GTA VI $80 | physical is code in a box

[dhaabi]

It is sad how easy we have gotten as gamers though.  No fight. Myself included.  As much as I stood strong with not getting a Nintendo Switch 2.  I will cave to fomo for GTA 6.  All mock me now.  But I am deeply ashamed of the companies practices. But its also GTA 6.

There will probably be some offense taken by saying this, but it's a hard truth worth saying: if someone ultimately yields to problems they're actively aware of while even after voicing opposition toward them, then it's difficult for others to take that person seriously regarding the topic because it signals to them that that person, at least in this individual circumstance, doesn't stand by their principles.

Well.that would be anyone who hates on GTA 6's anti consumer policies and digital codes, a hiding content behind giant pay walls but also purchased a switch 2 that literally makes you sign away hardware ownership of an entire console and didn't even blink twice. So I certainly wouldnt be alone in that regard. Especially in this forum. We all have taken blows countless tikes in this gaming sphere. Won't be the first. Wont be the last.  Don't blame the player for having to balance their principles with their freedom to enjoy their favorite hobby. It isnt always easy.

Everybody has their own priorities. All I meant with my previous comment is that the issues relating to Grand Theft Auto VI appear to be not that big of a concern to you if you're planning to buy the game anyway in spite of recognizing them. And if you're referring to me specifically since it's easy to identify that I own a Switch 2, I've said publicly before that the console I own was not purchased by me. I am not the only one in my household who plays games nor am I the only one who's capable of buying games for their own enjoyment. Needless to say, those people aren't overly concerned with these issues.

Regardless, I don't think anyone really knows with full certainty about the situation with Nintendo's EULA. From what I've read, some people seem to have made this a larger issue than what it really is and it became widely discussed as some big scare. Although how much of an online scare the matter could be questioned—it's not as if I'm aware of every piece of gaming news, but I stay relatively up-to-date and am only hearing about this issue now. I've read others say that the sort of language in Nintendo's EULA isn't setting some new precedent and is common legal text, but I'm not a legal expert nor have any knowledge of whether that's actually true or not. Based on this article, Nintendo's Switch 2 EULA indicates that consoles that have been commonly referred to as bricked have had their online capabilities revoked as a consequence to using modding and hacking tools, thus rendering it an offline-only device but one that's still playable. So I don't think this is some large scale problem. You may find it worthwhile to also know that at this time, there has been at least one legal challenge about this issue, but I don't think there have been any noteworthy updates concerning it this past year.

[telekill]

$80 for a code in the box of a version with scrapped, readily available content to premium users.

No thanks.