sign me up...

"MINE: When not in use, enlist your PC and Radeon graphics card to earn IRON, credit for free games on Robot Cache"

Sounds like a scam, where they use your system to mine for Bitcoin etc, and reward you with "iron".

Caring1"MINE: When not in use, enlist your PC and Radeon graphics card to earn IRON, credit for free games on Robot Cache"

Sounds like a scam, where they use your system to mine for Bitcoin etc, and reward you with "iron".

I have problems with the thought that Amd would be involved in a scam business, I think it sounds quite interesting.

Caring1"MINE: When not in use, enlist your PC and Radeon graphics card to earn IRON, credit for free games on Robot Cache"

Sounds like a scam, where they use your system to mine for Bitcoin etc, and reward you with "iron".

To be fair, isn't that what Folding@Home does? Same principle I mean.

Also, you don't HAVE to utilize your PC/GPU to mine anything if you don't want to. It's not like AMD is taking control over your PC/GPU when it's not "in use".

I'm actually rather curious about this new platform. I tend to keep my games (never quite understood the whole "hit it n' quit it" approach to game purchasing that's become commonplace) unless of course it happens to be utter shit. Still, looks like an interesting concept.

Caring1"MINE: When not in use, enlist your PC and Radeon graphics card to earn IRON, credit for free games on Robot Cache"

Sounds like a scam, where they use your system to mine for Bitcoin etc, and reward you with "iron".

I mean you are getting paid in video games you can buy with said "Iron", so why is that a scam anyways?

If it's open source like most cryptocurrencies, it should be easy to tell anyhow.

All of these video game re-sell schemes are utter nonsense. Games are a digital medium, they don't lose value when "used". It's just legitimised piracy.

So the games I can buy there are used or not?
The interface is a mess with the huge tiles.

AoyagiAll of these video game re-sell schemes are utter nonsense. Games are a digital medium, they don't lose value when "used". It's just legitimised piracy.

Educate yourself on laws before touching the keyboard, you will look less stupid.

OctopussEducate yourself on laws before touching the keyboard, you will look less stupid.

Which part of of the word "legitimised" do you not understand?

AoyagiAll of these video game re-sell schemes are utter nonsense. Games are a digital medium, they don't lose value when "used". It's just legitimised piracy.

So transfering a game license is piracy now?

Aoyagilegitimised

The part where you combined it with piracy.

R-T-BSo transfering a game license is piracy now?

You enjoy someone's completely unspoiled product without them receiving a single penny for it. This makes it equal or worse than actual piracy. Certainly from the developer's/publisher's point of view.

R-T-BThe part where you combined it with piracy.

Right. That doesn't make any sense, but all right, I'll try to explain it even for people who refuse to understand:

Games don't spoil. They don't get worn. The experience doesn't change by them being "used". There is no objective reason why someone would buy a "used" slightly discounted game over a new one when they just want to enjoy the game.
As explained above, there are strong parallels between re-sale of games, especially with that of digital games, and especially new-ish games. And most definitely for singleplayer games. So yes, I will call it "piracy", just like I will call a machine with a cabin, four wheel, steering, and a motor, etc. a "car" even if it's not road legal.
As for "legitimised", I'm really baffled that someone can somehow misconstrue that simple expression. Legitimised quite literally means that something was made legitimate. And legitimate in turn means, again quite literally, that something is conforming to the law, i.e. that it's legal. How can the other poster insinuate that I accused someone or implied that someone of committing crimes is, well, baffling.

Oh, by the way, games reselling was and still is a strong driver of the "live services" shite some game firms came up with. So thank you, people who take part in it, really appreciate it.

Does anyone understand what is the person talking about? Because I don't, at all.

AoyagiYou enjoy someone's completely unspoiled product without them receiving a single penny for it.

Licenses are to a person. The dev was paid when the license was initially created and issued to said person. Beyond that, if the EULA is written to allow license transfers, why should we care? We already got our dues on that outstanding license and if the previous party who sold changes their mind and wants to play again, they will now need a new license.

If a dev really hates this, rewrite their EULA to disallow it. It is pretty simple to do so.

I might mention I have dabbled in game development and even sold some of my own licensed software, so it's not like I'm just talking as a consumer.

OctopussDoes anyone understand what is the person talking about? Because I don't, at all.

The whole part about licenses not "wearing out" strikes me as trivial and irrelevant, but otherwise, yes.

R-T-BLicenses are to a person. The dev was paid when the license was initially created and issued to said person. Beyond that, if the EULA is written to allow license transfers, why should we care? We already got our dues on that outstanding license and if the previous party who sold changes their mind and wants to play again, they will now need a new license.

That's the legal part of it though, not the principle.

R-T-BIf a dev really hates this, rewrite their EULA to disallow it. It is pretty simple to do so.

That's not possible because of consumer rights. Although obviously some publishers do try to circumvent this in any way (and Steam is pretty successful in this, although they keep being challenged).

As for wearing out, that's a key principle of buying used goods - they're worn, so there's a disadvantage of buying them over brand new ones. If that's out of the equation, there is no disadvantage in buying "used" games and in theory, only one customer needs to buy a game and then a everyone in town can play and finish it before selling it to the next one. Each will get the full experience, but the developer will see no money from it (unless they employ "live services" or similar rubbish)... instead getting some money if everyone waits a bit and buys the game it later at a discount. Or had a few beers less that month. But no, everyone must have everything NOW. It's bloody ridiculous, that.

AoyagiThat's the legal part of it though, not the principle.



That's not possible because of consumer rights. Although obviously some publishers do try to circumvent this in any way (and Steam is pretty successful in this, although they keep being challenged).

As for wearing out, that's a key principle of buying used goods - they're worn, so there's a disadvantage of buying them over brand new ones. If that's out of the equation, there is no disadvantage in buying "used" games and in theory, only one customer needs to buy a game and then a everyone in town can play and finish it before selling it to the next one. Each will get the full experience, but the developer will see no money from it (unless they employ "live services" or similar rubbish)... instead getting some money if everyone waits a bit and buys the game it later at a discount. Or had a few beers less that month. But no, everyone must have everything NOW. It's bloody ridiculous, that.

Except in the Case of Robot Cache, they Use BLOCKCHAIN to store ownership and transfer of it thereof, and each time it is resold on the market there is a share for the Dev of the game.

on the contrary, it is far better for developer than your usual second hand game shop that don't give a dime to the devs.

You are just making assumption on their business model without really having a clue how their software/marketplace works.

The "Iron" they give is also two fold, you can redeem/pay/buy second hand (sold by other ppl) games with it, or you can sold your account and be paid in cash for it.

BatailleuseExcept in the Case of Robot Cache, they Use BLOCKCHAIN to store ownership and transfer of it thereof, and each time it is resold on the market there is a share for the Dev of the game.

on the contrary, it is far better for developer than your usual second hand game shop that don't give a dime to the devs.

You are just making assumption on their business model without really having a clue how their software/marketplace works.

The "Iron" they give is also two fold, you can redeem/pay/buy second hand (sold by other ppl) games with it, or you can sold your account and be paid in cash for it.

There was a system like this a few years ago and I distinctly remember it not picking up because it's neither as extraordinarily profitable as GameStop's system, nor very favourable for the customer's purse. Maybe it was this even Robot Cache thing, I don't know. There is no worthwhile business case in "used" games unless it actively hurts the developer/publisher.

And no, i didn't extensively research them, they have an abysmal website with little to no information on it. But thanks, I dug into the forums only to find out they work with the fallacious premise that "digital distribution is broken". But at least the publisher gets the majority of the resell price - 70% specifically, so that's at least one major positive about the whole thing. The mere 5% for the store for both new and "used" sales sound too good to be true in long term though. Then again, looks like the main gimmick here is that you can buy stuff with mining.

AoyagiThere was a system like this a few years ago and I distinctly remember it not picking up because it's neither as extraordinarily profitable as GameStop's system, nor very favourable for the customer's purse. Maybe it was this even Robot Cache thing, I don't know. There is no worthwhile business case in "used" games unless it actively hurts the developer/publisher.

And no, i didn't extensively research them, they have an abysmal website with little to no information on it. But thanks, I dug into the forums only to find out they work with the fallacious premise that "digital distribution is broken". But at least the publisher gets the majority of the resell price - 70% specifically, so that's at least one major positive about the whole thing. The mere 5% for the store for both new and "used" sales sound too good to be true in long term though. Then again, it looks like the main gimmick here is that you can buy stuff with mining.

well that's because they get I think its 15?% of what everyone mines. so regardless of what people buy/sell they get a small commission but I'm pretty sure a good chunk of the money is made with the pool commission/Exchange rates they use.

Batailleusewell that's because they get I think its 15?% of what everyone mines. so regardless of what people buy/sell they get a small commission but I'm pretty sure a good chunk of the money is made with the pool commission/Exchange rates they use.

As per their partner webpage, they get 5%