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

321–330 of 346 posts

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

#321

Post by joxdosba »

skotobaza wrote: post #296
joxdosba wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose the charitable interpretation is that those who would invest considerable time campaigning for this are deeply into gaming, which is an activity typically associated with younger people. There’s also the fact that through events like Gamergate, the term “gamer” has become highly charged and is not something most adults would want to be associated with.

That's an interesting point of view. For me, people who advocate for preservation are usually older because they remember the times when you could just buy games and they would keep working forever. While younger people were born into the world where online games is the norm so they don't expect everything to last long.

I’m sure the preservation folks will tend to be older, but they’re still going to end up grouped with all other gamers.

It’s a deeply unfortunate association. The “gamer” identity is toxic to the point where “gamer word” means “racial slur”.

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

#322

Post by [deleted] »

skotobaza wrote: post #294
akramachamarei wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is literally what SKG is doing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that game companies often create games and sell them (i.e. sell licenses), and the terms of those licenses include some degree of revocability and nonguarantees of continued function—which I don't like, btw. Nonetheless, customers buy these games, agree to these licenses, having attentatively read those terms or not. It's a bit…

> my impression is that game companies often create games and sell them (i.e. sell licenses), and the terms of those licenses include some degree of revocability and nonguarantees of continued function Yes, that's the case. But the absence of guarantees is not very specific, which opens a door for publishers to just drop support on a whim. It's not an issue with titles that have no online components, since you can ju…

[deleted]

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

#323

Post by modo_mario »

slopinthebag wrote: post #264
modo_mario wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it forcing people to work?

What happens if someone decides to no longer work managing a server for a game they built?

Then they don't lock their playability behind a goddamn server. Why are boatloads of games with singleplayer content locked behind a launcher anyway?

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

#324

Post by rafterydj »

skotobaza wrote: post #254
rafterydj wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're calling for legislating software architecture for a subset of software that is different to how it works everywhere else in the tech industry. I am not even sure that's true, even in the limited scope of "we've already built this jumble of micro services that our thin client requires to do anything and a rewrite is impossible". I think the real goal of this would simply be clearer communication with consumer…

I personally think this is not a desirable solution for gamers. Some, if not most, publishers will put a label about "renting" (like they already do in the EULA) and won't change a thing.

I don't think we can stop publishers from rent-seeking behavior, I am only trying to get at the idea that we should clearly communicate to a user when something is truly bought and owned vs rented. If that information is clearly and loudly proclaimed to the customer at purchase time, I have to assume consumer behavior would steer the industry in a more positive direction.

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

#325

Post by eptcyka »

joxdosba wrote: post #295
skotobaza wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SKG people are mostly immature and tend to overreact How so? What's immature about the desire to keep games functional?

I suppose the charitable interpretation is that those who would invest considerable time campaigning for this are deeply into gaming, which is an activity typically associated with younger people. There’s also the fact that through events like Gamergate, the term “gamer” has become highly charged and is not something most adults would want to be associated with.

Gamergate has nothing to do with the SKG initiative.

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

#326

Post by joxdosba »

eptcyka wrote: post #325
joxdosba wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose the charitable interpretation is that those who would invest considerable time campaigning for this are deeply into gaming, which is an activity typically associated with younger people. There’s also the fact that through events like Gamergate, the term “gamer” has become highly charged and is not something most adults would want to be associated with.

Gamergate has nothing to do with the SKG initiative.

It’s a bad look to have to explicitly deny things like this.

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

#327

Post by eptcyka »

joxdosba wrote: post #326
eptcyka wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gamergate has nothing to do with the SKG initiative.

It’s a bad look to have to explicitly deny things like this.

You brought it up, what do you mean? If one were to bring up allegations of you associating with unpopular movements, would you not clear your name? Having checked your post history, I have to genuinely ask if you're a troll account.

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

#328

Post by joxdosba »

eptcyka wrote: post #327
joxdosba wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a bad look to have to explicitly deny things like this.

You brought it up, what do you mean? If one were to bring up allegations of you associating with unpopular movements, would you not clear your name? Having checked your post history, I have to genuinely ask if you're a troll account.

I didn’t suggest that the two were directly related.

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

#329

Post by probiz »

joxdosba wrote: post #321
skotobaza wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an interesting point of view. For me, people who advocate for preservation are usually older because they remember the times when you could just buy games and they would keep working forever. While younger people were born into the world where online games is the norm so they don't expect everything to last long.

I’m sure the preservation folks will tend to be older, but they’re still going to end up grouped with all other gamers. It’s a deeply unfortunate association. The “gamer” identity is toxic to the point where “gamer word” means “racial slur”.

[flagged]

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

#330

Post by eptcyka »

joxdosba wrote: post #328
eptcyka wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You brought it up, what do you mean? If one were to bring up allegations of you associating with unpopular movements, would you not clear your name? Having checked your post history, I have to genuinely ask if you're a troll account.

I didn’t suggest that the two were directly related.

You made the association. You literally brought them up yourself.
Post reply on HN