Developers can and almost always do close to offer their games on multiple platforms and can even choose self hosted direct distribution of they do choose. Customers can choose to purchase their games on steam, itch, epic, Microsoft, or any of the many places they’re often hosted simultaneously. Steam is more often than not the choice people choose to use of their own free will because they perceive it as being the superior service.

Why do you believe excellence should be punished?

If someone says they’re not interested in dating Republicans, it doesn’t mean they are any better than the average person at picking one out from a crowd.

Stream created and maintains a platform that gamers and developers want to use but more importantly, they’ve built up a reputation that people believe in and trust.

Gamers and developers are so eager to use steam because in all the years they’ve been operating, they still support and expand upon family sharing, have a fantastic refund policy (for consumers), don’t employ aggressive exclusivity deals, don’t limit download speeds behind paywalls, and provide a great review and recommendation system.

They’ve become successful due to this reputation, why should we punish them for that?

Valve created a fantastic entertainment product that people voluntarily choose to use. Why would you want to turn something people already love into something completely different? Counterproductive - especially when direct distribution is essentially free and universally accessible.

That sounds like a nightmare! I don’t think game developers (or any other artist) would want the CRA breathing down their neck, telling them what they can or can’t do with their work. I certainly wouldn’t program under those conditions.

This would be an issue if the servers use any proprietary code, libraries, or services the developer is not at liberty to distribute.

A studio may also to reuse their networking code for a sequel, and it would suck being forced to release that just because an older title got discontinued - could lead to exploits, or just competitors profiting off of your hard work with no compensation in exchange.

I’m not comfortable with the idea of the government dictating what developers must do with their games. There are legitimate legal, financial, and artistic reasons they may not want to be forced to distribute in that way.

I think that it’s the responsibility of consumers to make sure they have the level of ownership over the games they like. I personally don’t really like to invest into live service games for this reason, but I do enjoy playing them on occasion and appreciate that they’re free to play and receive constant updates. Forcing the Deves to open source their code at the end of the game’s life cycle would jeopardize their vision and our ability to play games like them.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I may be misunderstanding things, but did Harper not follow though?

https://globalnews.ca/news/2202138/did-harper-really-run-eight-straight-deficits-like-the-ndp-liberals-claim/

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

It seems to me people like PP because of their stance on inflation, which for most is the single biggest issue facing Canada today. Cons are proposing budget cuts, and the NDP are proposing a grocery store tax as solutions. People will probably be more favorable towards whichever solution they think will be the most effective.

“Conservative and Bloc Québécois MPs voted in favour of an NDP motion calling for an inquiry to include a look at attempted interference not only by China but also Russia, Iran and India. The Liberals voted against that motion.”

Conservatives and NDP in agreement for once.

As I understand it, meta has announced they will be deplatforming Canadian news and links. In retaliation, the federal government will no longer pay for advertisements on their platform.