So, interesting thought. For all of us who play Japanese Video Games, think of the possibilities of possible ports or localizations for certain games that are limited by licensing issues.
There are a ton of games that are only grounded in Japan which I would love to have US ports of or at least localizations.
This was your first mistake.
Weabboo detected.
Why would someone invest capital in a video game port that they can’t own?
Likely, there would be a huge number of games made and approved by various companies and, like classic novels, money would be made by those who actually manufacture and distribute the best copies of these. People would not need to try in particular to invest a lot of capital to port games, since there are plenty of nerds out there willing to cross-platform program if they have open source, legal mod-ability and the ability to sell and distribute their products.
And if there were less Jap-RPGs in the world, I don’t think I’d mind.
But who will invest the money to produce games?
Whoever expects it to be profitable to do so, or who wants to do so for other reasons. Far more video games are produced for free than for money, and many of them are better in my opinion.
There is no possibility of comparing what is more or less marginally useful outside of monetary calculation on a free market. So, if something like video games turns out to be less profitable and therefore less produced - so what? It’s likely that, on a free market, there would be less Pepsi brand soda. So what?
This is the classical communist argument, that we can’t even imagine how a communist society would work.
Stranger,
Let me get this straight, unless I misinterpreted Htut this is what she said: Video games on the free market end up being less profitable and therefore are produced less, and so all the individuals, ie. consumers, in the free market don’t buy these games leading to less profit and so investments go to less production in video games into other areas that are more profitable - and - that’s called ‘classic communism’?
No, this is the argument that intellectual property should be abolished because it would make consumers worse off.
The communist argument is that we can’t know how the free market will work without private property.
Well I know I hate it when the publisher fires the original creators of a series and hires new people who then make a mockery of the franchise. No IP and you wouldn’t have dross like Fallout 3 and Operation Flashpoint 2 desecrating a glorious name.
I also think there wouldn’t be as great divide between people writing a game and modders. They would sort of merge into one.
Fallout 3 was a great game and a model of what capitalist industry can achieve in digital entertainment.
Hateful communism is not an argument against IP.
I loved Fallout 3.
Fallout 3 is a crappy lowest common denominator game, an Oblivion clone with guns. It is a dumbed down RPG with pathetic writing. As such, as representative of this kind of “genre” it is a decent one. But it is not Fallout. Fallout stands for something else.
I disagree with your assessment.
Who made that argument? No to whom?
ok, maybe I misinterpreted Htut and that’s what she was referring to: this “communist argument”; yet I didn’t see anything in Htut’s post referring to a proposal of ridding private property.
The classical communist argument includes centralized planning and no property rights. To say that there is a plan and that there isn’t a plan at the same time would be contradictory. No capitalist here is claiming that there will be some plan to follow.
If one could tell you exactly what the world would exactly be like without IP, would be the same kind of person that tells you exactly what the future holds. There is an element of uncertainty in our actions and plans and in the actions and plans of others. So unless you can read the minds of all people who will be affected by the removal of IP laws, it can’t really be said how everything would go.
I’d wager that more resources and efforts would be directed towards the production and improvement of physical goods, and that people who were previously employed in areas that were made profitable by IP would be finding other work that is also profitable.
So who would benefit from making intellectual property consumers worse off because of the sudden collapse of intellectual property production for other lines of production?
Companies that are in other lines of production like open-source support companies.
Who would not benefit from the abolition of IP?
Consumers of intellectual property.
Case closed.
Bwahahahahahaaa!!!
That’s good! Ideas are “consumed” and thus new ones need to be created to satisfy demand or we’ll run out? You, sir, should be a comedian.
Anyway if IP were abolished tomorrow I seriously doubt the “weeaboos” would care, considering it’s nearly impossible to enjoy foreign media while respecting copyright at the same time anyway.
He’s not talking about ideas. With that said, all we know is that he is not talking about ideas.
And Stranger, you never gave me a definition of Capitalism.