🌐🐍

@AndyKavna Why would discretion have changed if it was right or wrong? Would just give less people the opportunity to know about it.

@hatycatt And i maintain the whole mess could have been avoided if the users in question had decided to be more discreet, or if the supporters had tried even a little to understand the opposing view, instead of claiming moral high ground of preservation for a game in no need of it.

Another aspect of this NieR situation is, I think, that our perceptions of art are somewhat warped by an age of abundance. We've become accustomed to having whatever we want at our fingertips, so there's a strain of entitlement at play. 1/3

@AndyKavna Do you consider let's plays piracy? Do you think Spotify is a cheaper alternative to buying games? Most would not find these things follow.

@AndyKavna It's obviously not binary. Preservation of adjunct media is more than no preservation, but is not a substitute for the game itself. Do you think the notre dam restoration was pointless since we have pictures? Is the criterion collection without merit since trailers are on yt?

@AndyKavna To clarify it's okay to not have answers. These are just logical conclusions of what you presented. It's okay to think it over, and end up with a strong conviction i am wrong, or change your mind. Or just not care enough to think. I'm by no means the moral arbitrator lol

@hatycatt Around it, and I find myself uncertain about things. To me, it seems like you're pressing me for answers that I don't have, because my stance on this is somewhere in between both sides. I can understand why that feels frustrating to engage with now that I think about it.

@AndyKavna Yes. The disagreement is only semantic. We agree the music, merchandising and yt play throughs are preserved. We both agree the game itself is not. You are taking a semantic stance that a game is preserved if adjunct media is preserved. But that is semantic, not substantive.

@hatycatt Is a painting lost if you have photos of it? Is a play lost if you have a video of the performance but not the paper script? Is a piece of music lost if we have a score but no recordings? We just don't agree here and I don't think we're going to.

@AndyKavna Right. But like, how could you possibly believe that. Is a painting lost if I can describe it? Is a movie lost if we have the poster? I'm arguing about the videogame. Not the merch. You specifically stated the game to start this. Not the soundtrack or merch.

@hatycatt Right okay we've landed on the fundamental disagreement then. I don't consider it lost just because it isn't playable.

@AndyKavna But how can you say preservation is solely the purview of the artist if you don't have a reason for it, or a consistency in this stance?

@hatycatt I don't feel its my responsibility here to make a case against (I assume that's what you meant) museums etc.

@AndyKavna But it literally is lost! You can not play it. I agree the soundtrack is not lost. Youtube play throughs are not lost. Merchandising is not lost. But the actual game is lost.

@hatycatt Ethically I'm generally fine with it, more than that really. Those works would have been lost and that would be a shame. But I don't think that thought process applies to the NieR case.

@AndyKavna People are honest about it! People preserve art because they are passionate about it. Passion about video games is playing video games. Passion about film is watching film. Passion about music is listening to it. Etc.

@hatycatt Yeah that's fine. Just be honest about it.

@AndyKavna You don't know how you feel about it ethically or you don't know the legal side? The legal side I can answer, they predate IP law. But I'm more interested in how you view it ethically!

@hatycatt I actually don't know. I would have to look into how that came about.

@AndyKavna Well yes, art is to be appreciated. We preserve it so it can be appreciated aka played again. That would speak to any and all cultural or artistic preservation.

@hatycatt They weren't. But they also weren't preservation attempts for anything more than "we want to play" which again, I think it's fine.

@AndyKavna Like we can walk this back a step. Where do you think the right to distribute Shakespeare or Aristotle comes from?

@AndyKavna You flip flopped in that it's not okay. But then it's okay if it's private. But then you don't have a right. But them preservation is good. Either it's okay or it isn't. Either we can preserve it or we can't. Posting online so fans know about it is entirely separate.

@AndyKavna I would argue that's the nature of art. Copyright ensures that arts can be financially viable and rewarded. It's existence is pragmatic, not the be all and end all. You obviously disagree. But haven't made a case for museums or anyone preserving the art of deceased artists.

@hatycatt I'm not sure where this flip flopping you're describing is though. Let's say I make an album, and release it digitally, then decide i want to remove it from distribution. Someone distributes it online. Okay, they've preserved it, but where did their right to do that come from?

@AndyKavna A videogame is the sum of its parts I agree. But that would mean preservation is also the sum of its parts. You cannot separate elements and preserve them individually. Listening to the soundtrack in isolation is not the same as playing. Nor is playing without the soundtrack

@hatycatt x.com/i/status/20441…

@AndyKavna I'm not being combative. You just need to think through these more to have a more consistent view. Even if you come out still against stuff like this, thinking about it past a legal lens or flip flopping lens would be helpful.

@hatycatt I think you're being combative for the sake of it now so I won't be engaging further. You don't have to find my stance convincing, it's your right to disagree.

@AndyKavna Sure. I think making a 1to1 private server of classic wow today would be bad. I also recognised that for 15+ years blizzard did not support it, and without private servers we wouldn't have classic WoW now. So why were the preservation efforts in the interm bad?

@hatycatt Which is where the tweet you replied to initially comes in. If NieR Reincarnation was subject to some scrubbing effort, you might have a preservation argument, but the opposite is true. In fact its highly likely to be ported someday given its popularity and prominence. 4/

@AndyKavna You haven't pointed out ethical quandaries though. Only legal ones. So you are flip flopping. They assumed the right when the rights holder failed to. Why would you logically view that differently than a museum or other preservation of arts?

@hatycatt Not only was it brazenly announced, but when JP users pointed out the legal and ethical quandries, the response was a pompous "this is GOOD actually, you should thank us for preserving it" which leads to the question, what gives YOU specifically the right to do that? 3/

@AndyKavna But the way you engage with games *is* to play them. I don't condone bootleg merchandise or pirating art books or soundtracks. But it seems disingenuous to say these are equivalent to playing a game. To be able to play a game is to preserve it.

@hatycatt Im going to assume you're being sincere and that I wasn't clear enough, so I'll explain. Firstly, Nier Reincarnation is in absolutely no danger of being lost. Square are still producing merchandise of it, it's music and art are easily accessible, as are full playthroughs 1/

@yurihustle Chromium based crypto browser is my personal hell. I just don't get why people don't use Firefox or one of its 1000x forks. I'm partial to Zen.

why do people keep shilling brave when ublock exists