sascottsn
17168
351
11
I know this is a bit of a fringe case, but I just saw something the other day about the "save our games" case in california, and its clear the lawmakers are being asked to vote on a law that they have no real clear idea on what it actually does, and my bankruptcy really reminded me of that. My lawyer, for all his skills, couldnt see how I had spent thousands and thousands of dollars on videogames, and there be no possible way to attach a monetary value to that. I can't refund them, I can't sell then, I can't pass them on. The only value in them is that I have continuing access to them, and that is something that cannot be taken away from me.
allmycommentsareGold
Zero. The value is $0. Determined with 100% accuracy
TheobromineAddict
A clear example of why nobody over 60 should be making laws.
Tarmaccian
Sounds like your lawyer needs some continuing education.
You paid money to enter into a contractual license agreement that allows you to copy and use intellectual property owned by the publishers. By paying that money (and not violating other terms), you have fulfilled your end of the contract, so it remains in force, and is irrelevant to the bankruptcy.
That’s why every EULA starts with “this software is licensed, not sold.”
Hrafna55
You bought a licence to the game which can be revoked at any time. I am surprised the lawyers found this concept difficult.
seenunseen
If you never mentioned it, it would have never been an issue
cousteau
But by mentioning it, they'll waste time on that and divert their attention from the Swiss bank account OP has.
sascottsn
since the creditors have people investigating my assets, by not mentioning it, it would be considered concealing it, and since i spent a considerable amount of money on the games, even though they now hold no actual "transferrable" worth, its still important to disclose it.
I cant go "oops" and just say the games collection that ive spent like 3-4 thousand dollars on is worthless so i just didnt bring it up, the other side would have a field day.
cousteau
Yeah, that's fair; I was just kidding. Would be neat if the creditors wasted time on that as well.
GoblinTit
I'm in my late 50s and all I do is play video games. Steam library = 1200 games
Rink257
The invention of the internet has definitely changed the economic value of things we make.
NoneOfYoBiseniss
If you cant sell it then it has no value, if someone can legally take it without your permission then you do not own it.
RXJ235231
I truly think if he pressed the issue with Steam he could have gotten money back. Courts can push weird circumstances if they truly wish to do so.
stonecw
No intrinsic or fungible value, but possibly personal/sentimental value.
lighterletter
"intangible assets" still have inherent value. @op
jnmjnmjnm
If somebody will/can buy them.
IhopeUgetwhatUvoted4
You could sell your account, not by steams rules but you can. Find a buyer on the downlow and give them the login and password... for money.
PleaseRespectMyAsshole
If buying isn't owning then piracy isn't theft.
Temzilla
If buying isn't owning, a lot of time piracy is owning.
NoneOfYoBiseniss
Arrhh Matey!
JohnSmithterms
It can be taken away, it already has been taken away for at least 3 games. More will follow without a change in the law. It will be taken away.
Pegaxs
If buying isn't owning, then it can't be counted as assets because you have a limited user license to "access" these titles, they are not "yours"...
vilikke
https://steamdb.info/calculator/
Though it doesn't take into account games bought from other places like Humble Bundles
redditmcredditface
what a weird thing to bring up in a bankruptcy. they don't care.
IamnotarobitIseethenumber2
I wouldn't have even considered mentioning it because it wouldn't have occurred to me. what compelled you to even mention it?
cousteau
If you purchase and eat a $100 can of caviar, do you own $100 in assets? I imagine this would be the same.
ThadisJones
So this is actually a "maybe"- if a court finds a reasonable assumption you disposed of assets immediately prior to declaring bankruptcy in order to prevent their seizure, you might be liable for the value of those assets.
ElbowDeepInUserSub
Well it certainly can't be resold!
Racealistic
I'm sure there's a case to be made for selling your poop as manure or something :D
cousteau
Or as a collector's item. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_Shit
Alistairetheblu
Not with that attitude it can't.
DaisyfromDownunder
Oh dear, the games can be taken away from you or access removed in several ways. Like if the company(s) go bankrupt, or if you lose internet access and/or access codes. This is covered under Capitalism 101's code of malpractice.
OhIfIMust
Yeah, if you can't sell it, it's worth nothing; just ask the IRS, when they tried to value and tax a piece of art at $65,000,000: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canyon_(Rauschenberg)
Eiladar
Tell them it's like renting videos at Blockbuster or something. You're paying a licensing fee for agreed upon use, but you get nothing concrete from it
poscduke
I would try to get a better lawyer. Firstly most states allow you to keep a primary residence, furniture and a vehicle while declaring bankruptcy without a 5k limit. Secondly any lawyer should understand a licensing agreement even if they never play games because it's a standard contract feature. Game companies didn't invent it just abuse it
sascottsn
Bankruptcys over, I'm good. I brough this up more because of what I saw yesterday in a youtube video about the case in california. And especially with the shit thats happened with sony in the last 2-3 weeks.
jnmjnmjnm
Bankruptcy valuation, as it was explained to me, is based on what you could get for it on at a yard sale.
Sh1tMovieGroup
I think it's because you phrased that you "paid for it" which he will have understood as "I bought this" not "I leased access to these games for an indeterminant period"
chackstar
Did you try using finger puppets? I’m 57 and that hasn’t worked for me either.
whiskeywonka
" The only value in them is that I have continuing access to them, and that is something that cannot be taken away from me." Sweet summer child, Sony, et al, are taking them away all the time. And heaven forbid you some how lose access to the email address on file for the account or its a MFST email.
SodomySnake
OP specified a Steam Library, and, even discounting Valve being one of the few companies that treats their customers decently, it *is* possible to ensure that you never lose access to that... as long as you haven't bought anything that uses 3rd-party DRM, so you should probably just not buy those games.
thatiscomedygoldrightthere
As a musician, I stopped all streaming and am focusing on only physical media. It has made zero difference in my income.
Shade169
incorrect - they CAN take digital media away from you if they want
MyCommentsUsuallyHaveTypos
This is important information for anyone facing financial scrutiny. Basically you don’t have to count your digital media as a “liquid asset”
MaybeIllDisappear
Brewster's Millions for 2026.
zylokun
Digital items are never considered in bankruptcy. They by definition have no physical value
sascottsn
I’m not sure if that’s entirely true…
For instance, if I was one of those guys playing EVE running a megacorp or whatever. Assets in EVE have real world value and can be and are traded in real world currency.
https://www.pcgamer.com/eve-online-player-uses-obscure-rule-to-pull-off-the-biggest-heist-in-the-games-history/
IWasGoingToMakeEspresso
Is this how Minnesota accidentally legalized edibles?
NoneOfYoBiseniss
Congrats, you found the one niche case where not actually owning what you bought works out for you!
malakim
Funnily enough, steam is an edge case even in that regard. You get to keep games and can even download and install them, even if steam delisted them and removed them from the storefront.
satanslittleposter
However Steam can just decide to fuck you at any time (Steam is not your friend, they're just another corpo piece of shit, no matter what parasocial / glazing relationship people seem to have with them), you don't own shit on Steam. Gog.com or seven seas and nothing else.
RAJrios
I now see that was your point; your wording had confused me at first. Hooray for GOG.
satanslittleposter
Apologies for any confusion, and yes, hooray for GOG! And they're no longer owned by CDPR too, though I won't pretend that any company is my friend at least GOG sticks to their original mission.
RAJrios
GOG is DRM free. You own that shit. Proud supporter of the cause.
JeremyDaniels
Not just DRM free, but they give you an easy and handy way to download the full installer for a game instead of being tied to their Galaxy Launcher.
IMakeLotsOfReferencesAndRemakes
The amount of times I have to explain that bracket statement to people. They may not answer to shareholders... but that means that market dominance is because ONE DUDE wants it. They buy out studios. They make devs and studios sign pseudo-exclusivity to put it on their store (including the whole "if you put it on sale somewhere else you gotta give us a similar deal) and the 30% cut they take which you often still owe them on keys for your own game if you want to list on 3rd party sites.
Camelspotting
They buy out studios?
Lynkfox
While I agree with you, I think it's important to point out that the "you gotta give us the same deal" has been shown to be related specifically to selling steam keys elsewhere. If you put your game on another store (... What other stores ...) and it's not selling a steam key, you can charge a different amount if you want
The restriction comes because steam keys can be "paid for" in bulk at a lower amount and yet steam is still on the hook for the bandwidth\storefront\ect
But steam is still
Lynkfox
A corporation and still not your friend.
They may be extremely consumer friendly overall but that is *overall* and individually will fuck you if it's in their best interest
likuidlightning
Except it can get taken away from you. You didn't buy anything, you licensed it. And if Steam wants to, it could remove those games and you would have no real recourse.
pickinganameistoomuchpressure
exactly, it's like your costco membership or museum membership. Just because you paid for it doesnt mean you own it, just the right to use the services.
SirNinjaPirateBot
Good thing Valve, at least, has a good track record for wanting to preserve personal ownership of rights for end users. Which makes sense, since this is their bread and butter.
I hear about pushback, constantly, from other companies who sell through Steam and in legal issues like the above, but Valve seems to actually be on the side of the users.
Snowman25
Pretty sure Valve is the only service that has a dead-switch built-in. Meaning that even if Steam goes Belly up from one instant to the next, you won't loose access to your games
Slewth87
Yes, Valve are good on that right now. But they could theoretically one day just change that policy, maybe they get bought out or shift management, and decide to time limit all your old purchases and charge you to renew them or they'll take them back. Or even just cut off old games from their database to reduce storage fees and the launcher stops supporting games not in their database anymore.
It's unlikely, but nothing actually stopping it other than the whims of the people in charge over there
NKato
The question is how this gets preserved after Gabe kicks it.
whiskeywonka
For the most part yea, but they have had plenty of games go poof.
SirNinjaPirateBot
Asking because if it's any big players, I'm 100% avoiding buying from them in the future.
SisyphusRollin
Its no one. There was a singular game that drew all the attention, The Crew. A racing game that was online and its playerbase died out. They will ignore things like "the people who lost access to that game were able to get their purchases refunded" and then pretend every other video game entity is now going to take away your access to all games. What steam has done is stop selling games, if you already bought it... you keep it. Thats normal.
Racealistic
Those games get delisted and aren't accessible on the storefront. Players who bought it previously will still have access to it from their library.
SisyphusRollin
They have games they no longer sell, which is fine. The people who bought them when they sold them don't get their game going "poof" they can download it whenever they want.
Alozar
I remember when Epic delisted a bunch of their games from Steam a few years back there were some users that claimed they got removed from their accounts as well. I never got verification on that, unfortunately. I still have my games on my steam account but who knows.
SisyphusRollin
Couldn't comment on Epic. The issue I have is how the argument is often phrased, "taken" is often mistaken for "lost" when a company no longer allows use of something. Delisting games for legal/other reasons isn't great but people ignore those who bought them, still have them. Its a rarity in fact, we're talking very rare, that people just outright lose access. It usually involves hacking of accounts which sucks but about every service from blizzard to steam have a long rep of the opposite of