Comment on GOG Has Had To Hire Private Investigators To Track Down IP Rights Holders
slimerancher@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Paczynski says they once hired a private investigator to find someone living off the grid in the UK. He had unknowingly inherited the rights to several games, but was super supportive of “preserving his family’s legacy” when GOG tracked him down.
So, it happened once. And they hired one private investigator. Not that it isn’t interesting, but why exaggerate everything?
Remaining quotes from article:
“To be perfectly honest, it’s harder than we thought it would be,” Paczynski explained. “What we’ve found out is that games and how they work has deteriorated way faster than what we thought. And we are not talking only about the game not launching. We are talking about more subtle things as well, like the game not supporting modern controllers, or the game not supporting ultra-widescreen or modern resolutions, or even a simple thing like not being able to minimise the game, which is an essential feature today.”
Pacyznski says digital rights management (DRM) features are especially frustrating to circumvent, which means they’re working as designed. Heck, some rather famous games are unplayable without third-party patches because of DRM — any old Xbox-to-PC that’s saddled with a “Games for Windows Live” log-in comes to mind.
Pacyznski suggests that triple-A developers remove DRM from games after a few years to make life easier for future game preservationists. Of course, this will never happen because executives don’t care about preserving games.
_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
that’s not exaggerating anything. it’s merely saying it has happened at least once before.
slimerancher@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Okay, so grammatically, in perfect tense we can use plural to mention a thing that has happened at least (or exactly) once? Wouldn’t using a plural imply multiple, when the known fact is singular?
olafurp@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
It’s a fair point but it’s not as egregious as most other headlines. I personally give this one a pass since clickbaits are meta in the article space. It shows that GOG has this in their toolbox.
_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
Is implying plurality exaggerating things to begin with in this context? The headline is pretty vague, it doesn’t overtly exaggerate anything. It makes a pretty simple statement without embellishing anything.
But if we’re going to get into the weeds, we don’t know how many private investigators work at whatever agency they hired, or how many were involved in tracking this person down.
MotoAsh@piefed.social 16 hours ago
Yes. Yes implying plurality for a singular thing is, by definition, exaggerating.
slimerancher@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It did feel like exaggeration to me, but it could be my bias. May feel differently about it later.
You are right about the fact that it could be an agency. Maybe I was just being pedantic 😀
ripcord@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Yes
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
“investigators” is plural tho so that is indeed wrong
slazer2au@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Not really. It could be they hired several for this one case.
If a person is off the grid in Yorkshire, you wouldn’t get someone from London to go up to do something.
slimerancher@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Well, the quote specifically says “a private investigator”.
logicbomb@lemmy.world 1 day ago
That is simply a generic way of referring to the concept of private investigators, as I’ve also just done in this sentence.