I’d love that link too if that’s alright. Last time I tried to read Konsi in order, I kept getting sidetracked and reading all your other comics. Not saying that’s a bad thing, but it’s not what I set out to do.
I’d love that link too if that’s alright. Last time I tried to read Konsi in order, I kept getting sidetracked and reading all your other comics. Not saying that’s a bad thing, but it’s not what I set out to do.
To be fair, half of the AAA gaming industry is all about trying to clone the latest successful game with a new coat of paint. Maybe using AI to make these clones will mean that the talented people behind the scenes are free to explore other ideas instead.
Of course in reality, it just means that the largest publishers will lay off a whole lot of people and keep churning out these uninspired games in the name of corporate profits, but it’s nice to dream sometimes.
Just wait until some oil baron says that sloth-dug tunnels is the way to “deal” with climate change.
The real conspiracy is that there’s only one recognised holiday per year for most species on the planet, except for humans that get several per month. Seems to me that humans are trying to keep other species from having enough free-time to plot the revolution.
At least with Metallica, we could laugh at the irony of a band regularly releasing songs about anarchy crying about piracy.
Maybe orcs have always been “soft”, but it’s taken a cultural shift to get to a point where they’re allowed to be themselves.
That’s an oversimplification. All works are derivative to some extent. There’s a huge difference between taking inspiration from something, to taking the characters and setting from something. Particularly if you’re intending to make a profit.
If an author makes something that a large number of people enjoy, why shouldn’t they be able to make money off it for the rest of their life? Why exactly should an individual give up the rights to their creation simply so that someone else can use their characters and their worlds?
To be clear, I’m talking solely on an individual level. I think the system we have where a corporation can own an idea is very broken. I’m also talking about this from a perspective of the world we currently live in. In an ideal world where money wasn’t the endgame for survival, ideas would flow more freely and nobody would need to care. But that’s not the world we live in.
I think an argument could be made to set it to the date of death of the author. I agree with the other guy that it should only apply to commercial works though.
I also don’t think that the copyright should be transferable. The trading of ideas is an absurd concept to me. But then us humans do a lot of absurd things so I guess it’s just par for the course.
But Microsoft is doing exactly the same thing, only instead of paying for exclusivity of one title, they’re buying developers so not just their next title, but all future releases will be exclusive, up until MS decides they’re not worth it and dumps them.
Sony absolutely participates in anti-consumer practices, but let’s not pretend that MS is any better.
Just make sure your family has a way to access your account. I very much doubt that Valve or most publishers will care that your kids have access to decades-old games after you’re gone. Although I could see Ubisoft trying to take action out of spite, but that’s only if they’re still around by then, they’re on pretty shakey ground at the moment.
Better option if this is an important issue for you is to only buy DRM-free. You’ll have to wait for most AAA games, but most AAA games these days are increasingly not worth it anyway.