![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/a18b0c69-23c9-4b2a-b8e0-3aca0172390d.png)
20·
7 months agoBack when Blizzard campaigns were so good you paid for the single-player while the online multiplayer was free.
Back when Blizzard campaigns were so good you paid for the single-player while the online multiplayer was free.
They get paid more if people use the affiliate links or coupon codes from the sponsored sections of the video.
Just because a company is profitable it doesn’t mean they can’t ask users to pay for a service.
I don’t love Alphabet either, but in their shoes I’d block ad filters too. YouTube is spectacularly expensive to run.
Yeah. Despite all the evil things Google does, saying “either pay for our product or watch ads” is kinda reasonable.
I pay for premium and it’s fine. I still run Vanced on my phone because I hate lots of other things about YouTube, but I’m okay with paying for a product I use every day.
There’s pretty much zero percent chance there isn’t a class-action waiver in the old license agreement. Maybe an arbitration clause too, but that could actually be good, since Sony would probably have to pay the arbiters win or lose, so if enough people actually pursue it it could cost them a boatload.