Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

dexerto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 346 posts

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#161

Post by nanaboo »

yndoendo wrote: post #4

I would say lobbyist are continuing their take over of the EU. Copyright law is the excuse but 90's games proves this to be invalidated. None of the games from the 90s and early 2000's required authenticating with a launder. They just worked and this is why those games are still playable to date. Those same games that had multi-player allowed for downloading a self-hosted server. Enemy Territory is a prime example. T…

> Copyright law

who cares. you can still pirate if you so choose (at the risk of your data if you do it on the same PC).

you pirating is basically taking part in a distribution, the host simply doesn't do it with a company but a nick (digital loophole*). but the distribution happens no less and the license of right-to-use never covered this to begin with.

all these cases are digital loopholes: companies being able to shut down servers and forcing people to move on.

we need these laws.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#162

Post by magicalhippo »

EarlKing wrote: post #6

If only those 1.3 million signatories pledged to never buy from a company that Kills Games again...

EU already have markings for lots of things, like how efficient a dishwasher is.

I think a reasonable middle ground here is to just have EU mandate something similar for games. To receive an A rating the game has to be installable and playable fully offline, for example, and so on.

They could allow for publishers to guarantee a minimum support period, with full refunds guaranteed if the publisher does not honor that. So an E rating may be a game that's guaranteed playable for 2 years and requires online connection to play.

Then those who purchase can make informed decisions. Do I want to buy this game with a rating that signals the game may stop working at any point the publisher decides?

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#163

Post by hobofan »

roblabla wrote: post #151
hobofan wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> multiplayer games can very well have an offline playable LAN mode _some_ multiplayer games can, many can't, as they are using a cloud-based multiplayer backend that isn't easily replaceable (see other discussions in this thread). SKG makes no effort to address those differences.

I don't understand your argument. SKG specifically excludes: - Existing games (they only aim to have regulation for newer game, as existing games may be locked into technical choices like a cloud based multiplayer backend that can't be replaced) - Non live-service games (ergo games where you have a monthly subscription of some kind, which makes it obvious you're "renting" the game for a limited time). Within these co…

> a LAN multiplayer mode (most match-based FPS/strategy games can do that

Most match-based FPS don't do that anymore, as it's susceptible to DDOS. Whether a LAN-like mode is otherwise still feasible/acceptable by todays game quality standards is debatable.

> Provide server binaries for self-hosted servers

This is only feasible if the multiplayer backend is a simple server binary, which in many cases it's not anymore, but a full cloud architecture you would find for any SaaS app. There additionally is the issue of licensed libraries, which may prohibit redistribution of the server binaries (and may e.g. be bound to a per-host pricing).

> Now, please give me an example of a game that doesn't fit within that framework if you want to continue this argument.

Take your pick from[0] or a competitors website: PEAK, Content Warning, Gorilla Tag; All games from indie developers that heavily rely on good networking that wouldn't be feasible to be replaced.

> you can just make your game into a service requiring a monthly payment

Ah, yes the simple option of "completely tank your playerbase".

[0]: https://www.photonengine.com

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#165

Post by thrance »

l23k4 wrote: post #141
roblabla wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a much smaller set of European citizens, and yet they have a much larger access to lawmakers. So no, it's not idiotic.

[flagged]

False dilemma. Riot could release the server binaries when they end League of Legends service, and no one would get thrown on the street.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#166

Post by drbscl »

l23k4 wrote: post #141
roblabla wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a much smaller set of European citizens, and yet they have a much larger access to lawmakers. So no, it's not idiotic.

[flagged]

> And FWIW: People building games contribute something to society, playing them contributes nothing.

You're aware that they are taxed products that people buy with their wages, right?

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#167

Post by hodgehog11 »

jon-wood wrote: post #83
p0w3n3d wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this shows how corrupted elites are. If the "democratic" entity spends all the time with lobbyists, and not the initiative which started the discussion, this speaks volumes.

[flagged]

What you're saying is literally what the lobby groups think SKG is trying to go for. It's not at all what they're asking for. You should maybe take a look at what they are actually proposing and some of the presentations by developers on why it is sensible.

They're not stupid, there has been a lot of groundwork for this over the past 10+ years.

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#168

Post by thrance »

l23k4 wrote: post #144
LtWorf wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you buy instead of something else is putting someone on the street.

[flagged]

What's democratic about a decision made by the wealthy few, disregarding a massive popular wave!?

Re: Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

#169

Post by hodgehog11 »

andwur wrote: post #159
gambiting wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in games, worked on some of the huge(40+ million players) online live-service games out there, and I have no idea what you're talking about here: " What isn’t realistic is stamping their feet and demanding that companies make it possible for people to run their own servers for live service games, just the licensing issues are going to be a nightmare to solve" Like....what licencing issues? After the game is "d…

> Like....what licencing issues? After the game is "dead" and the parent company doesn't want to support it anymore, we could easily release the source code or even just the executables for the servers. I can't speak to the parent's stance, but more generally this would be referring to IP licensing and patent encumbrance. I've worked on a number of large systems where non-trivial parts of the codebase were licensed f…

Yes, this would force the nature of licensing to change. It does not apply retroactively, so the legal processes would naturally need to shift. Such licenses were used in the past, so there is no reason they cannot be considered again.
Post reply on HN