this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
597 points (95.0% liked)

memes

10680 readers
2593 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/34790413

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works 107 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Their fault. I remember a time when publishers allowed for people to run their own dedicated servers, for FPS at least. They could have modified that existing model, but instead they took that ability away from the user whilst almost simultaneously making excuses about the problem they created.

If their servers can't run forever, give us dedicated servers on a larger scale FFS!

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 48 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I really believe it has nothing at all to do with running the servers or their maintenance costs.

It's about control. It's a rare sight to see any kind of multiplayer experience that isn't all about selling shit through MTX. If you could run your own server, you might be able to also give yourself the shit they want to nickel and dime you for without paying, and that would really ruin their model.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Yeah, but the point is if they've already shut off their servers and moved on to the next thing, who cares? Just let the dedicated fans and other nuts run their own servers and they can wash their hands of it entirely. They weren't going to make any money on it after pulling the plug anyway.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Ah, but then there's a chance fewer people would buy the next piece of shit designed to extract their money.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Yep, their argument against game preservation is that some people may use the preserved games for *shock* recreation!

That is an idiotic argument.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 9 points 1 week ago

You’ve nailed it with these two points.

I’d like to add they specifically want to determine when and where you access their IP.

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago

Yep.

If its possible for someone to choose an older, less expensive game, then that means those games are market competitors for similar modern games, with more mechanics designed to coax money out of you.

Its basically a hyper charged version of planned obsolesence.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 77 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Here is a completely noncontributory comment.

I stumbled across a copy of a physical book from the author of the comic this is from. I wondered to myself if this meme is in it.

It is.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago

THE PROPHECY HAS BEEN FULFILLED!

THE CHOSEN ONE IS AMONG US

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 76 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's such a garbage argument when you can just counter with "okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

There are plenty of famous games, including Minecraft (only the most famous game in history) that manage to do that just fine. Acting like it's impossible just so that you can force people to buy the next game is bullshit.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

Or shit at the very least release documentation on how it works and let the open source community take care of it lol

[–] uis@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

Both? Both. Both is good.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

It's such a garbage argument when you can just counter with "okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

Which you can help by signing European Citizens' Initiative. If you are EU citizen that is.

[–] Belgdore@lemm.ee 56 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They cant run servers forever. Which is why they should release the server code when they decide to shut down.

[–] Fades@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Yeah that would be awesome but it’s easier said than done (to no surprise, I’m sure).

One of the big issues I see from a developer standpoint is the potential for leaking proprietary code that they may not want to publicize like things related to authorization, server side anti cheat implementations, etc.

Why would they care? The product is done right? Well every project is not written from scratch and so to publish this stuff it could incur risk to the org’s other current/future projects in addition to helping outside sources get a leg up on said other current/future projects.

This could be dealt with potentially as well but that means extra dev resources and time and potentially inter-org collaboration to develop common OS standards but again that’s work that does not generate $$$

I’m not defending these assholes mind you, I just understand the blockers in the way. The greedy fucks could indeed do this but they never will because of said $$$

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] AkatsukiLevi@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"They can't run servers forever!" Open source the server then Let people who want to play it run it themselves then

EDIT: typo

[–] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I remember being able to run a private World of Warcraft server on my computer back in like, 2009. Surely if WoW can be reverse-engineered, so can many other titles.

But yes, it would obviously be better if they’d just open-source it.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

Surely if WoW can be reverse-engineered, so can many other titles.

This is solving wrong problem. Or rather, this problem should not exist at all.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 32 points 1 week ago

they can't keep running servers forever

That's exactly why we need it to pass.

Which EU citizens can help with by signing it. We are 40% there, we need your signature.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 30 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think Microsoft should be pressured under this with their deprecation of Windows Mixed Reality. They're totally fine with just bricking tons of highly sophisticated, expensive devices people already bought.

And then they have the gall to talk about "sustainability."

Not gonna support it anymore? Give it to the community. Patch out the requirement for your top-secret black-boxed corporate garbage.

[–] DerArzt@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That all costs money though .......

Money they earned when they said it will be around in the future, so fuck-em.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

"Stop Killing Games" is literally a way to force companies to let you host your own servers. That's the intention. The company loses nothing, they can wash their hands and move on.

In fact, they can even continue to sell games without servers.

[–] callyral@pawb.social 29 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If they're not gonna run servers, then they should distribute and open source the server software so players can run their own servers.

[–] Irelephant@lemm.ee 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Whenever google cancels a cool project a small part of me wishes they would open source it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I feel like wayyy too many engineer minds lean back on “too vague” without understanding how many judgment calls judges make in cases every day. It’s not uncommon for them to have to decide what someone’s intent or knowledge was when taking a certain action.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Software engineer here. I find the petition to be very specific, and totally feasible.

Anyway, this isn't a true referendum where its text would become immediate law as soon as it passes. It's a petition that would be presented to legislators who would write the actual law. The petition doesn't need to be written in legalese.

(Also: if the customer paid them even one cent, then they DO owe the customer something. Also: They should be forced to release the server software when they shut down the servers.)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Slayan@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Meanwhile ragnarok online a 2002 mmorpg is alive and kicking with hundreds of private servers..

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SpaceScotsman@startrek.website 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

To all the people saying they should release server source code: You don't even need to do that (as nice as it would be). At the very basic level all that is needed is:

  • remove DRM (which probably cost more effort to add in the first place)
  • a description of the API for any online components (which any decent dev team will already have internally documented)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 1 week ago

If your game relies on your servers, I won't buy your game.

[–] Mandy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago

If two guys and a basement can run the guild wars 1 servers for next to nothing (their words) than yes, company's very much could run their servers forever.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Switch this meme with "people want video games they own" and it's this thread. There are still plenty of games you can self host: Palworld, Minecraft, Satisfactory, Factorio, Terraria, Space Engineers, Counter Strike 2, The Forest, ARMA III, 7 Days to Die, Rust, Valheim. The average person obviously doesn't care about self hosting their own game server.

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago

They can connect to a server of those who do care about self hosting their own game server.

[–] Default_Defect@midwest.social 5 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Maybe its my lack of trust in the government from being in the US, but you guys seem to have a ton of faith that your legislators will take this and not make it a shit show and worse than the status quo.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] sirico@feddit.uk 5 points 1 week ago

Getting back to the old status quo

load more comments
view more: next ›