221–230 of 452 posts
I work for a game company. I am ardently opposed to this idea. All you will end up with, in the best case scenario that isn't even guaranteed to happen, is extremely mediocre games for which you will have the server executable along with the client. Whether you like it or not, thanks to piracy and competition (and yes I've heard Gabe Newell's quote on piracy), server authoritative video games that are eventually turn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your games are mediocre now. It's better to have a mediocre game that one can play, than an exceptional game that one can't. You're free to make games now, and yet it's most often hard to justify money for a game that isn't a skin on a version of solitaire (on sale). That's how bad your industry is. So, please, with your warning. As if you have work product to bargain with. You act as if your industry is busy. Outsid…
I agree with you that there is a mountain of shit in the gaming industry. Is any other industry different? Are Instagram and Tiktok literally not brainwashing hundreds of millions of people? Do defense companies care that innocents are murdered with their weapons? Do airplane companies face any enforceable moral judgment that they encourage relatively rich people to engage in idle leisure in other countries rather th…
Given that you work for the video game industry, perhaps your comment is in a sense perfect.
I work for a game company. I am ardently opposed to this idea. All you will end up with, in the best case scenario that isn't even guaranteed to happen, is extremely mediocre games for which you will have the server executable along with the client. Whether you like it or not, thanks to piracy and competition (and yes I've heard Gabe Newell's quote on piracy), server authoritative video games that are eventually turn…
>is extremely mediocre games for which you will have the server executable along with the client. opposed to absolutely nothing? yeah i think we can do with "mediocre" >video games that are eventually turned off is a legitimate business strategy if they aren't misleading customers about it sure. make the game a subscription and you can shut it down whenever you want :) >And no, "just release your source code then" is…
Re mediocre, ok that's fine.
Re the "how", then we arent really talking about anything here. Until there is a how, there is nothing to firmly agree or disagree with, so we have to talk in hypotheticals, which we are, and which is semi valuable.
Re making your own, when a company sells you a toilet and it breaks, you fix it yourself or buy a new one. When your 1999 game doesnt run on Windows 11, you fix it yourself or you buy a new one. If you require companies to fix it for you, the small ones will go bankrupt and the big ones will find a loophole.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what a strawman. its not about "you cannot draw this" but its more like "please dont use dyes that offgas deadly fumes", a technical regulation not about substance
Talk about strawman, it's literally "I paid for something I don't like, there should be a law!" And you're comparing it to poison gas
It's much more like "I paid for something, there should be a law so no one can take what I've paid for"
At a macro level, killed games are a good thing for gaming companies. It creates a shortage of playable games so that new games sell and continue to make money. The biggest competitor to the video game industry is movies (Netflix, Disney plus, etc) and past games. Think about it - what does the gaming industry look like 100 years from today? If players can play thousands of high quality games for free, why bother pay…
This is something we can answer pretty easily by looking at the book industry. People do enjoy novelty. The pulp sci-fi/fantasy from the 60s-80s is long forgotten save for a few masterpieces, and there is a flow of recent books that people buy and read.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that was the end of the road, then I definitely don't have a problem with it. Like another poster said, it would be like labeling for cigarettes, and that is totally fine. What I do fear however, is that they will go a step further, requiring companies to release server builds, client and server sourde code, and then of course the ultimate dream, "well no you actually can't turn it off, we require you to maintain…
>requiring companies to release server builds, client and server sourde code you did not read the initiative. they do not mention any of that and explicitly state that this won't be required (even if they wanted because of copyright laws).
Do not be surprised when they go from something harmless to something punitive that forces small companies out of business.
Of course it does. The whole idea of "Stop Killing Games" is that developers should not be able to summarily kill off a game that people have invested time and money into, just because it's not making them enough money going forward. Developers should absolutely not have that choice. It's fine if you want to run a live service game where the optimal experience happens during active support. However, unless you as a d…
It's such a bizarre counter argument. The whole point of the movement is that developers are choosing to harm the medium and should stop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>is extremely mediocre games for which you will have the server executable along with the client. opposed to absolutely nothing? yeah i think we can do with "mediocre" >video games that are eventually turned off is a legitimate business strategy if they aren't misleading customers about it sure. make the game a subscription and you can shut it down whenever you want :) >And no, "just release your source code then" is…
Re subscription marketing messaging, totally agree. Re mediocre, ok that's fine. Re the "how", then we arent really talking about anything here. Until there is a how, there is nothing to firmly agree or disagree with, so we have to talk in hypotheticals, which we are, and which is semi valuable. Re making your own, when a company sells you a toilet and it breaks, you fix it yourself or buy a new one. When your 1999 g…
you mean the loop hole that was industry standard before 2000 and a handful of dudes in basements solved?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nowhere did I say or imply that - did you respond to the wrong comment by accident?
It’s kind of implied by your argument. All these concerns apply to every piece of legislation that gets concocted. What makes this topic especially effected by one’s distrust in the government’s ability?
No, it's absolutely not. You're reading your own thoughts into it. Nowhere is the implication that we should do nothing.
> All these concerns apply to every piece of legislation that gets concocted. What makes this topic especially effected by one’s distrust in the government’s ability?
Because the authors are asking for public support for an initiative, and it now has a lot of public attention, with some specific people (mostly PirateSoftware) that are also publicly opposing it, and likely many more lurkers that don't want to sign it because of their concerns.
It's also the case that the more technical the topic, the more that legislators tend to screw it up, likely because of technical incompetence.
I'm elaborating the concerns so that they can get addressed. If you want more signatures, then you'd want to know what peoples' hangups are so that you can fix them.