May be true but the core of the problem with buying games online is that you can pay for the game, the platform holder can just remove the game from the storefront at any tile, and essentially remove any access to the game you had previously purchased under the pretense that it is yours to keep, since you've paid for it, without citing any reasons or giving warnings. When we buy something, we usually assume, since that's the way it is with physical goods, that you're keeping what your buying.

I feel like this transparent language is a good step in the right direction

[–] moonburster@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Currently I have multiple games in stream which have no store page and I still am able to install them just fine. And they even run on Linux guys proton

[–] v4ld1z@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm not sure how Steam works exactly, but can't you redownload games once you've added them to your library regardless of any store pages?

[–] moonburster@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Yes that's exactly my point. The comment I was responding to was saying stuff gets deleted on steam, which is true. But that you can still play them/they are still in my library

[–] Starbuncle@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I think that a step in the actual right direction would be forcing platforms to give people actual ownership of what they pay for. If they have a licensing issue and want to pull the game, they can stop new sales, but they shouldn't be allowed to make it unavailable to people who've already paid unless the entire company is going under and the store is shutting down (and even then, they should be forced to provide non-DRM downloads).

[–] repungnant_canary@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Yep, the step forward would be to regulate licensing in a consumer-friendly way. Not going back to buying every song or album separately.

[–] v4ld1z@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

No doubt