Announced late last year, Meta is shutting down three of its exclusive titles this week, including VR shooters Dead and Buried (2016) and Dead and Buried II (2019), and virtual pet simulator Bogo (2019), making it your last chance to say goodbye.

Update (March 11th, 2024): The date for complete shutdown of Bogo and both Dead and Buried titles is coming fast, arriving on March 15th. If you want to give them one last go, now’s your chance. For Quest owners who haven’t played before, sadly there’s no way to download them from the Quest Store, as all three have been removed at the time of the original announcement in September 2023.

The original article detailing the games’ shutdown follow below:

Original Article (September 18th, 2023): Meta announced via email to current game owners that all three titles will no longer be supported come March 15th, 2024. In the meantime, the company has removed the games from store search results, and removed any way to purchase or download them (if not already in your library).

Created as an Oculus Touch launch title for Rift and released in late 2016 by Oculus Studios, Dead and Buried was one of the pioneering multiplayer VR shooters that explored room-scale gameplay, including co-op, PvP, and single-player modes.

Interestingly, the Oculus Touch launch title never came to Quest, although a version was adapted for Oculus Go, the 3DOF standalone released in 2018.

SEE ALSO
'Laser Dance' Hands-on: Forget 'the floor is lava'—You've Got Lasers Now

Meta’s internal game development studio back then, Oculus Studios, instead was working on Dead and Buried II, which would release as a launch title for the original Quest in May 2019, but also arrive on Rift with cross-play.

Dead and Buried II departed from the purely room-scale locomotion of the first, and injected some standard stick-driven locomotion to the mix, making for more dynamic shootouts across multiple maps.

Released as a free Oculus Quest launch title in 2019 (and Rift), Bogo lets you raise and care for your own virtual pet. It’s admittedly a short experience without a ton of depth, but it’s getting the axe just the same come March 15th, as it will be removed not only from both Quest and Rift Stores, but also from user libraries.

While both Dead and Buried games heavily feature online gameplay—more understandable victims of platform decay—the decision to shutter the single-player game Bogo suggests Meta isn’t prioritizing legacy support for original Quest games as it moves towards the next generation of Quest headset, or more specifically Quest 3.

Whatever the case, we’re sure to learn more come September 27th during Connect 2023 where the company will very likely release a flurry of news surrounding Quest 3.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • Scientism

    This world where “buy” means “we let you rent-play it for 3-5 years” really sucks. All people who bought a game that is being discontinued by an online store should be able to download the game’s image for side-loading and the server code for self-hosting also.

    • peppersghostoftsushima

      So stop supporting a shitty company that has been known to be shitty at least since 2014 just because they have cheaper/better hardware. Even the hardware itself is essentially rented to you.

      • Garhert

        I don’t think the post was pointed at Meta, sounds more like a general statement.

        But yeah, you may like Meta or not. The question is where VR would be today without Meta respectively without Oculus being sold.
        And who should we support instead? Pico? Sony? Individual game studios? Valve is out of question for me, PCVR had its chance, but the user base was simply too small to be profitable in the near future.

        • Guest

          Yes, at least Pico and Sony’s non-internet dependent VR apps can stay functional in older hardware indefinitely, but they both still screw the developers for not letting the apps run on their latest devices. It’s sad because some superior content never gets rewritten for newer hardware, just like some of the best music on vinyl LP’s never got remastered onto CD’s or Mp3’s…

          • Garhert

            Damn, I was almost set to give Meta another chance with the Q3. But now someone leaked potential Pico 5 controllers. Hope there will be further leaks soon.

            “…screw the developers for not letting the apps run on their latest devices.”

            I don’t know about Pico, but could not every developer make their PSVR1 app run on the PSVR2? Of course it would have been nice to have full backward compatibility, but imo you cannot always expect that when a new generation is released. Developers develop for a specific generation of a platform. Why should they/we expect that an app will run for eternity on future generations? Was it nice to play my GameCube games on the Wii? Yes! Did I expect it? No

        • peppersghostoftsushima

          >The question is where VR would be today without Meta respectively without Oculus being sold.

          We would have high spec’d Rift 2 years ago instead of Quest 2, as the sellout Palmer Luckey himself admitted on twitter. So, by now we would have Rift 3. VR would be fine.

          • Garhert

            And why would the Rift 2 and 3 have pushed game developers more than any other PSVR ready headset? I’m really asking out of curiosity, I don’t have much knowledge about PCVR.

            And there is no problem with supporting Sony. I’m just waiting for information/leaks whether PS5 Pro could improve the experience with PSVR2. If it does and if there will be a PS5 Pro + PSVR2 bundle for 999.- I will definitely consider buying it.

          • peppersghostoftsushima

            >And why would the Rift 2 and 3 have pushed game developers more than any other PCVR ready headset?

            Why wouldn’t it? Oculus was a >100M funded startup and they proved to be able to push things with the CV1, why wouldn’t the iterations which had significantly better visuals and the wireless capabilities we have today, not pushed developers?

    • ViRGiN

      Valve started the revolution exactly 20 years ago with Half Life 2. You bought the game in physical brick and mortar store, on physical disc? Valve invented the approach of having to login and stay online to play. They were hated for it 20 years ago – servers were overloaded, it was kicking people out. Now look how the tables have turned..

    • Titanfall 2 is a very good example of how to support a game way after release

  • JanO

    Makes me wonder about Meta’s claim that ALL of my current game library will work on Q3, just better… They should definately keep old content alive in one way or another with some kind of compatibility layer. No matter what they say, they do have the mean$ to do it and its been done by others.

    When done right, all programs should last a lifetime with minimal intervention… Just look at anything made by John Carmack.

    Nobody likes having their things taken away from them, but it seems modern companies don’t give a f**k about you once they’ve got your money. It wasn’t like that back when people had a spine… This should become law.

    • Jistuce

      All your games will work on the Quest 3, because they will delete any that don’t from your library.

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    TL;DR: Meta sucks. Obviously not always, as they do a loot of good things for VR, but too often. They are utterly horrible at preserving VR history.

    I am still pissed that Meta removed the already implemented Quest compatibility with Oculus Go titles on the Quest 2 for no technical reason. I had paid a significant amount of money for a large library of Go apps, only for them to announce two years after launch they’d cancel it less than six months later. That meant not only stop selling the hardware, but also updating the software. And even 3rd party developers wouldn’t be allowed to publish or update apps or fix game breaking bugs, even though the Go app store is still running and selling software almost three years later, I assume mostly to prevent customers from suing them.

    Killing a locked down platform with less than half a year warning is obviously anti-consumer, as there is no way to simply switch to another store. With MRL burning through billions every year with often questionable results like Horizon World, I don’t buy that they had to save the money or needed the production lines. They just carried over the “fail fast” philosophy of many large web service companies, shutting down everything that doesn’t attract a sufficiently large user base in a short time, the results of which are visible on sites like the “Killed by Google” graveyard, currently listing 288 terminated Google projects.

    Contrary to what many believe the Go wasn’t unpopular due to being limited to 3DoF. Oculus sold more Go than Rift, and during the OC5 keynote John Carmack revealed that the user retention rate was as high as with the Rift, something they had not expected due to the miserable retention rate of the Gear VR. Killing the Go or removing Go compatibility from the Quest was probably driven by the same motivation as shutting down the Echo VR or Dead and Buried servers: Meta is done with the project, and the users are collateral damage. It’s not that they couldn’t find and pay a few developers to keep the projects running and fix minor bug, they just want to move on. And that is a bad attitude for any media provider. People tend to get emotionally attached to old movies, music they loved as teens or games they played obsessively at/after school. When those aren’t available as physical media, shutting their services down permanently is different from canceling one of thousands of similar web apps, which will mostly only cause some inconvenience.

    I’m grateful for all the research and product development done by Oculus/Meta, and without them VR would most likely be in a much worse state. But they treat VR too much as just a product and not enough as a medium and culture. Compare that to Valve, who on September 13th turned 20, and celebrated with a page about their history, listing the most important releases for every year since launch, most of which you can still buy, currently with huge birthday discounts. Or GOG (Good Old Games), famous for preserving ancient DOS games now running in DOSBox, support for Mac/Linux and not using DRM, which grew out of the initial business of CD Projekt. Founded in 1994 to provide legitimate versions of games in Poland, localized often by decompiling and reverse engineering, which taught them what they needed to develop titles like The Witcher or Cyberpunk 2077. Their passion for games and game preservation is what drove them to not only use GOG to publish their own or new games, but spend time and money on making classic titles playable that will never sell in large numbers, but enable gamers to relive some of their memories or show their kids what they played before billions of polygons and 100GB install sizes.

    Forget about showing any of your decedents what taking part in the early days of consumer VR felt like. The best you can do is dig up some old titles on Steam, but that’s mostly 2016 and after. Some of the very early and iconic titles like RiftCoaster were available only on Oculus Share, a directory/site run by Oculus for early VR experiments and games, open like Sidequest VR, and shut down with little or no warning once Oculus had started their closed store in 2016. The site’s structure prevented it from being properly preserved by archive_org, so this extremely impactful part of VR history is pretty much just gone, because Ocululs/Meta “moved on” and wanted people to use their newer, closed product instead. I may be annoyed by not being able to go back to my Oculus Go library, but compared to that, shutting down Oculus Share was basically a crime against humanity, or at least the part of humanity that cares about the history of VR. They should have at least given a proper warning, so that someone could have archived this repository used by most of the early VR developers. And if you look at GOG, or the huge emulator scene, or what people today do with and find out about 30, 40 or 50 years old computers, there is a market and a need for the preservation of the history of (VR) technology and gaming. Unfortunately Meta lacks respect for both the history of VR and gaming and their customers, which is a problem, given their dominant role in XR.

    • NotMikeD

      This is really well said. I took the shutdown of Echo VR hard, despite the fact that I’ll freely admit I wasn’t playing it every day, or even every month. The idea that I couldn’t go back and revisit even those lobbies I’d spent so much time in with friends, or idly pick up a few games on a lazy afternoon, really saddened me. These recent shuttering announcements are somewhat the same, I gifted my mother a Quest for Christmas one year and I’m pretty sure playing lots of Bogo was as far as she ever got with it.

      Lots of people will come in with facts/figures about how people weren’t playing Echo VR as much as apparently Meta wanted us all to and how it’s totally fine they shuttered it. I just think Meta forgets sometimes that they are marketing games to human beings, and like it or not we are sentimental creatures. They’ve proven one too many times they’re more interested in jumping too quickly to the next shiny thing and not treating the experiences they sell us with care or regard to future preservation, so this human is done buying games on the Meta platform. My spend has moved to Steam and Sony stores.

      • ViRGiN

        From bad to worse huh?
        Steam cuts off windows 7 users in few months (more users than pcvr).
        Sony doesn’t really care about backwards compatibility.

        You haven’t played any of these games for ages, but sure, now commit to other platforms that do even worse shit.

        • NotMikeD

          Well look, in my view unless people are running Windows 7 machines for some very specific reason, like some legacy software suite for which they need access, I look at the decision to stay on that aging OS as little more than digital contrarionism; like I’d half expect such folks to be living out in shacks in the woods. Legacy software needs could definitely drive people to stay on the platform (hence the volume), but I can’t expect those are bleeding-edge tech gamer types that will be too sad to lose access to Steam on those machines.

          When I bought PSVR games, I bought them with the intention of playing them on that system. Light based tracking was always going to be a prorprietary Sony thing, as more enduring solutions already existed at the time it was released. Anyone who expected all of those titles built for that tracking solution to just move forward in time were fooling themselves, and no one forced anyone to sell off their PS4’s and PSVR’s. Mine’s still hooked up next to it’s shiny newer brother, and it still sees plenty of use for Astro Bot, Rush of Blood, Statik, and others.

          • ViRGiN

            Staying on Windows 7 does have _very_ specific reason – these gamers, most likely of older age, are not interested in any of the “latest and greatest” OS or computing power. They have zero needs for any of that to play their old favorite classics, like oldschool RTS games, maybe some old platformers – you name it. There is plenty of games that came out in Windows 7 days, and their machine handles these games perfectly fine. You can’t just switch to Windows 11 on these machines and expect everything to work properly or at the same performance. These games haven’t had any updates for years, many of them are exclusively offline. They are just cut off from ever running them again because Steam won’t allow logins from Windows 7.
            This is nothing more but Valve fault, because they built their launcher in most lazy way possible as a chromium based web app.

            PSVR1 situation is indeed a bit different due to tracking system they used, but I think they still dropped the ball by not designing the controller with some sort of emulation layer to allow to play them with PSVR2. As time goes on, the hardware will wear down, spare parts will be unavailable etc.

            I remember how much flack Meta got for releasing Quest 2 so soon and “abandoning” Quest 1, which to this day is receiving updates and there are games coming out that supports it, despite infinietly smaller install base.

            Dead and Buried is difficult to find any somewhat recent gameplay videos on YouTube, which confirms it’s pretty much absent from gamers minds. Bogo is a different case, since it’s a nice little app perfect for showcasing room scale and maybe getting your kid into VR. But I’m sure if Meta silently removed those without informing anyone, almost nobody would notice they are missing. Still sucks, but it is what it is. SDKs evolve, and these games were running on extremely old ones.

          • NotMikeD

            I agree with a number of your points here. As a fan of classic games myself, I won’t begrudge anyone who wants to play old favorites on aging hardware and it’s a shame Valve’s making such a move, truly. It won’t affect my patronage on the Steam platform since as I’ve aged I’ve found maintaining some base level of hardware continues to be a budgeting priority for me and probably always will be. While this group of users will be sadly disenfranchised, I’d suggest that Steam is doing more good than harm for folks wanting to continue bringing classic games forward.

            Also agree Sony could’ve been more thoughtful about designing the new hardware to play the older games, that would’ve been great. As it stands, I hope that PSVR2 games might be easier to carry forward since the design of the new hardware has far more feature parity with other VR systems and controls schemes, and I’ve heard something to the effect of it’s much closer to PCVR development to build for it. BUT I will make certain that I have a confirmed future-proof plan for my existing PSVR2 library long before I ever sell this generation’s hardware.

            Sony and Valve’s hands aren’t totally clean to your point, but I’ve been personally affected by Meta’s forced obsolescence decisions; killing off Quest 1 users ability to join something as fundamental as a party chat sucked and made it difficult to continue doing things that had current value to my friend group like playing Walkabout courses. And failing to make some minimal investment into keeping Echo VR alive given its optics as one of VR’s only viable e-sports was just unforgivable to me. I appreciate Boz’s attempt to be transparent about the decision, but the things he said and the tone with which he said them made it worse for me. As a result I don’t see myself buying a Meta headset in the forseeable future.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            TL;DR: Don’t be evil.

            There are some several reasons to (forcefully) deprecate technology, with different levels of necessity/validity:

            – Finite resources, like the frequency bands for old analog TV broadcasting or 3G being reassigned for newer, more efficient technologies that make much better use of them. Avoiding the change would significant progress for all.
            – Security, like no longer allowing access from old devices with unpatched firmware that are regularly captured for botnets to be used in DDOS attacks or other harmful activities. Avoiding the change will lead to serious damage for others and lots of resources spend on preventing it.
            – Cascading deprecation, like the OS or software a product relies on being shut down, forcing to either to cut of (parts of) the product or switch to a completely different base. That’s what happens to all software relying on libraries like e.g. Chromium or QT, they either have to follow their compatibility schemes, fork them and maintain the fork themselves or rip them out and replace them. We use such libraries to not be forced to do anything ourselves, so usually none of these are an option. Microsoft cutting Win7 supports leads to Chromium/QT cutting Win7 support leads to Steam cutting Win7 support.
            – Hard economic reasons, like a limited number of employees and a limited number of users for the old product. A small game developer may not have the resources to handle multiple projects at the same time, which will cause them to prioritize which ones to support. So an old game may no longer be update and converted to the newest tool chain/game engine, which may at one point lead to it ending completely broken, as applying a necessary change due to e.g. new server authentication would basically require the whole project to be updated first at unreasonable costs.
            – Soft economic reasons, basically doing the calculation if supporting the old version will provide you enough benefits, because there are still paying customers. Supporting Quest 1 is still possible, but you have to either restrict all versions to an older SDK, or maintain a fork for Quest 1 with the old SDK and one for Quest 2/3 with the current one. The borders between hard and soft economic reasons are fuzzy, and binding some resources to maintain older systems has both advantages and disadvantages for users, like being able to use hardware longer, but getting less new features.
            – Policy reasons, which are pretty much everything that isn’t covered above, so it would be technically possible to continue support, the product can do no harm, the underlying tech still works, you have enough resources and it doesn’t prevent implementing new features. Basically you just don’t want to support it anymore. That actually can be a valid reason, to keep up motivation or focus, but it can also be a sign of negligence, being inconsiderate or irresponsible.

            How acceptable dropping support is can sometimes be hard to determine. Sony justified not implementing (technically very difficult and expensive) PS3 backwards compatibility on PS4 with people not actually using it, which the user base decried as obvious nonsense. But Ars Technica went and checked how many Xbox 360 games Xbox One users actually played, and it turned out that they only spend 1.5% of their time with older titles, and most of that was just one game “Call of Duty: Black Ops”, that had seen no PS4 re-release. Porting that game would have benefited way more people than full backwards compatibility at a much lower price.

            And the impact of dropped support can be lessened. Many deprecated systems can still be used without a permanent internet connection. It may be more hassle, but if you need to keep your Win7 Steam running for compatibility to some games, you can download your library, set it to offline and basically use it indefinitely, as long as the machine is no longer connected to the internet (you may have to keep a snapshot and restore it from time to time). Or rebuy some of the titles on GOG without DRM to not lose access to them. On a phone with an un locked boot-loader, you may be able to install a free version of Android like Lineage OS with current security patches years after the manufacturer dropped support. If something looks like a computer, no matter how old it is, it can most likely run a recent version of NetBSD, who are basically the church of OS multi-platform support and eternal backwards compatibility. And it will of course run Doom, because some genius had the idea that instead of just dropping support, you can open source the project and let the community support it yourself. And with some luck a couple of nerds are crazy enough to get it to run in VR 30 years later and still be a great experience.

            So there are lots of options someone can pick from. Unfortunately too many pick the worst ones, first locking in customers to prevent them from leaving and maximizing profit, then just cutting them off once something else will provide more profit, and not even letting users fix it themselves. Which is why legal initiatives like right to repair or a guaranteed time span of software and security updates are so important to get some of the players to behave in a fair and decent way they actually should have chosen themselves.

        • Andrew Jakobs

          But it makes perfectly sense not to support steam anymore on windows 7, you shouldn’t be using it anymore connected to the internet as it doesn’t get any security updates at all anymore. You could, and still can, upgrade it to windows 10.
          And it makes perfectly sense that steam doesn’t allow logins from a highly insecure OS (due to no security updates anymore).

          • ViRGiN

            You make perfect sense in mental asylum.

        • peppersghostoftsushima

          Windows 7 users can upgrade to Win 10 for free. It’s a free SOFTWARE upgrade. And Windows 7 was released in 2009! That’s 14 years, way longer. Your analogy fails, little one.

          >Sony doesn’t really care about backwards compatibility

          Difference is they don’t kill an already existing purchase you own on an existing product. You can play PS1/PS2/PS3 games on the original consoles just fine in 2023. Again, your analogies are shit.

          • ViRGiN

            Go back to mental asylum. Everything continues to work on Windows 7 except steam login. Go worship poor behavior somewhere else. Better pirate games than support monopoly steam. GOG doesn’t prohibit you from using Windows 7.

            You really are retarded.

  • wowgivemeabreak

    This should be handled like it was for some Rift games they pulled like VR Sports Challenge. Dead and Buried 2 has bots so let people play with bots if they want. The Bogo thing is just baffling other than it’s another example of how farcebook likes to troll their customers and annoy them. I mean just look at the Quest OS and how they keep changing stuff for the worst there and breaking other things that were working before.

    I just hope people get a clue and quit buying any games published under Oculus/”Meta” Studios since all they’ll do is yank them down the line, especially if they are multiplayer based games.

    I wonder if Robo Recall will be pulled soon and I expect Sports Scramble to be killed off sometime next year.

    Farcebook is a dumpster fire of a company and it is annoying they are basically the only game in town here in North America if one wants standalone or tetherless PC VR.

  • ViRGiN

    Of course the outcry is huge, just like swords of gargantuan said they will shut down the servers. Everyone promised not to buy from them anymore. They later apologized and promised to work on a version that doesn’t need to connect online. They actually followed through and guess what? It has 0 players right now, and had only 1 in the past 24 hours on steam.

    That’s how these cry babies are worthless. They don’t even play the titles, they just want to hoard digital stuff in library when in reality after initial play, it’s never getting played again.

    I’m pretty sure these two titles will get replaced with proper equivalents for Quest 3 – Bogo pet sim was already shown as part of passthrough, and Dead and buried might come back as officially supported colocation game.

    Meta bad, blablabla. And how many of you even attempt to remind cutting off millions of people from Steam just in few months, because after over a decade of flawless support, valve decided not to support windows 7 anymore, not even for games that never had online support. You won’t be able to log in to steam and play your equally old games. And unlike bogo and buried, windows 7 is still used on steam by more people than entirety of pcvr.

    Now go ahead and smash that downvote button, that will help you feel better for smearing valve.

    • NotMikeD

      EVEN IF people want to ‘hoard digital stuff in their libraries’ without the intention of constantly showing up on these point-in-time SteamVR player counts you love to cite, then so what? Part of the appeal of building a game library is that you have access to go back and play stuff when you feel like it. There’s value in optionality. There’s nostalgia and sentimentality that can drive you back to things now and then. Human beings are buying these games, with ever-changing priorities and drives; you constantly define us as point-in-time player-count metrics, and it sucks.

      I think you’re going to increasingly see people decrying Meta’s decisions like these and potentially turning further away from the platform as the company proves more and more that they can pump a ton of investment into VR but they’re still missing fundamental aspects of what people care about that they can’t tease out in ‘the numbers.’

      • ViRGiN

        It’s just the reality of digital distribution. Made it easy for anyone to buy rent stuff, but if I could, I would rather pay extra for physical medium, and be able to sell it whenever I feel like. Especially with VR there is very little value in todays games – I want to play it and move onto the next one.

        I remember Xbox trying to ban selling games second hand.

  • brandon9271

    So.. we’re going to have to resort to pirating games we already paid for just to be able to play them?

    • Jistuce

      Arrrr, matey!

  • BOGO nooooooooo!

  • MeowMix

    BOGO was a free tech demo

    Dead & Buried 2 – support will refund you in store credit equal to whatever you paid (it released at $20)

    • ViRGiN

      Never played it and never wanted to, but I’m gonna hate Meta regardless! It’s not like Steam is cutting off system from ENTIRE library for older systems!!11

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      Money isn’t everything and doesn’t make happy, but experiences do. You don’t just pay money for a game, you also invest a lot of time and often passion. If you play through a game and then never touch it again, getting a refund may actually be great, but a lot of people will care less about the money and more about being able to experience it again, if they want to.

      Just imagine what it would be like if you’d bought an album as a teen that you still listen to occasionally, and then the company releasing it would somehow make all copies unusable and refund the purchase price. Or if Bethesda, now owned by Microsoft, would announce that Skyrim will now be an Xbox exclusive title, disable all Skyrim installations on non-Xbox devices and offer a refund as compensation. Todd Howard would need 24/7 protection, a new identity and would most likely still have to spend the rest of his days in a bunker to protect him from angry gamers.

      Microsoft, currently worth USD 2.4 trillion, would probably go broke if a court sided with the angry Skyrim players and forced the company to not only refund the purchase price, but also compensate them at minimum wage levels for the time they invested modding the game, as all that “work” would be lost due to their action. If the court also awarded financial compensation for emotional distress suffered by players who had spent at least 200h in Skyrim, “probably go broke” would turn to “definitely go broke”.

  • RIP cute Bogo

  • Max-Dmg

    FB are broke.

    • ViRGiN

      Gaben weight is in grave danger

  • Snekertechie

    I don’t play these games, but this hurts my trust in the Meta store.

  • Killing off Bojo is a bizarre thing to do. It suggests our game collections might be in real-trouble in the future. I’ve bought from Steam with somewhat reckless abandon, as I feel they will dependably hold on to a game for years, if it takes me years to actually play it. (some games I STILL haven’t played!)

    This is a real blow to my confidence in Oculus. (I’m not calling it Meta, Meta is still stupid)

  • Nevets

    No debates about ownership here. If there’s a game you truly love, the digital age’s walled garden makes it impossible for you to keep it.

    This is very bad.

  • Foreign Devil

    Honestly, life is too short to play through a whole game again. You get it when you are older. Treat it like a vacation that you take once and can’t exactly duplicate again.

    • ViRGiN

      Sad to see Bogo go as it was a nice kid-friendly tech demo, but Dead and Buried was archaic for years already and completly dead.

      People just want to collect digital trash and _be able to_ play them 25 years down the line, but actually never start even once.

      Thanks valve for inventing steam and ruining decades of second hand market games.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      But not everybody has played the game yet. I’ve got a lot of games in my gamelibrary which I haven’t played yet.

    • Jistuce

      I disagree. There’s games I will come back to over and over.
      There’s also games that don’t have an “end state”. You don’t play through it, you just play it.

  • Charles U. Farley

    Meta is the type of company that would kill your pet for a buck.

    • Jistuce

      In fairness, I think there’s a lot of companies that would kill my pets for a buck. Fortunately for my dogs, the assassination would cost them more than a buck to pull off.