59
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
59 points (92.8% liked)
Games
16410 readers
2163 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Good luck.
You'd need new legislation to have any legal case (for future games obviously). There aren't laws that entitle you to access to the servers forever or for the game to work without servers.
I'd be all for "you must release all necessary code (or at least all the technical details to replicate the interactions) to replace the server when you shut it down, or make the entire game fully playable without server interaction", but even writing those laws in a comprehensive way would be hard, let alone getting them passed or enforcing them.
There's no way a company is going to attempt to release all that information and potentially fail to release all details and set themselves up for a lawsuit. I think it's more likely that these laws would kill server-based games if they were implemented as suggested.
Instead, I could see that there might be a minimum server support length after the last sale of the product. Even then, service would be spotty for that time and there'd be no uptime guarantee. Fixes for problems and hacks would be incredibly slow and the game would basically be unplayable in short order, unless that guaranteed time was short, like 1 year.
Killing unnecessary always online horseshit would be a huge benefit by itself.
Companies wouldn't stop making multiplayer games. There's too much money.
But MMOs can be fun?
Also that includes any competitive MP FPS.
That's not unnecessary?
And it's not remotely possible that even one game would not exist as a result of laws requiring companies provide the capability to continue to play them when they stop hosting. The burden is less than negligible compared to the revenue those games provide.