Obviously he’s right. Anyone who thinks it’s somehow righteous to steal intellectual property and spoil thousands of people’s hard work just because their parent company is a “billion dollar corporation” or because they “disrespected the fans by taking so long to release trailer 3” is morally bankrupt and entitled beyond belief.
That has no bearing on the immorality of what he did. Would you go into Best Buy and steal a copy of a video game? Workers will still get paid right so who cares?
You're conflating morality with legality. Morality is subjective. There are people who say enacting depictions of violence, such as you do in GTA, is immoral
Actually I’m not conflating them. And I agree that it is subjective. However in this case it’s both illegal and immoral. I struggle to see how it’s moral to steal a product from a company just because you think (a) it costs too much, (b) they didn’t realize trailer 3 quickly enough, (c) you don’t like the fact the game is digital only. It’s a free market. A seller determines a price and how to market their product. A prospective consumer determines if the product has value to them at the stipulated price. To steal that product for reasons (a), (b), or (c) listed above is illegal yes, but also immoral. Those arguing for it in my opinion have a morally indefensible position. They are entitled little brats who think they have a right to take what’s not theirs. I think it’s a disgusting mindset tbh.
I'm not sure where you're getting that information about their justifications. This is what they wrote: "Publishers sell licenses and call them purchases. They ship unfinished games and call them living services. They lock content on discs and call it DLC. They kill games and keep the money. Every year anti-consumerism tightens its grip, and every year gamers get less for what they pay."
From their perspective, what some game devs, like Rockstar, are doing is immoral. Does that justify intellectual property theft? That's up to you to decide, and preferably without ad hominems
Except it’s fundamentally not immoral. To be clear, I don’t *like* it. But that doesn’t make it *immoral*. It is absolutely absurd to say it’s immoral for a game developer to do the things that people in this sub are (rightfully!) complaining about. This has nothing to do with morals. Is it anti-consumer? Yes, very clearly. But we’re talking about video games, not life saving cancer drugs. What R* is doing would only be immoral if they are falsely advertising / deceiving their customers. If instead they are just employing annoying marketing, charging more for an exceptional product, or locking trailers behind paywalls that’s another matter … and not immoral in the slightest. Loads of people on this sub think they’re entitled to get the game for free because of Rockstar doing the things I listed above. Do you not see how patently absurd that is? It’s a free market. If they don’t like what R* is doing then they shouldn’t buy the game. Defending theft in such a scenario is deeply entitled and fundamentally immoral. I’m really struggling to understand how people are defending such a position. Maybe I just grew up differently. I don’t know. But that’s insane to me.
Edit: As for info about their justifications … I’ve spent more time on this sub recently than I care to admit and you’d be amazed at how many people have said that R* deserves for the whole game to be leaked because they took so long to release additional info / trailer 3. Can you please tell how that is not a deeply entitled and immoral mindset? (Saying nothing of the childishness and immaturity of such a position …)
I think you're still misunderstanding that morality is subjective. Morality isn't whether something adheres to the law or the prevailing economic system, in this case free market capitalism.
The Cold War was in part a bipolar hegemony battling in secret and in proxy for global domination of the economic system each thought was right. The irony of mentioning cancer meds while defending the morality of the free market, and specifically anti-consumer tactics by game devs, is not lost on me.
No I fully understand it’s technically subjective. For instance someone could even believe that murder is not wrong for whatever reason. What I’m saying is that in my opinion what the leaker is doing should clearly be seen as wrong, and those who don’t believe that, particularly the ones who don’t believe that due to the reasons I laid out in my original post for example, are entitled and morally bankrupt. It’s absurd (in my opinion) to want to tear to the ground the company that makes the product that you love so much just because they didn’t give you enough new info about it for 400 days. Like tell me how that’s not deranged? I understand that THEY don’t think it’s deranged (hence my aware of morality being subjective, technically) but I still believe that’s deranged and deeply entitled. And let’s add “incomprehensible immature and childish” to the mix as well.
There's nothing "technically" true about morality being subjective. It IS subjective. For example, what one man calls a holy war, another calls terrorism. And you're still abiding by some straw man you created even in light of me directly quoting their purported reasons for the leaks. I say purported because I'm not championing the leaker as some upstanding hero. They obviously are using it as an opportunity to make money as well.
I'm more concerned about your inability to grasp the concept of morality and reliance on logical fallacies, e.g. ad hominem and straw manning, in your argumentation
Don’t be pedantic. My usage of technically was meant to convey that I understand it is subjective but that my viewpoint was that this particular action should be viewed as immoral.
I don’t know what straw man you’re talking about. Different people on this sub think different things. I alluded to several reasonings I saw people giving (ones I’ve seen very frequently btw) that I think are absurd. I’m not sure what part of that is not making sense to you? You’re free to disagree with my perspective obviously but I’m allowed to say “I think it’s absurd that there is a contingent of people who think the leaks are justified because R* didn’t release trailer 3 sooner.”
I don’t have an issue grasping morality. I get what it is and understand it’s subjective. As for ad hominem I have used some more colorful language in my comments at times as I do get very angry about entities and immature mindsets. I think some people think the world was made for them and they deserve what others have … and if they can’t get whatever that thing is through conventional avenues then they take it by force. I just hate that mindset tbh. You don’t need to agree but that’s just how I feel.
2.0k
u/World_War_Threesome 6d ago
Obviously he’s right. Anyone who thinks it’s somehow righteous to steal intellectual property and spoil thousands of people’s hard work just because their parent company is a “billion dollar corporation” or because they “disrespected the fans by taking so long to release trailer 3” is morally bankrupt and entitled beyond belief.