Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember back in the old days when you could just run your own game server, even though it wasn't open source? That would work too. Or peer to peer LAN gaming, why is that not popular any more? Designing a game to use developer hosted servers is a choice they made. Probably to squeeze money from microtransactions.
because real P2P is hard for realtime stuff. Be it timing or network port forwarding issues.
Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
341–350 of 506 posts
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#342Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#343One thing i think is missing from this discussion is that the problem is larger than just games, and I wish legislation was wider. It's good that games are used as an example and flag bearer due to wide appeal, but what about other software that requires online services, like the old programs that talk to activation servers?
those movements can use gaming as a precedent to push foe their own legislation, at least.
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main no argument is that it makes risky games riskier for the developer, publisher and IP holder. Games like Marathon never get approved.
what's the risk? "Oh no we might have to provide the product we sold!" Lmao. That's the right kind of risk to force on sellers in a market. Sellers risk getting penalized for not providing what they have paid for. Great. Fanastic. Sounds healthy for any market and may even increase average customer confidence enough for a surge in sales, one that can't be created by one company alone.
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite, afaict. When the auth servers are shut down, you wouldnt be able to play it anymore, even in single player.
Does Minecraft's offline mode not work indefinitely? I'm not familiar with the official launcher but this article [1] doesn't say anything about needing to reconnect occasionally. [1] https://www.practical-tips.com/games/play-minecraft-offline-...
It still requires an initial authentication.
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#346One thing i think is missing from this discussion is that the problem is larger than just games, and I wish legislation was wider. It's good that games are used as an example and flag bearer due to wide appeal, but what about other software that requires online services, like the old programs that talk to activation servers?
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That way the community has the opportunity to run their own servers if they want to. That might be fine for very small titles - where the "game server" is a relatively simple binary that can be run anywhere. Larger titles depend on a huge amount of infrastructure, for authentication, progression, matchmaking, etc... It's not feasible to open-source all of that, especially given that it may well still be in use for…
> It's not feasible to open-source all of that, especially given that it may well still be in use for more recent titles If they're still running their authentication server (for example), then they wouldn't need to release that service. Patching the game to no longer contact the authentication server would also be acceptable, for services that aren't a core part of the game. It's pretty likely the game already allow…
Of course that is regrettable and could be changed, but it would require a significant change in incentives.
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#348* When GameSpy announced shutdown, patches were released to use Epic released the "post-GameSpy" patch, replacing the GameSpy servers with Epic's master servers for Unreal Tournament 3 [1] * Older Unreal series games later were transferred for maintenance to OldUnreal [2], and also made free.
At the same time, they are not open source, nor source available. So, there is an entity, that owns the code and maintains it, without the hassle of opensourcing it.
This is because the series have a strong community, which was in large part formed because the standalone servers, prior to algorithmic matchmaking, allowed people to gather there and learn to be social to each other and learn gaming etiquette. You had to play strategies for repeated games and be civil to others. Modern matchmaking strips us of that - you play with others once and go separate ways, so you don't have to deal with consequences and can use one-time game strategies, which leads to poor behavior and less enjoyment. Yes, you had players of drastically different skill levels on the same servers, and that was a good thing. Skilled players could teach newbies, newbies could learn the gaming etiquette and see what's possible, instead of boiling in the same pot with others playing completely different games than on the other skill levels. You had the core game and the social game on top of it, now we are all alone in our rooms interacting with strangers we will never see or play again with nor against.
Maybe Epic is not the best or the most loved company (compared to Valve) but I respect, that they understood that "this cow has gave us enough milk already", and could part ways with it, leaving existing community satisfied.
[0]: https://www.epicgames.com/unrealtournament
[1]: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/13210/view/291772582...
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
CS:GO's server architecture makes perfect sense for a game that would be easy to release server software. What do you do for, say, a failing MMO built on a proprietary game engine you're trying to make a sequel for?
This is such an overstated issue. There's not really that many MMOs. It's hard to say, but I would estimate that there are ~600-1000 MMOs total. Many of them are quite simple (like Club Penguin, MapleStory, ...) or already have third party servers running (WoW, City Of Heroes, ...). Also, your example doesn't really make sense. First, no one is arguing that companies should right now go revive all past MMOs. This is…
Maplestory 2 fails; they now have to release server software that could compromise Maplestory 1?
Re: Bill to block publishers from killing online games advances in California
#350I'm on the treadmill so this may appear jumbled. Bought PGA Tour 2k21 for $50. In October the servers shut down completely neutering the game. I think you're allowed to play a few courses still. But the career mode, which is why I originally bought the game, was completely turned off. Mind you that career mode had zero Internet needed features. It's like a sports franchise mode. So good on this bill. 2K should rot fo…
But you knew exactly what you were buying. It’s not hidden to you that an internet connection is required when you buy the game. Game developers are generally pretty terrible and do a lot of really shady things to extract value from their players. But that one isn’t one. The terms are clearly stated before your purchase
The original sin is selling a product that has an ongoing cost for a fixed price without creating an ongoing trust to pay those costs. Imagine I had a gas station that sold all you can use gasoline for a car for 4k. Then I sell a bunch of memberships and pay myself then go bankrupt. That’s straight up fraud.