannot give that account to another player either, as it is not yours to give. You're required to not share account credentials with anyone else for any purpose, including gifting the account to another person. 5. Yes, the money you spend is Kabam's money. That's the definition of spending in this context. You give your money to another party, and in return you get something for it. In this case, an enhanced game experience.
Don't like that my account doesn't have any value after spending 7 years and a lot of money
Other accounts you don't own that you also can't legally re-sell or pass down:
Netflix MAX Peacock Disney+ Hulu Paramount+ Apple tv+ Amazon Prime Nintendo Online PS Plus premium EA online XBox game pass ultimate Spotify premium SiriusXM
and those are all the accounts i currently pay for, of which several annual renewals are just there for when my kids feel like playing.
Luckily I can easily easily afford all this wonderful, digital stuff.
Everything you listed there is a subscription not an actual account like in a game. Not even close to the same
This is a weird distinction. Those things are not "subscriptions." They are subscription services. The fact that most of those have a monthly fee is not relevant. Try saying it out loud.
Those services cost money, so their accounts have no value. MCOC doesn't cost money, so its accounts should have value.
Don't like that my account doesn't have any value after spending 7 years and a lot of money
Other accounts you don't own that you also can't legally re-sell or pass down:
Netflix MAX Peacock Disney+ Hulu Paramount+ Apple tv+ Amazon Prime Nintendo Online PS Plus premium EA online XBox game pass ultimate Spotify premium SiriusXM
and those are all the accounts i currently pay for, of which several annual renewals are just there for when my kids feel like playing.
Luckily I can easily easily afford all this wonderful, digital stuff.
Must be nice 😫
I forgot youtube premium. That's my kids most important sub. Smh.
We are spending money and time for an account that we can't sell to anyone else because if we do it the account could be permanently banned, what means that isn't our account. Legally we can't even give it to another person... Maybe the money that we spend is kabam's money. That is ridiculous and this is why I say that our account doesn't have any value because the value from any inversion falls through what another person can pay for this one.
This is why nft and blockchain games are the future. (When they finally start having funner games out). I play a few now that earn you crypto but they are more classic nes/sega style and kinda repetitive. Although not really different from mindlessly grinding arena. Owing your in game assets and being able to sell them is a game changer in the gaming world. The current big game companies don’t like it because the players make $ not them but real gamers understand that if you are skilled and have free time there is $ to be made instead of games constantly taking players for every penny they can.
And yet the "big game companies" are, or at least were, trying to get in on NFT/blockchain technologies.
I was skeptical about blockchain commoditization of games as a service even when it seemed like the hottest thing around. The idea that blockchain economies external to the internal game economies is good for players in general is very naïve. You only have to consider the way "bind to account" works in games with actual player economies. When players can earn a resource that has resale value, the devs have to value that item accordingly. That means if they suspect such an item will have very high value in the open market they will have to value it as such for the purposes of game balance. When resale value is much higher than utility value, resources cannot be balanced around their utility value. Which means from a player perspective, anything they need that can be bought will almost have to be bought, because the game will not give them an easy path to those resources. If it is worth buying, it will also take forever to earn.
Bind on drop-style mechanics and features are specifically used in games with player run economies specifically to allow for utility-based valuation. In other words, the game can make it easy for players to earn them in-game, because the developers don't have to worry about players farming a ton of them and them selling or trading them away. Once they earn those things, they can't give them away or trade them, so the game can balance the effort to acquire them strictly on a utility value basis.
The idea that if only players were allowed to buy and sell everything without developer restrictions everything would be great for players presumes that games are designed by developers who have forgotten humans play those games. In a game where assets can be bought and sold on open markets, supply will get constrained to account for this behavior. In-game farming would become much harder. F2P players will find themselves surrounded by a much more hostile game environment. Because you can't just change one thing, especially something as huge as "players can buy and sell their stuff" and not expect the rest of the game to reshape itself around that change.
Although it isn't universal, I did see a lot of this attitude in the crypto-gaming space. The notion that games are these virtual "places" that should be owned by no one, a kind of commons where game companies can make money but players can also make money, as equal stake holders. Personally, I think this is as much of a obviously broken utopia dream as the F2P players who play F2P games and wish the game companies didn't sell so much stuff because it puts them at a disadvantage, not realizing that it is only because they sell all that stuff to people willing to buy it that they are allowed to play the game for free. That playing games like this for free is not some universal right, it is paid for by other players.
Listen kids, if you think this is a hard copy of a game like, let's say, my Nintendo duck hunt cartridge that i can list on ebay and sell, this ain't it. Pretend it's Nintendo Double Dragon II that you're playing via Nintendo Switch online thru your subscription account. You try selling that.
We are spending money and time for an account that we can't sell to anyone else because if we do it the account could be permanently banned, what means that isn't our account. Legally we can't even give it to another person... Maybe the money that we spend is kabam's money. That is ridiculous and this is why I say that our account doesn't have any value because the value from any inversion falls through what another person can pay for this one.
Except for the part about being ridiculous, this is 100% true.
1. You are not allowed to sell accounts. 2. Sold accounts could be banned if detected. 3. Your game account is something you register for, but do not own or have any ownership stake in (see: TOS Section 10). 4. You technically cannot give that account to another player either, as it is not yours to give. You're required to not share account credentials with anyone else for any purpose, including gifting the account to another person. 5. Yes, the money you spend is Kabam's money. That's the definition of spending in this context. You give your money to another party, and in return you get something for it. In this case, an enhanced game experience.
We are spending money and time for an account that we can't sell to anyone else because if we do it the account could be permanently banned, what means that isn't our account. Legally we can't even give it to another person... Maybe the money that we spend is kabam's money. That is ridiculous and this is why I say that our account doesn't have any value because the value from any inversion falls through what another person can pay for this one.
This is why nft and blockchain games are the future. (When they finally start having funner games out). I play a few now that earn you crypto but they are more classic nes/sega style and kinda repetitive. Although not really different from mindlessly grinding arena. Owing your in game assets and being able to sell them is a game changer in the gaming world. The current big game companies don’t like it because the players make $ not them but real gamers understand that if you are skilled and have free time there is $ to be made instead of games constantly taking players for every penny they can.
Just go on fb & see how mcoc groups there do sell & buy accounts! Many ppl already doing that. Personally for me, this is a game. & ppl spending or not spending their money on a game's imaginary champions is totally dependent on the choices they made.
You agreed to the TOS when you started playing. Ignorance is not a valid answer. It was there. You didn’t read it. Responsibility begins and ends there.
Comments
it is exactly the same.
GAAS games. as i mentioned above
they are games that require always online connection.
the game developer can turn the server off and stop the game at any point.
it literally says in the TOS you own nothing, you have access to the game.
so it is exactly that of a subscription.
I never once said we should be able to sell this one. Its obviously in the tos for years now. I stated nft/ blockchain games are the future of gaming. I also pointed out in inaccuracies in your comment because subscription services and owning in game assets are 2 completely different things and require different technologies.
you never replied to anything i said before at all.
you therefore never pointed out any innacuracies in anything i said.
also you are missing the point that this game is a GAME AS A SERVICE.
we are paying for access to the service.
not for owning anything.
exactly the same as a subscription to a streaming service as opposed to buying DVDs
1. You are not allowed to sell accounts.
2. Sold accounts could be banned if detected.
3. Your game account is something you register for, but do not own or have any ownership stake in (see: TOS Section 10).
4. You technically cannot give that account to another player either, as it is not yours to give. You're required to not share account credentials with anyone else for any purpose, including gifting the account to another person.
5. Yes, the money you spend is Kabam's money. That's the definition of spending in this context. You give your money to another party, and in return you get something for it. In this case, an enhanced game experience.
Those services cost money, so their accounts have no value. MCOC doesn't cost money, so its accounts should have value.
Exactly.
I was skeptical about blockchain commoditization of games as a service even when it seemed like the hottest thing around. The idea that blockchain economies external to the internal game economies is good for players in general is very naïve. You only have to consider the way "bind to account" works in games with actual player economies. When players can earn a resource that has resale value, the devs have to value that item accordingly. That means if they suspect such an item will have very high value in the open market they will have to value it as such for the purposes of game balance. When resale value is much higher than utility value, resources cannot be balanced around their utility value. Which means from a player perspective, anything they need that can be bought will almost have to be bought, because the game will not give them an easy path to those resources. If it is worth buying, it will also take forever to earn.
Bind on drop-style mechanics and features are specifically used in games with player run economies specifically to allow for utility-based valuation. In other words, the game can make it easy for players to earn them in-game, because the developers don't have to worry about players farming a ton of them and them selling or trading them away. Once they earn those things, they can't give them away or trade them, so the game can balance the effort to acquire them strictly on a utility value basis.
The idea that if only players were allowed to buy and sell everything without developer restrictions everything would be great for players presumes that games are designed by developers who have forgotten humans play those games. In a game where assets can be bought and sold on open markets, supply will get constrained to account for this behavior. In-game farming would become much harder. F2P players will find themselves surrounded by a much more hostile game environment. Because you can't just change one thing, especially something as huge as "players can buy and sell their stuff" and not expect the rest of the game to reshape itself around that change.
Although it isn't universal, I did see a lot of this attitude in the crypto-gaming space. The notion that games are these virtual "places" that should be owned by no one, a kind of commons where game companies can make money but players can also make money, as equal stake holders. Personally, I think this is as much of a obviously broken utopia dream as the F2P players who play F2P games and wish the game companies didn't sell so much stuff because it puts them at a disadvantage, not realizing that it is only because they sell all that stuff to people willing to buy it that they are allowed to play the game for free. That playing games like this for free is not some universal right, it is paid for by other players.
Again, sell this spider man game?
Sure
Sell this spider man?
Naw
Personally for me, this is a game. & ppl spending or not spending their money on a game's imaginary champions is totally dependent on the choices they made.
Revelation #2: You invested (apparently) thousands of dollars into something without reading some pretty basic TOS.
Revelation #3: You already sold it and presumably are reaping the consequences.
This is most definitely a good plan. Do this.