Juana Garcia/The Cougar
has exploded over the past 20 years Video game Monetization. From microtransactions to monthly subscriptions and battle passes, gamers have had to be increasingly wary of ethically questionable and sometimes outright predatory systems aimed at getting them to open their wallets.
One such strategy, which has only recently reared its ugly head, is data-hungry technology that exists solely to collect players' personal information and sell it to advertisers and other companies. This is the dawn of bundling programs with games. Usually, permissions for these covert activities are hidden in boring privacy policies written with the express intention of discouraging people from actually reading them.
These policies and the Devil's Contracts they contain typically only apply after a player has already paid for a game, with the consumer either clicking accept to move on or getting a refund for a game they never even had a chance to play. You are forced to take on difficult tasks. To play.
What's worse is that these clauses aren't always present at the time of purchase. For example, consider the acclaimed indie roguelike card game Across the Obelisk. Last December, the game moved from its original publisher, his Paradox Arc, to Paradox Interactive. Although both are properties of Paradox, their missions are very different.
After the transition, many Beyond the Obelisk fans were confused by the fact that they needed an additional program to run the game, namely Paradox Launcher. Aside from the typical annoyance of opening a separate Steam launcher to open the game before actually running the game, this change also expands our privacy policy.
In addition to standard game-related information such as hardware specifications and crash reports, games now collect your address, name, and a range of other personal information. According to the policyWe do this to “share” such information with platforms such as , Facebook, Google, and other marketing and data agencies.
None of this was needed before Paradox Interactive acquired the game. In fact, many users who had already bought this game fair and square woke up to suddenly find that it came with an additional digital string. Those who do not agree with the new policy are free to do so, but will not be able to play the game.
To summarize this a bit, imagine someone buys a car. They love their cars and use them every day without any problems. Then, one day, several years after the purchase, the car manufacturer is acquired by a major, unscrupulous investment company. Now, to drive the same car, you must always agree to let the car hear you. Do you think that's fair?
This pattern doesn't end with Paradox. Back in the pre-COVID-19 era of 2016, the long-awaited release of Civilization VI sparked some unexpected controversy. The game came bundled with a program called Redshell, which users claimed was spyware. Others defended the game, saying Redshell only collected information intended to measure the effectiveness of advertising and was not serving ads itself.
Despite the program's intentions, the move was met with backlash from furious Civilization fans who felt their loyalty was being taken advantage of.And he is 2018, the developer is announced They were removing Redshell from the game's files.
However, despite removing the program, the company behind the popular strategy series still has a privacy policy that raises some eyebrows.
“We collect information such as your name, email address, phone number, photo, mailing address/zip code, payment or purchase information, age, gender, and password.” Take-Two's policy To read. “Sensitive information (we collect): Precise location information… Content and functionality of communications via chat feature.”
This is the kind of document that would make a Cold War-era CIA agent sweat, and according to their policy, Take-Two, the parent company of Civilization VI's publisher, 2K games — one for every user.
Additionally, the policy states that Take-Two may “interact on your behalf with third-party platforms, games, and social networking accounts that you connect to our Services.” The wording is a little unclear, but it sounds like Take-Two can post to social media on your behalf.
Of course, if Take-Two were actually posting on your behalf, they probably would have already noticed. In any case, the wording of the privacy policy and the amount of information it supposedly claims should be a concern to consumers.
The concern here isn't necessarily about new releases. As Paradox Interactive has already proven with its hostile takeover of Across the Obelisk, companies are swooping in to acquire the rights to games and offering new terms to users who already own the games to keep playing. It seems perfectly legal to force consent to. .
How long until all your childhood favorites are taken over by such a company? Many games remain popular long after their release because people feel nostalgic about them. We may soon see companies desperate for profits monetizing that sentiment by imposing new requirements on fan-favorite titles.
[email protected]
