Comment on The UK Stop Killing Games petition has reached 100.000 signatures

• RealFknNito@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Upon reading the UK version over again you’re right - it’s even worse. It states that companies no longer be allowed to ‘disable’ games which they often don’t do. They just stop maintaining them until the infrastructure for it disappears.

  I expected at the very least gamers would have understood the problem they’re complaining about but I got ahead of myself. The only thing SKG might accomplish legally is to allow third parties to host servers at End of Life but the counter argument to that is cheaters using their own servers.

  None of this is thought out. You’re demanding a solution be created AND implemented. This will go nowhere. Pirate Software was right and it’s stunning.

  source

  • Asetru@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Upon reading the UK version over again you’re right

    :)

    it’s even worse.

    sigh

    Why?

    It states that companies no longer be allowed to ‘disable’ games which they often don’t do. They just stop maintaining them until the infrastructure for it disappears.

    You’re close. Maybe read it again. Or something. I don’t know.

    source

    • RealFknNito@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Maybe instead of being the condescending dickhead you and yours project onto Pirate Software, you could instead point out specifics since you’re advocating for it. I’m confident you can’t though since I’m sure you haven’t read shit, just listened to people slobber all over it.

      source

      • Asetru@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Maybe we wouldn’t have to be such condescending dickheads if you cared to not make up stuff.

        the initiative seeks to prevent the remote disabling of videogames by the publishers, before providing reasonable means to continue functioning of said videogames without the involvement from the side of the publisher.

        That’s the core idea. Publishers should just make sure that after they milked their product it can somehow be run without their interference.

        That doesn’t require sources. In fact, this doesn’t even state any method that is preferred. Could they release sources? Sure. They could also release server binaries. They could also patch out the connection to their servers and only leave people with local multiplayer mode or something. They could do whatever. The initiative doesn’t care.

        The practice of licensing a product indefinitely but then just disabling it remotely is hostile to consumers. If they really, really want to keep their business model, they should sell licenses that are limited to a certain timeframe right from the start. Selling perpetual licenses and then disabling them without leaving consumers with any means to still access what they paid for shouldn’t be legal and probably isn’t.

        Also this right here:

        The initiative does not seek to acquire ownership of said videogames, associated intellectual rights or monetization rights, neither does it expect the publisher to provide resources for the said videogame once they discontinue it while leaving it in a reasonably functional (playable) state.

        Nobody wants your ip. Just don’t break stuff you sold.

        source

        • -> View More Comments