The Stop Killing Games campaign have revealed their support for a Californian bill related to game server shoutdowns.

cross-posted from: https://fedia.io/m/[email protected]/t/3751309

The Stop Killing Games campaign have revealed their support for a Californian bill related to game server shoutdowns.

  • QuadratureSurfer@piefed.socialOPEnglish
    7·
    5 days ago

    You’re right that there should be concerns about connecting old games to a random server that can push software updates.

    However, I think you’re misunderstanding what the SKG movement is as well as what this legislation is asking for.

    It’s not asking for companies to leave the servers running indefinitely. It’s definitely not telling them to just allow a 3rd party to take over the databases with all of the information there.

    It’s telling companies to provide information upfront about what consumers can expect when the game servers are officially shut down. It’s telling them to have a plan for shutting the game down.

    It provides some options for what those plans could look like:

    • Offline mode (and communicate what features will no longer be available)
    • Allow private servers
    • Refunds

    The current version of this bill has an exception for free games and subscription only based games.

    • fallaciousBasis@lemmy.worldEnglish
      212·
      5 days ago

      A refund makes no sense.

      That’s eerily similar to asking for a refund at an arcade machine because you died.

      Yea, exactly. This idiotic bill is trying to leverage that which has none, nor should!

      • QuadratureSurfer@piefed.socialOPEnglish
        4·
        5 days ago

        The way I see it, a refund is a last resort if they are unable to follow through on the other 2 options.

        Using your analogy, asking for a refund at an arcade would be more like asking for a refund for a subscription based online only game. In both of those cases you’re paying to play for a limited amount of time. This bill has an exclusion for that already, so it’s not an issue here.

        Think of it this way: Imagine you bought a kitchen appliance (like a refrigerator) that has a screen on the door for creating timers, leaving notes, and checking the weather.

        One day, the company says they’re shutting down the servers so that your refrigerator will no longer be able to check the weather, sync notes, etc. However, along with this update the refrigerator will no longer be able to keep food cold.

        Wouldn’t you want a refund at that point so that you could buy a new one? Or better yet, maybe we need a law to tell these companies that shutting down their servers shouldn’t affect the core features of the appliance.

        This is basically what’s started happening to a large number of games. Instead of just losing access to a few online features, companies are locking us out of the entire game, even if they are mainly a single player game. Just look at what happened to The Crew.

        • lad@programming.devEnglish
          2·
          4 days ago

          The way I see it, a refund is a last resort if they are unable to follow through on the other 2 options.

          And I expect companies trying to present refund as the default option, squeezing negative PR out of it and using it for astroturfing against SKG as a whole

        • fallaciousBasis@lemmy.worldEnglish
          114·
          5 days ago

          So do you sue MTG because no one wants to play magic anymore?

          Same with the pogs people?

          The other incredibly shit things people fawn over and then discard like trash?

          No dude. You’re trying to sell me some bullshit and I’m not buying it. That’s what you don’t get!

          I would accept that if I did pay for such a thing I would be a complete fucking moron and so -no - I wouldn’t be entitled to a refund. And that’s probably expressed in their policy - they don’t issue refunds - and so I don’t know why you would want one after you’ve read their terms and you’ve agreed to buy in their product with the expectation of no refund.

          You sound completely fucking insane.

          • QuadratureSurfer@piefed.socialOPEnglish
            8·
            5 days ago

            I think the refrigerator example is a much more accurate representation of what’s happening here.

            It’s not about whether you can find friends to play with, its about a company remotely disabling something you bought which should be able to work whether it’s connected to the internet or not.

            What if a bunch of car manufacturers start requiring an internet connection just to turn on your car (for security/safety reasons). Then after 5 years they shut down those servers and say, “buy a new one”. You’re telling me that, rather than supporting a law to deter the practice, you would rather just avoid buying cars from that company?

            • fallaciousBasis@lemmy.worldEnglish
              113·
              5 days ago

              Abstractions were always a problem for you.

              As towards your question. Yes. And a harder yes. I would not buy shit from them. And if I saw their vehicles I might slash the tires and smash a window or four.

              That’s the problem with most of you on lemmmeeeeznuts. You’re like half punk, sometimes, you’re not a real punk cuz you don’t really want to do anything that might get you in trouble but you really love people who do?

              Grow some balls.

              • QuadratureSurfer@piefed.socialOPEnglish
                42·
                4 days ago

                And if every car manufacturer starts to do the same thing with their vehicles, then you won’t be left with much of a choice. And no amount of slashing tires or smashing windows will actually change anything.

                At that point the only option you have left is to go through the legal system. That’s where real change can happen.

                Side note, technically I’m not on Lemmy, I’m on PieFed. But we’re all connected, so I’m assuming you actually meant to talk about Fediverse users in general.