Could The FCC's Net Neutrality Ruling Effect Your Gaming

Earlier today, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled that the Federal Communications Commission's rules for Net Neutrality were unfounded, and the broadband throttling that results could have an adverse effect on digital distribution and online gaming.

[Bigpappy]

Shame on Game Informer for botching up the headline. It is the court's ruling that is in question, not the FCC's.

These judges seem to be very anti-consumer recently. They are going heavily conservative, and going with corporations over the public (Government). These corporations were not being treated unfairly, and with the strongly conservative congress we have today, the only hope it seems is the balanced supreme court, which also has most of its power in the conservative benches.

The way the politics is now, this could very well stay unless we get a rally cry directly from the public, or the corporations that stand to loose start some heavy lobbying of their own. Chances are the big boy have a way around this, and we the people will again get to carry the shitty end of the stick.

[Activemessiah]

I personally think those judges were bought out... the only way to explain this.

[MsmackyM]

Fewer regulations are always better for the consumer. Just have to look at how the heavily regulated "Affordable Care Act" is anything but. If ISP were to try and squeeze their customers they would only create an opening for competition, and with fewer FCC regulations more investors will be willing to try the market if they can find a profit. You could potentially have ISP who tailor their services specifically for gamers or internet streamers. Regulations only hinder innovations and protect monopolies.

[Drekken]

In most instances I would agree with you... but something like internet is not something you want to have unregulated. We are talking about companies that charge extra if you go over caps and throttle certain sites.

Most people only have one option for high speed internet. Once that company starts charging you to game or watch movies on top of your already high monthly fee then I want to hear your stance. Where the competition is strong and people have a few options then I agree... the market and consumers would dictate but when you have one, that company calls the shot and you are up s**ts creek without a paddle. You will either have to pay up or not have internet.

This ruling was made by old people that are our of touch with reality. The only reality they know is the cash lining in their pockets from the lobbyists.

[Axonometri]

@pappy
I think you need to check your facts before claiming heavy sided ends of Government.

[jmac53]

One day you will learn that it's the corporations that are influencing the decisions of our government. It's all one big organized cash grab. Most of the people on the FCC board used to work for the big cable companies.

[jackanderson1985]

not if you're outside america it won't. in fact i think they're bringing in the exact opposite in europe

[darx]

The rich get richer

[hazardman]

At 1st I was gonna say no. But with all the streaming services out there that rely heavily on Internet might be. Netflix, Playstation Now, Hulu, Youtube, etc. I feel like regular gaming sector has nothing to worry about. If your just a regular gamer. Plays online isnt pirating or dowloanding massive files all day long, we good in a sense. Gamers who do all that and watch netflix and use online streaming services will have to pay more!

Comcast 250gb capp was taken off because there is alot of consumers who are passing that in no time. They're thinking of coming in at 300gb a month and anything after is $10 for every 50gb used. There also looking at having a single tier for heavy users who need more than 300gb a month and you will pay accordingly.

[Menkyo]

The digital future of gaming.......Haha. We have a court system that said corporation are people so now more and more of this crap will happen. Under the first amendment corporation can now give unlimited amounts of money to politicians.

[OrangePowerz]

There will be 200 appeals before that goes anywhere.

[pabadamus1]

Big telecom and cable in the US are some of the biggest perpetrators of anti consumerism. All of the early government supported funding and concessions initiated to incentivize R&D to improve our broadband infrastructure have been misappropriated. They used all of those resources to plunder and monopolize markets all to our detriment and their benefit. The cats are getting fatter and this new ruling only allows them to develop new revenue streams that stifle competition and adversely affects our value to cost ratio. If you are a broadband only household that streams Netflix or Hulu as your only entertainment services don't be surprised when or if your ISP levies additional fees or restrictions to access your services. You know it is an issue when the court acknowledges that their decision wasn't in the best interests of consumers or competition. They had to rule against the FCC because they had no grounds to do otherwise.

[djplonker]

"Could The FCC's Net Neutrality Ruling Effect Your Gaming?"

No because I don't live in the us and I don't want to...

[Double_O_Revan]

Yea, well I do. And I've always considered going out. No place is perfect, but I'm definitely tired of this place.

[MoveTheGlow]

I love how the title on N4G, along with the filename and title heading on GI, all say "Effect your gaming," while the article's headline says the correct "Affect your gaming."

Unless the Net is suddenly super-fast, it's not going to effect (start, give rise to) more of my gaming. It'll affect it either way, though, if a good appeal or a rules change from the FCC doesn't go through.

[ExPresident]

Proper capitalism will win the end, if consumers actually vote with their wallets. The sad part is people aren't willing to, for a lack of better word, sacrifice, momentarily for a bigger gain.

Any company who is willing to put in awful pricing tiers with crappy data limits should see their customer base dwindle. These companies will break when they aren't making money. Netflix bled customers when they proposed separating their digital and DVD distribution into 2 businesses. Netflix went as far to already have the site done and business name picked. Consumer backlash in the form of consumers quitting the service resulted in a complete back step by Netflix.

While it is known that in many areas only one provider exists it is still up to consumers to show that provider who decides what is fair and what isn't. If you continue to pay for crappy service then you deserve what you get. You do not need the internet to survive, contrary to what this entitlement driven society thinks.

The last thing I want is more Government involvement in my day to day life. The Government cannot run anything efficiently. While it is unfortunate that the Judge even said he believed these companies had ill intent toward the consumer he basically pointed out that the consumer can still dictate what happens.

Be willing to fight for what you believe is acceptable and not acceptable and vote with your wallets. These companies live and die on the dollar.