streamchat

[wary drift]

Well it would be pretty hypocritical to take my stance on the current controversy and not try to deescalate.

[wet storm]

Sorry if I sound salty and assmad but I got a vicious flu and the last couple days here have been a tirade of ad hominens and batshit insane smug behavior, of "I will cross my arms now, convince me peasant"

Back in my day if you were interested in a subject enough to argue for an hour on the internet you'd either do your own research and legwork to understand that subject better or be labeled as a troll

(even my text is comming out flu-ey)

[dusky grove]

lol

[wary drift]

Much the same, yeah.
The weather probably adds onto this for a lot of people.
Got a friend on the east coast who almost got hospitalized due to the heatwave, it's nuts.

[wet storm]

I'm on the southern hemisphere and it's 4 degrees C (39F) in a house with no insulation

🥶

I got +1 kg from water retention and missed 2 workout days, my GAINZ are slipping away

Also yeah aparently in Canada, NS and NF, it was 40 C yesterday

That's oppresive heat for sure

[golden mirage]

Been there. It made me seriously consider lighting the house on fire for warmth.

[grim pine]

when you have a large audience and you say something, the audience buys that stuff, whether it's true or not. Yeah there are some independent thinkers, but usually people are swept to believing what that person says. Thor has been put in a position - whether he likes it or not - where he has a responsibility to at least try to say what he believes is the truth, or at the very least, not say things that are false.

He clearly believed (or so I'd like to hope) that the movement was vague, and there were issues, and he "encourages people to not back it". He read Ross's tweet on misunderstanding certain things. At that point, I would argue he has an obligation to at least revisit the points he made and try to get a different point of view. But beyond obligation, Thor wasn't against the concept of the movement, just several factors of it. So beyond obligation, when being told "You've misunderstood things", that's a problem, if somebody with such a big audience has misunderstood something. Maybe it's not his fault, maybe the initiative is actually awfully written, and any sane person with knowledge in the industry would read it like him. But then, that's where a dialogue naturally comes in, because you can support something you're not objectively against, acknowledge the fact that maybe the guy telling you you're wrong has a point (or maybe not), and that you're giving your audience potentially false information.

Karl Jobst just got sued over false information, ts ain't a joke, ygm. People in the position of Thor have outreach, something game developers don't (what is Warhorse gonna say on the matter?). And his opinion to this is honestly quite important (assuming it's genuine, which some people don't) because it's genuinely from a nuanced position.

An initiative that requires numbers to sign being hit with a man in the industry discrediting it is going to damage the initiative. Thor knew that. Thor believed the initiative shouldn't go through because it was a bad initiative. But when he was told "You misunderstand", he should've rolled back, been willing to discuss it. Because if he doesn't, a large chunk of his audience will take his word as fact - people who otherwise would've signed the form.

I don't buy the "they had the choice to discuss for 10 months" arguments when Thor said he wouldn't discuss due to disingenuity on day 1. You've kinda thrown the key away with that one, you cannot blame SKG's bullying (it happens on both sides, Welcome to the Internet!) as a valid reason to not discuss this topic. And even then, are we not going to discuss in future because it says "bullying works" or are we going to realise that the best time to have this conversation was yesterday.

"Why expect Thor to be the one to have to clean the mess" Clean the mess, we're looking at this the wrong way. We all agree to some extent with what SKG stands for, even if there are issues. Thor not only has the obligation to do right by his community and confirm what he thought he understood was true, he should also realise that if SKG fails, there's nothing. Like okay, you have problems with it, speak out, converse, fix the problems, chat. Yeah it's not great, but the alternative is the status quo that Thor also said wasn't great.

i didn't really expand specifically on what i said so real quick ps: since the movement is signature based, someone with a large audience saying something that they cannot be sure is true and then refusing to discuss it further is damaging whether you like it or not.

[wary drift]

what is Warhorse gonna say on the matter?
They can offer the same industry insider insights Thor put forward of how the movement needs to approach these issues to not run into stone walls or wreck entire genres of games.

I didn't bring up Warhorse, because I'm suggesting Warhorse (or really any other EU video game devs, they were jus the first on my mind) would publically speak on the issue, but that there is a million and one options other than Thor to reach out to if SKG is serious about incorporating solutions to the issues Thor brought up.

[grim pine]

Thor is the one with the audience, and the claims against SKG

[wary drift]

Having an audience is irrelevant when the issue is the shape a proposition should take.

Thor's entire point was that SKG lacks an understanding of how the industry works.

[wet storm]

Sorry but this is absolutely not true

People tend to stick to the first thing they hear and if what they hear is "this proposition is dogshit and written by someone who doesn't know whay they are talking about" that's what they'll believe even after a year

[grim pine]

This is wrong generally, but especially so in Thor's case when his audience is made of potential-signatures for an initiative that requires signatures.

[wary drift]

I see where you're going, but I'd really rather not talk over everyone, so I'll wait until you're done to explain myself

[wet storm]

Meanwhile at the risk of being a whataboutist a much more grounded response is "this proposition has major issues and I am willing to pencil in some time to talk about it" IMO

and saying "Oh Thor had no obligation" yeah he didn't but it's dissapointing the whole process was to take a dump on it and walk away as one of the top streamers at the time

It became news worthy

[wary drift]

Just on this note though, that basically suggests that Thor has some responsibility to in addition to offering his critique, to take time out of his day to do SKG's homework for them in a political proposal for a continent he's not on.

[wet storm]

He does as one of the main faces of the industry that was interested in throwing his hat in the take circle

[untold seal]

How can Thor have any major influence against SKG when he has been public enemy number one even since he posted those two videos, and with the wow drama. Almost all youtubers are dog piling him. By that measure the opposite should have happened. More people would have signed the petition to send a message to Thor.

That did not happen, because in the grand scheme of EU politics, Thor and Ross are nobodies. They have zero influence to hoity toity lawyers and politicians .

[polar sandal]

hey so

[wary drift]

Is that how criticism works?
Should Siskel and Ebert have gone to Universal Studios and helped reshoot the movies they gave two thumbs down to?

[polar sandal]

y'all know about Offbrand Games and how Thor is involved in it right

well, one of the games Offbrand Games is publishing, Rivals of Aether II, is a live service game

[wet storm]

Apples and oranges

[polar sandal]

when you put it into perspective like that, it all begins to make sense how he's against live service games being restricted like this

[wet storm]

Sorry but what's that about?

[jolly prism]

Thor had on obligation to "shit" on the initiative either but he took the time out of his day to do it. It is not illogical that people now expect him to take responsibility for it.

[wet storm]

Is Offbrand Games publishing a live service game?

[flat moat]

At the end of the day, the petition is very likely to fail, a lot more outreach could have been done by the organizers to other YouTubers and the likes in the 10 month interim period to garner the additional 500k they needed. The idea will remain the same in its further iterations down the line but we do need the whole thing to be improved.

[wet storm]

This is true

ECIs have no cooldown

Someone could literally do SKG part 2 electric boogaloo in August 1st

[blissful imp]

Sorry, but i just saw this...

[grim pine]

yikes

I'm trying to give benefit of the doubt to Thor ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Am I a fool for doing so? Am I missing the telltale signs?

Idk.

[blissful imp]

i'm not siding with Act man here

swear i'm not

[jolly prism]

Broken clock and all that.

[sacred junco]

Conflict of interests. But I guess you already figured that out based on the wording of lime?

[wet storm]

I'm running on fumes and assumptions but I assume they meant Rivals of Aether 2

I'll be surprised if it doesn't have an offline mode

[rotund trout]

Just remember to keep things civil in here please 🙂

[wet storm]

Couch pvp etc.

[flat moat]

Act Man is only jumping on it because he believes he could benefit from it

[wet storm]

It's unaffected by SKG

[polar sandal]

SKG (Stop Killing Games), the initiative Thor is explicitly against (even though he fundamentally does not understand the initiative and what it's trying to achieve, therefore misrepresenting it), aims to make publishers and game devs think about building infrastructure for future games or building them in a way such that they can be preserved by the community later. This can be something like releasing server software to the public. This will not affect current games, meaning nothing will really be broken.

However, Thor seems to have some bias, as he has leadership in Offbrand Games, which is currently publishing Rivals of Aether II.

Rivals of Aether II is a live service game.

[wary drift]

Anyway, to say what I was going to say before: Yes, Thor throwing his hat in was a big exposure to the movement.
In fact, according to Ross, it was the biggest exposure to the movement. Ignoring that this means that the movement was not doing hot in the first place, you know what you can do with that bad publicity?
Go with it.
You know why you don't need Warhorse or whatever to talk publically if they behind the scenes help Ross out with a redraft?
Because if then a month or two later Ross comes back and says: "Okay, so we took a long hard look at Thor's criticism, and worked behind the scenes with some industry veterans to redraft the proposal." then (if the influencers who cashed in on the controversy just now actually give a shit about Ross like they claim they do now, and gave it some publicity which they could have done but didn't for the past 10 months), all the negative publicity of the proposal being bad and lacking insight would immediately turn around.
People are desperate to see political stuff actually change and adapt to criticism. Ross making an adjusted proposal would have been a colossal win.

Warhorse/other industry outlets having or not having a big public face is irrelevant, because the expert's job is not to be the PR guy.

[wet storm]

Isn't Rivals of Aether 2 like Smash Bros or Brawlhalla?

Those games have couch pvp

If Brawlhalla servers die you can still play on your tv

[wintry pond]

I am assuming that kronos had a look at it, since he was a lawyer and if they came up with that interpretation then its legal to do all the things he said

[polar sandal]

Rivals of Aether II has always-online requirements, even in a singleplayer match.

[wintry pond]

I always thought that thor was ok with the idea, but the wording was the problem

[rotund trout]

yes

[wet storm]

Oh cringe

But can you PLAY offline?

[polar sandal]

nope

[flat moat]

The funny thing is, Thor states every stream to not outsource your critical thinking. People have been outsourcing their critical thinking.

what can you do?

[polar sandal]

you must be online to play

[wary drift]

There is a world of difference between giving his thoughts on it after being constantly asked to do so, and sitting down to do SKG's homework on what the legal background of games even looks like in the EU to propose something that would both attack the specific practices he suggests SKG put greater focus on, and would have a chance of getting any traction in a parliment he had no exposure to on account of not living under.

[untold seal]

First people whine about too much goverment over reach, and now they want more goverment over reach over vidya games kekw

[wet storm]

It's 'cos people only want government overreach when corporations take advantage of consumers

[golden mirage]

My view is that skg needed 1M signatures, that is less than 1% of the estimated total number of gamers in the EU. If your initiative can't convince 1% of your target audience to support it then either people don't agree with it or you utterly failed to get the word out or you failed to convince people to sign.

All 3 of those things are the responsibility of Ross to address, not Thor. If Thor was against it then Ross should have reached out to everyone else to support it. You know, like all the streamers currently dog piling Thor could have used thier influence to support the initiative.

That this failed is not Thors fault, he's just the scapegoat so others don't have to take responsibility for it.

[wary drift]

Goverment is when bad. But when bad is bad to bad, it is good. But sometimes bad is bad to bad in a bad way, which is comedy special.

[untold seal]

If the movement was actually passed as is, the suits, mba, corporations are not going to be hurting. They will just offload to your developer already dealing with 80hr work week for shit pay

[grim pine]

Why is it Thor vs SKG though. People don't hate on Thor then think "Oh, I'll support the thing he said was bad, that'll teach him". That's not remotely realistic. There's no publicity to signing those forms, it literally doesn't affect Thor or his community in any way. Haters ain't gonna vote out of spite, that's a ridiculous notion.

What message does it even send a man who refuses to entertain discussion? Nothing, it doesn't send nothing.
And this doesn't even address the points. I'm not saying SKG failing is Thor's fault, honestly they were way off the mark. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have an influence. Everything I said still applies whether it was is fault or not. And we can't prove it's not his fault, but his videos on the subject got a lot of views. I remember someone sharing them a while back (bit of an anecdote lol, but they shared it because they agreed with it).

Also, "hoity toity lawyers" have little influence on public signatures. Yeah they'll have more influence than Ross and Thor later down the line, but we're at the point where it's not even worth it for the "hoity toity lawyers" to even consider the initiative, because they didn't reach the mark. It's people like Thor and Ross and other creators/streamers that have the influence now.

[wintry pond]

I am re watching the original video and isint he on the official page for it

[untold seal]

EU has a growing problem with Russian aggression , and political meddling. Nobody is going to care about video game preservation.

[grim pine]

what

[wet storm]

Ah, so the initiative is sound on principle and the issue is timing?

[untold seal]

Thor could have supported SkG from day 1 and this would have still failed.

[jolly prism]

People can care about more than 2 things at once

[grim pine]

that's certainly one of the takes of all time

[polar sandal]

Thor actually contradicted himself several times about all of this.
First he was completely against it, then he proceeded to be for it, but then say "vague", even though he fundamentally misunderstood what the initiative was about, causing him to believe that it was vague. Heck, he fundamentally misunderstood the point of an ECI. A European Citizens' Initiative (ECI) is a way to start negotiations between parties about parts of the law that should be addressed. It is not a law proposal and SKG was never intended to be one. Lawmakers are the ones who actually write the laws.

The point of SKG is to patch a hole in the EU Consumer Protection laws, specifically relating to directive 93/13/EEC.

[flat moat]

No, it's just an argument about govt inefficiency

[wet storm]

It's a pretty poor argument

If you wanna blame something on Europe blame people not knowing English

opening the initiative

English

Closes it

[untold seal]

The issue is that you need equally powerful and influential people on your side to get anything substantial done. You need to cover every angle . Lawyers, business ,corporations politicians. A full on wieners out for harambe plan , nothing vague. It needs to be solid

[jolly prism]

The initiative passing with the signatures is not the end step and does not guarantee implementation. It would however make them discuss it in an official capacity and offer changes to it.

[wary drift]

Yeah, I don't want to dogpile you or anything, but generally the way it works is that there's different people looking into different things.
The consumer protection side of the EU government isn't going to be sweating about Russian agression.
I mean, they are, but they are going to be sweating about it the same way any EU citizen is.

[untold seal]

Monkey paw curls

They reach out to Ubisoft, EA kekw

[flat moat]

That's if they choose to deal with the matter. Parliament and others like it can strike down petitions if they find it not worth their time or the paper it's written on

[wet storm]

Naturally

[rotund trout]

that is 100% wrong information. I just tested it. You can play the game offline

[wet storm]

You didn't think there wouldn't be lobbying?

[jolly prism]

They already do

[wary drift]

Huh.
You know when I was trying to think of European game studios, Ubisoft didn't even cross my mind.

Is this what peace feels like?

[jolly prism]

Still did not stop them for essentially burying loot boxes

[wet storm]

I'm particularly fond of GDPR

[jolly prism]

And that was only thanks to the discussion happening (and the potential it had)

[untold seal]

Sure, but it is video game preservation from two nobodies. It is a system with finite resources. They will not waste those resources .

I want games to be preserved. I want people to pay attention to this shit. But unless you get very powerful people/coporations/business on your side. Nothing will change even after the petition has passed

[grim pine]

fizzy my god man

who do you want to start a petition to get this up to EU

who

nobody gives a shit about your lawyers at this point

[wet storm]

Two nobodies? What about the signatures?

[grim pine]

please man

please

[polar sandal]

interesting. You sure about this?

[grim pine]

this is painful

[rotund trout]

I told you. I just tested it. I went offline and started the game.

[wet storm]

You do understand that we get refunds on steam WORLDWIDE because steam was sued in Australia?

[rotund trout]

I was just offline, maybe this image will convince you

[polar sandal]

well alright, my b then

[untold seal]

Yeah because it hurt the Australian goverment.

[polar sandal]

interestingly enough, a ridiculous amount of people have stated that it has always-online requirements even in singleplayer

[rotund trout]

it's fine but I'd prefer you guys check your sources first. And this one was easy to check ^^

[rotund trout]

oh you mean some people claim stupid shit on the internet? Colour me shocked

[jolly prism]

And the point here is that it hurts customers (EU customers). EU has a pretty good track record of fighting for customer rights.

[polar sandal]

I haven't bought the game because I don't want to support a publisher like Offbrand Games, at least while all of the controversy is going on

[wet storm]

What does that mean?

[untold seal]

Fair, and nobody gives a shit about why you want to play an old video game. To them, there are far bigger problems to deal with.

[polar sandal]

not just some, a surprisingly large amount have said that always-online is a thing even in singleplayer

[wet storm]

"Gamers aren't getting refunds so it hurts the government" what

[rotund trout]

Yea, that's fine. ot's your choice 🙂

[wary drift]

I'm guessing Rivals of Aether sends some online telemetry even when you're playing singleplayer for Steam Achievements and the like, and someone interpreted that as the game requiring online connection.

[rotund trout]

I don't doubt that. But a huge amount of people love spreading hate. It is what it is. If you want to have facts, check for yourself if you can.

[sacred junco]

Steam refund is there. but i understand that you don't even want to entertain the hassle of going through that, or putting money into your steam wallet which is non-refundable

[wet storm]

That's why consumer rights are being said ever other message. It's not about "playing old games", it's about not having something from a store you bought be removed from your account

[rotund trout]

Maybe. But you can definitely play if offline

[grim pine]

it's not a matter of "playing an old video game" its issues relating to outright violating commerce law through legal loopholes. I'd argue (and I may be going off on one here) that there'll be a fair amount of care.

[polar sandal]

I mostly assumed that because of such a massive quantity of people stating it is always-online, even in singleplayer. I didn't want to go through the hassle of testing it myself, but I guess I'm in the wrong here

either way, the game reportedly has a lot of other issues

[sacred junco]

Nah it's fine, I understand it

[wet storm]

Imagine you buy a car, there's a fine print that says you're leasing the car instead, dude says "Hope you're happy with your purchase" and months later you get repo'd

I would be surprised if there aren't precedents treating this as fraud

[grim pine]

This is why people want to download cars goddamn it.

[wary drift]

Honestly, I think that in particular would be best tackled with a class action lawsuit, over a general proposal that would need to churn through the political system with no real targets in mind.

[polar sandal]

laws based on SKG would make this practice illegal, they would have to give you clear notice and the ability to run the game yourself in one capacity or another

the vagueness in how you do that is on purpose, just like how cops pull you over if they have "reasonable suspicion"

[wary drift]

I'm going to go download the Landkreuzer P1000 Ratte again, just for that!
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3026535021&searchtext=ratte

Video game modding is truly beautiful.

[polar sandal]

The vagueness is there to make the job for publishers and devs easier, not to harm them

[wet storm]

Holy canoly People v. Northern Leasing Systems, from 2017

The silly example I described ACTUALLY HAPPENED

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2017/2017-ny-slip-op-32496-u.html

tl;dr Salesperson misrepresented leases as sales

[polar sandal]

there are many, many ways you could go about making a game comply under SKG's requirements

Thor has misrepresented the initiative and I honestly think it's a massive part of misunderstanding the initiative entirely and not only that, probably some inability to accept any form of defeat (this has been a repeating pattern in literally every controversy with Thor)

[wary drift]

New York car salesmen are just built different.

So what you're saying, is that when Tesla goes under through the subsequent class action lawsuits and their consequences, Elon Musk will have succeeded in saving gaming by proxy?

[wet storm]

They then sue you for bootlegging a solution to carpool

[wintry pond]

are you a lawyer? do you know law? did you read the initiative at that time? did you fully understand all the implications of it. If he misunderstood it then thats a huge problem, since people can misinterpret it and if it becomes a law, they do something different then what people wanted

[wet storm]

See this is what I mean with smuggly attacking people

Can we not do that

for the love of god

[rotund trout]

how can he be misrepresenting it when he wasn't representing it to begin with? He simply said he wouldn't sign it which isn't even a big deal because he couldn't sign it anyway. Plus, people should read the thing themselves anyway and then do some critical thinking and then sign or don't sign, depending on what they want.

[wet storm]

for like 2 days

Just until I kick off my flu

[polar sandal]

I'm not a lawyer, but the initiative makes perfect sense to a massive number of lawyers, including ones I know personally.
I've read the initiative myself and again, the goal of an ECI is to start negotiations, it is not a law proposal.

[wintry pond]

was it the current one or the one from 10 months ago?

[jolly prism]

That's... not how the European Citizens' Initiative works. The idea it would just pass through into a law without a change (if it was this problematic) is nonsensical.

[polar sandal]

Quite literally that's not the case. Thor literally said several times he will actively go against the initiative and argue against it. Heck, he can't even sign it in the first place because he's not a citizen of the EU or UK.

There are clips of this.

[wary drift]

Out of curiosity, could you show me what clips you're referring to?

[wet storm]

Representation has two distinct meanings.

Acting on behalf of someone, and describe and portray something.

I think you mixed the two here

[wintry pond]

link?

[wet storm]

Ayo can UK citizens sign ECIs?

I thought they couldn't

[polar sandal]

no, but there was also a UK initiative

[wet storm]

Ah, I see. Wasn't aware, sorry

[polar sandal]

similar to what an ECI is

[rotund trout]

Maybe I did. That doesn't change the fact that Thor couldn't sign it even if he wanted to. And he did say that the formalities were an issue.
I don't understand why they didn't just move on to another streamer, maybe even European, to promote the initiative. They could've gotten more signatures if they contacted more people and spread awareness but to my knowledge that wasn't done?

(correct me if I'm wrong, of course 🙂 )

[wintry pond]

also why wasnt there a clarification video from ros? like, if there's a video is has big traction, that is misrepresenting a thing I work on, then I would want to release something that clarifies things for people.

[wary drift]

What bugs me a lot is that a lot of people hating on Thor are coming from massive influencers who have been radio silent on SKG for 10 months, and still act like Thor giving SKG a fraction of his attention for about a week one time was why no one paid attention to it.

[wet storm]

'cos Thor has an European audience, and the original video from 10 months ago misconstrues critical aspects of the initiative. It's not about making multiplayer games have a forced single player component. Or forcefully releasing server binaries. It's about "leaving the game in a playable state when the service shuts down".

How that's done is up for debate, and you can bet that both politicians and companies would get involved to define the minutia of what constitutes a "playable state". That's not for the ECI to define. It needs to be a solution that benefits both the consumer and doesn't hamstring the company.

Rather than that the video goes on about how it's a "dogshit proposition that reads like it was drafted by a car salesman"

[rotund trout]

Exactly. Instead of moving on and focusing on the initiative, they focused on giving him shit and making content

[wet storm]

There's a clip on Ross' response where Thor mentions MMOs with "what are you gonna do, reduce the difficulty on Raids?"

Which is VALID sure, MMOs are barely touched, but the proposition is not retroactive. WoW is safe, etc.

Someone spends 20 years buying expansions every 2 years for 70 dollars a piece and then everything is nuked, that's what the proposition is against

[split tulip]

well that's what you get when you use vague language like "a playable state ": different interpretations

[wet storm]

And honestly, WoW has a very powerful private server community anyway

[rotund trout]

And you think politics would've done a good job with that? You think they would've taken the proposal that wasn't even thought through completely and and messed things up?

[split tulip]

the initiative covered video games. MMOS are video games. they are included in the initiative, as it is written now

[wet storm]

The problem is when the interpretation is taken at face value like people have a crystal ball that reads into the brains of polititians

[flat moat]

While it may not be retroactive, it has the possibility to affect new MMOs down the line which isn't easy to deal with given how hard it is to develop and actively balance such a game

[wary drift]

It doesn't need to be retroactive to be a problem though, because if WoW would not be safe if it was released now, then nothing like WoW is going to get released.
I'm pretty sure this is why Thor starts his video by saying he wants the industry to continue to thrive and have the means to continue, because he's talking out against aspects of the initiative that would harm game development going forward.

[wet storm]

And then have the actual GALL to say "Well I know how the world works".
This wasn't even Thor, it's people in this chat

[wet storm]

I believe they could've done a better job at customer rights than american corporations with CEOs legally bound to producing proffits at the risk of being prosecuted

[split tulip]

no one is asking for crystal balls. if you want it to apply to single player games, write that. do you want private servers after MMOs shut down? write that. if you leave it up for interpretation, don't be suprised when you get an interpretation you don't like

[wet storm]

It's a problem when that interpration is a conjecture spelled out as gospel and people believe that's what it's going to be

[split tulip]

look at other initiatives that passed. they are specific. they say what they actually want

[strange owl]

"Don't outsource your critical thinking"

[split tulip]

if you don't wan pirate's interpretation, why watch his video? and when has it been made as gospel?

I don't think he's ever said "do not vote for this", just "I wouldn't vote for this"

[wet storm]

Being specific doesn't make them free from conjectures and loopholes

[polar sandal]

I'm trying to find the originals, however, there is an edited version that does contain parts of those clips.
Give me a moment, I'll send it in rq

[wet storm]

Because I care about games not being killed?

[wintry pond]

what is a ''playable state'' of a video game? is a practice arena, where you can chose any character and theres only a dummy for you to hit, a playable state. Yes it is, but people dont want that

[wet storm]

How every game was made before Diablo 3 started the Always Online garbage

[split tulip]

I'm not asking for it to be free of loopholes, just that it actually presents what it want to do and how they'd like to do it

[wet storm]

heck Halo Infinite has offline with bots

[polar sandal]

A reasonably playable state, where most of the game is intact and works nearly as well or as well as when it was originally released. It is vague for a reason, such that lawmakers can decide on how it should be exactly defined, if there's even any exact definition necessary.

[split tulip]

what's that got to do with pirate's opinion? feel free to disregard it if you don't agree with it

[rotund trout]

Ok, agreed. But I would prefer the initiative is written in a way that is bulletproof and leaves no room for interpretation. I am European and I read it with a lot of o.O and back then. And yes, they could just write up a new one. A precise and specific one. And then contact European streamers for help 🙂

[wet storm]

Honestly I thing this is the best course of action

Having it only in English when the only English speaking country in the EU is Ireland is not very strategic

[polar sandal]

I am also European and I think that the way it was written is near-perfect.

[rotund trout]

So you'd rather it was translated in all of European languages?

[wet storm]

tbh I am also Spartacus European and my understanding is the specifics are hashed out amongst polititians

[split tulip]

I don't want lawmakers that have never played a video game to do that. present them with something clear and concise instead

and where was this?

[wet storm]

Other ECIs are, so yeah, for sure

The guides in the website are in English

You click the Spanish flag and bam, buide in English

[split tulip]

have you read other initiatives?

[wet storm]

Very silly

[wet storm]

Jesus Christ YES

Oh my god stop attacking people's credibilities

Attack what they are saying

[earnest mirage]

they tried with other streamers way before they got to Thor (i just looked into some of their discord servers to make sure and it was brought to most of them around end of june / beginn of july 2024). The reaction by the streamers and most of the communities was basically the same -> No, because it's written badly.
Ross take to this was basically F them, we don't need them or their community anyway.

[jolly prism]

It is translated. I have just checked and read the proposal in my native language.

[rotund trout]

so why did they only attack Thor then?

[flat moat]

Traction

Easy target

[rotund trout]

or maybe don't attack people and instead have a civil conversation 🙂

[split tulip]

I'm asking cause I don't see how this initiative compares to other that have passed. they ones I've seen have been clear. they say what they want and don't leave it to lawmakers to puzzle it out

[rotund trout]

exactly. Because they could make content

[earnest mirage]

honestly, i don't know. Maybe after all the bs from earlier this year they think he could be an easy taget. 🤷

[sacred junco]

I feel like this warrant proofs? I guess I can join their discord to verify this myself?

[wintry pond]

so, you want people who dont know anything about the industry to define it for you? I pass on that

[polar sandal]

lawmakers aren't stupid, the only real reason nothing has been happening in terms of fixing the hell that the game industry is in with live service nonsense is because the only party in the negotiation for laws aimed at consumers is next to literally no one, and before SKG, there wasn't even any chance we could fix it. Current laws allow for companies to just kill games at any point in time whenever they decide, for literally any reason. SKG would fix a hole in EU consumer protection laws, specifically relating to directive 93/13/EEC

[wet storm]

Save bees and farmers is very, very vague, and it passed. Vagueness doesn't come into it as much as people being emotionally attached to the subject (it does have a campaigning website, so you could take that as elaboration, SKG has one too)

[wet storm]

Teach me sensei

How do I spanish it

I am in Spain without the A

[jolly prism]

https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000007_es

[wet storm]

I stand corrected

[polar sandal]

SKG outlines how it should be defined and what it should achieve. This has been checked with many, many lawyers, and I've even asked ones I know personally. The way the initiative is written is fine.

[flat moat]

Games are not living things, they are experiences.
Using "Stop killing games" as the title is already emotive enough. It would have been better titled as "Stop disabling digital media"

[wet storm]

Thank you @jolly prism for DESTROYING my argument

[wintry pond]

in the 10 months since thor talked about this, there has to be changes and revisions. So are people having problem with thor nor agreeing with the current one or the one from 10 months ago?

[polar sandal]

Stop Killing Games is just the name of the initiative on the website. The official name is Stop Destroying Videogames

[wet storm]

The problem ultimately is about smothering it in the crib with no effort to assist with it. I am not sure I agree 100% with this interpretation, but that's what it is

[split tulip]

phase out synthetic pesticides in EU agriculture by 80% by 2030
phase out synthetic pesticides by 2035

that is exact kind of specific I want to see.

[thorny cloud]

This is honestly my main issue with it as well. Ross seems to insist that it needs to be vague and broad in its language so that the EU lawmakers can then take the fight to the next level.

The problem with that logic is that he is assuming that once the door is open, that lawmakers will then pass the "right" kind of laws simply because they are lawmakers.

There's a massive fallacy of authority going on there.

[wet storm]

Yes but how are we doing that?

How are pesticides going to be phased out? What will replace it to maintain crop production and avoid blight?

Do we make it single player or release binaries?

[flat moat]

Destroying is a completely different aspect and infers complete removal of both server and client side

[wet storm]

Please don't take this to mean I disagree with your example I love bees

Bees are cool

[polar sandal]

even if that would be true, that's quite literally just the name of the initiative. Also, "digital media" is insanely vague and doesn't involve only videogames.

[wintry pond]

arent bees fish in one state?

[split tulip]

restore natural ecosystems in agricultural areas so that farming becomes a vector of biodiversity recovery; reform agriculture by prioritising small scale, diverse and sustainable farming, supporting a rapid increase in agro-ecological and organic practice, and enabling independent farmer-based training and research into pesticide- and GMO-free farming.

[wet storm]

https://tenor.com/view/steve-harvey-gif-18261896

[flat moat]

It ups the stakes and makes conversations about it better.

You get more traction as a whole

[split tulip]

not a farmer so I don't understand the details, but they do have clear end goal in mind and what they would like to see in stead

[flat moat]

Imagine being able to keep the movies you buy digitally from Amazon

[polar sandal]

but videogames is the only media that the initiative targets, your suggested name just doesn't make any sense

[wet storm]

What constitutes sustainable farming? What percentage, over time, of agro-ecological practices? Reform in what way, through incentives? Taxation?

[wet storm]

Oh my god Bees are fish in California

[wintry pond]

are they still?

[wet storm]

There's gotta be a perfectly logical reason for it

[flat moat]

Yes but sometimes the initiative should be changed for impact.

[wet storm]

Ok so like, hear me out

The California Endangered Species Act protects endangered animals

[wintry pond]

missing a word in the law. an opsie that results from vague language

[polar sandal]

that would massively widen the initiative's goal and would make discourse much more difficult

[wet storm]

There's a few species of bees that are endangered

The California Endangered Species Act compiles all invertebrates as fish

ergo bee === fish

[wintry pond]

missing a work aquatic

so honey is seafood

this can happen when wording is vague

[wary drift]

https://tenor.com/view/dr-bees-thinking-harry-partridge-changethebees-hmm-gif-546197170858664745

[flat moat]

but it would involve more people, different aspects and the likes. It would gather enough signatures in a shorter time frame.

Perhaps "Stop disabling interactive digital media"

[wet storm]

DOCTOR FIIISH

[split tulip]

you make a good point there. I can see how the exact details of the implementations are left for discussion and maybe that a fair way to do it. I do still think the scope of the initiative is too broad and should be narrowed down

[polar sandal]

that is true

[wet storm]

That's why I don't have that much of issue with it

Let the politicians with their lobby friends decide what constitutes as a playable state

Surely they can't make it worse right?

😰

[split tulip]

I can see that, but I still don't want lawmakers in charge of it

[wet storm]

Who's in charge then?

[wintry pond]

also thor was looking from the perspective of a dev mainly

[wet storm]

Corporations? No thanks

[split tulip]

example of what they do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-geGEYEw7g

[wary drift]

https://tenor.com/view/omni-man-omni-man-are-you-sure-are-you-sure-invincible-gif-3935116808772397515

[wet storm]

Surely

My point is I'd rather not leave the decision in charge of someone who's job is to pick me by my ankles and shake me upside down in hopes of all my pocket change falls out, and rather that my voting slip does

[wet storm]

I mean I can equally respond this with what happened with The Crew

[wintry pond]

I would rather decision be in the hand of people who know all sides of the industry

[split tulip]

I still think developers should be a part of the discussion. not saying Blizzard should get the final vote

[wet storm]

Oh I agree, and they would be

'cos the first question parliamentarists would ask is "what in the heckin' is a playable state"

Luckily we do have parallels

Microsoft Office went from a product to a service

[wintry pond]

but what if they asked developers now, to clarify things and write it out in way more detail

[wet storm]

What developers?

Who?

The first one on call is likely EA

[orchid abyss]

Bobby Kotick, for sure.

[split tulip]

oh trust me I know. still, that's the risk with an online-only game. I do think they could have made it clearer at the start that it was an online-only game, but's not what the initiative is asking for

[wet storm]

Randy Pitchford showing up saying true fans don't care about playable states

[wintry pond]

thats my biggest problem. This is a one sided initiative from the consumers, ignoring the side of developers. There are many small, independent devs that they could ask for their opinion

[compact orchid]

I'm more of a hardware guy, so I wonder what happens when for example NVIDIA no longer supports certain tech and renders games unplayable. There's just so many variables.

[wet storm]

That's my biggest problem with the initiative, tbh. Not addressing games that need to be online.

What constitutes need?

MMOs are left quite unsheltered

[orchid abyss]

when hardware changes, at least on PCs, emulators get developed and nobody really cares much (vs someone making a GameBoy Advanced emulator..). I have games from the 80s and 90s that still run just fine thanks to work by emulation developers

[wintry pond]

a single player game with a leader board. You need to be online of the leader broad, but is it necessary? For some people yes, for others no

[wet storm]

But do you need the leaderboard to be able to play?

[split tulip]

in that case I do think the game should still function when offline. just without that added function

e.g. elden ring is playable offline, you just can't play coop or see other's messages

[wintry pond]

but does taking the leaderboard away take something from the game

if its marketed as a competitive game, then in my opinion leaderborad is a crucial aspect of it

[buoyant arrow]

The question would in that case be whether the leaderboard could be considered a core component of the gameplay experience. What if it's a competitive game where a leaderboard could reasonably be considered important information?

[wet storm]

It's not about taking away from the game

It's about rendering it unplayable

[wintry pond]

but does it make it unplayable for some people? maybe

[split tulip]

that's really in up to your own judgement. and thus up to you if you would still buy it, considering the function would eventually go offline

[orchid abyss]

What we really need to be talking about is software as a license, not as ownership--think of a novel or physical recording. If that isn't changed, we can flap our lips all day about what's right or not, but agreeing to those licensing terms means a publisher can revoke the license at any time for just cause. "Unable to profit hosting the service" is a more than just cause.

[buoyant arrow]

What if a game is just straight up bad?

[wet storm]

Btw fwiw those are excellent points

[wet storm]

https://tenor.com/view/right-to-jail-right-away-fred-armisen-parks-and-rec-right-to-jail-jail-gif-1866630920936314540

[split tulip]

I do think value judgements like this are dangerous to leave for politicians to make on your behalf. at the end of they day you choose wheater or not to buy a game with online requirements. if you don't want them, buy drm-free games from gog

[split tulip]

I don't see how that's relevant

[orchid abyss]

even drm free doesn't mean it isn't free of licensing. you just have a bit more leeway on how you install and use your copy of the software.

[wet storm]

Makjing a bad game is now a capital offense

[wintry pond]

game is bad, gets shut down, but still needs to be playable for the 4 people who bought it

like, concord would have to be playable still

[split tulip]

dvd's don't free you from licensing either, so I don't see how that matters

[wet storm]

There's an inordinate amout of games on steam like that

[split tulip]

didn't they refund everyone?

[wet storm]

I can still download starforge

[wintry pond]

and all of then needs to stay playable forever

[wintry pond]

but its not playable, it would need to be playable

[earnest mirage]

you could, but don't expect from me to link/advertise other discord channels and violate the rules of this server.
If you can understand german language, feel free to join the discords of the big gaming streamers and try to search for it yourself. I know from at least one server that their gen chat only displays messages since you joined and nothing before this date.
On Ross side, i tried to search for his old posts, but looks like he deleted them. Even when you know who responded and look up their messages, it's missing the initial post.

[wet storm]

Also the initiative is not about distribution

IT's about a playable state

[orchid abyss]

dvds are software encoded using compression codecs. compare to standard compact discs, which is raw digital data. You don't need licensed software to play a CD, but you do for any format of DVD.

[buoyant arrow]

Being a bit cheeky here, but what if the games in a technically playable state, but just not distributed anywhere?

[split tulip]

you still have limitations. you can't set up your own cinema business with dvds or sell copies

[orchid abyss]

@buoyant arrow "Abandonware" is a thing. It's a legally grey area, so won't discuss it more than stating it is a thing

[split tulip]

I can see that, but if they gave you the money back you don't really have any claims to it

[wet storm]

Then that's fine I guess

Becomes abandonware

[sacred junco]

Yea thats fair.

[orchid abyss]

@split tulip this is true for CDs,, too... and any other form of recorded media. That law is baked into International Copyright law as I understand. It is in US law, anyway. It has nothing to do with licensing, though it might be repeated in a license agreement.

[buoyant arrow]

So there would be nothing stopping them from making static "playable" version that then rots in some storage somewhere? not saying it's a smart idea, but if you leave loopholes like that, people gonna exploit them somehow

[split tulip]

I don't think you can plug all possible loopholes in an initiative like that. but you can make it less open to intepreation

[wet storm]

Btw not cheeky at all, it's a very valid question but distribution is not part of the scope

[buoyant arrow]

Well it's what my dumbass came up with in 5 minutes, so I don't wanna know what someone who's actually competent in the field could come up with

[wet storm]

Ye

[orchid abyss]

My one word of caution is any amount of interpretation in law is likely to be argued successfully by a lawyer in a way that nobody likes other than lawyers and those who will profit from the ruling.

[wet storm]

I suggest you take a look at the abandonware scene if you haven't

Gamers don't let games die if they can avoid it

Heck GoG started this way

[grim pine]

i might be wrong here but this wouldn't be a loophole, as it's the product peoplem are buying that needs to be a playable version

[buoyant arrow]

Even GoG is beholden to licensing and rights, they can't just grab anything and sell it.

[grim pine]

i do have like 0 context so sorry if i jumped the gun here

[wet storm]

No, but they can keep the game alive

[orchid abyss]

yeah. but CDPB reached out to developers and publishers about getting licensing where they could. Some of the other sites treated it as much like it was piracy and "keep it quiet so we don't get shut down."

[wet storm]

Btw although interesting this has nothing to do with SKG

[orchid abyss]

they actually did put up a lot of games where they couldn't get agreements with anyone. these were truly abandoned games. in many cases, once someone who held licensing saw there was profit, agreements were made or games were taken down.

[split tulip]

I do think supporting things like GoG is a good way of pushing for what you want, without getting regulators invovled. tho I don't think they've been as fully "drm-free" as they've claimed

[orchid abyss]

by "couldn't get agreements," I mean to say couldn't get in contact with anyone to reach any form of discussion

[buoyant arrow]

I know, but even for those you'd first have to do the ground work to make sure 100% that there's no one actually holding the rights.

[wet storm]

That's only if you wanna sell the game

Does abandonia still exist?

Abandonia was a website where you could get games that were completely abandoned for free

Internet Archive does a similar thing

When a holder of the rights to that game wanted to enforce it, the game would've been taken out

So again, SKG, isn;t about distribution, it's about not just removing the game you bought from your account

[orchid abyss]

some of the sites definitely operated from a "if we're not making money, it's better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission."

[wet storm]

Exactly

"Oops my bad I thought you abandoned this game since you haven't talked about it for 30 years EA"

[split tulip]

it's about not just removing the game you bought from your account
then they should put that in the initiative. cause that's not what I read it as

[buoyant arrow]

Yeah.

[wet storm]

Sorry I swapped what it would do that i like rather than what would happen

I meant to say playable state yada yada

Getting tired of repeating myself

[buoyant arrow]

I still have Transformers Devastation. It's not buyable but still playable on Steam. You mean like that?

[wet storm]

Yeah that

StarForge is the example I used earlier

It's still playable if I download it from somewhere, no matter where. Even if the game is a broken mess lol

[split tulip]

I don't think anyone is arguing against that. but what if the game required a server? that's where the issue stems

[wet storm]

That's the one part of the initiative that's where I find a flaw in

Because what constitutes requirement?

Diablos 1 and 2 had online play, but didn't require an internet conneciton. Diablo 3 an 4 do.

Starcraft 2 can be played offline, it's sucky but it works and you can do LAN play over a VPN if you finagle with it enougn

But MMOs

Yikes they get shafted

[buoyant arrow]

Yeah, and that's where the swamp of definitions comes back in. It'd need to be established with as little room for doubt what constitute "playble" for any kind of game. And that's work Years of work.

[wet storm]

A simple like where it said
"Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOs) that require an internet connection for basic funcionality would be exempt from this." or something like that

[split tulip]

star craft 2 requires you to connect to battle.net. if it shut's down the campaign and LAN is gone

[split tulip]

and I think that's bad, to be clear

[wet storm]

What do you prefer? To have Titanfall's 2 campaign still available although those features are now borked, or that the game is removed from your account forever?

[proud lily]

That would open up an avenue for every game to just classify themselves as MMO to avoid it.
And since MMO isnt a well-classified term, welcome back to legislation hell

[wet storm]

That's the pipe dream isn't it though

And not the point

[wet storm]

If you were already logged in to bnet, vs against AI and arcade maps you downloaded

[split tulip]

and again, the question is how the multiplayer would be run. require the company to provide private server software?

[wet storm]

Older versions let you play across LAN too

Having something functional where you can still play it in a limited capacity is better than having nothing at all

If blizzard goes "Yeah Coop is gone, Campaign is gone, Vs AI is gone, Arcade is gone, Starcraft is a pile of rubble" i'm gonna riot

That's brutal, unless it's like LAN

'cos then they'd have to release server binaries and that's IP

[split tulip]

provide servers or provide software for running it yourself?

[buoyant arrow]

What if not possible? What reason would be acceptable for it not being possible?

[wet storm]

https://tenor.com/view/that-is-the-question-that-is-the-right-question-gif-13658847

[split tulip]

most multiplayer game servers are not made to be run on a personal computer. who would pay for it to be ported?

[buoyant arrow]

Yeah, but that kinda stuff would have to be clearly defined if this is supposed to be legislation.

Bad laws do way more harm than good.

[split tulip]

and it still leaves open the issues of IP rights and moderation of these servers

[wet storm]

The argument is harming companies in such a way they can't release MMOs no moe

[buoyant arrow]

The issue isn't that people can play the game, is the shenanigans large corpoes and their fleets of lawyers will get up to if the legislation is lacking.

[orchid abyss]

@balmy escarp but that's the thing. even if you have a physical copy, you don't actually own the software. Licensing agreements have been a thing with software since at least the 70s. They were ubiquitous by the early 80s. Even NES cartridges came with a licensing agreement.

[buoyant arrow]

Referring back to may earlier state of "make a playable version, lock it away so no can't bother us about it. Techincally followed the law". Which is a brutally simplified example, but still

[wet storm]

Typically they're called licensing agreements, not a green button that says "Purchase" or "Buy"

[compact orchid]

What this initiative shows imo is that governments are incredibly far behind on tech and internet. We know what they want, we know how it can be done, but we're nowhere near being able to see a clear path to it.

[cedar shale]

Why would you assume that the EU would develop the law in bad faith?

[buoyant arrow]

IMO, the biggest issue is how unclear it is what we're actually purchasing. It should be absolutely 100% mandatory to inform that you buy a license to access, not a direct copy of the software.

[cedar shale]

Its LITERALLY written in the ECI, part of the process is consulting ALL the relevant actors in the issue

[proud lily]

I'm not mistrusting their faith, I'm mistrusting their competence on the matter.

[buoyant arrow]

I'm worried more about the lobbyiing that will go into it. Bad Law doesn't need bad faith. The whole "websites gotta tell you about cookies" was one example. It didn't stop anyone from using cookies to get data, it basically just made web browing more annoying because we now gotta press extra button next to one engages with anyway.

[cedar shale]

There is something called the United States of America who you should be mistrusting far more.

Your current data protection, consumer rights and protections for tech and electronics comes from the EU. Not the US

[proud lily]

I'm not trusting the US either.

If the EU is tech-incompetent, then the US just discovered electricity.

[orchid abyss]

EU has been stepping up in the last decade or so, but plenty of consumer protection laws have come out of the US, too. Governments are people, and people get influenced by both the good and the bad.

[cedar shale]

Yeah cause the US would allow lobbyists to sway the politicians decisions

[buoyant arrow]

So does the EU.

[compact orchid]

I mean let's face it, if anyone can do it, it's the EU. It's just that the effects of it can potentially be much bigger than just preserving games.

[cedar shale]

If you are worried about lobbying, the EU wouldnt have enforced USB-C on Apple or constantly fined the biggest companies for privacy violations almost every year

[wet storm]

Idk I like GDPR and other countries had to make their own privacy laws because of the EU. I trust them.

[cedar shale]

Exactly

The EU's strength relies in how big of a market it is

[buoyant arrow]

I'm all for preservation, but preservation takes rescources that someone would have to provide.

[wet storm]

It's not that complicated

Put offline mode on your game

That's it

[cedar shale]

that any law enacted in it can effect international companies to extend those obligations to other countries for the sake of standardizing the process

[wet storm]

A moderator confirmed that even Rivals of Aether 2 has offline mode

[split tulip]

putting an offline mode in WoW is not complicated?

[cedar shale]

Oh man, woe be the AAA Blizzard executive who gets paid 1million a year to shut down a fan-favorite game

[wet storm]

We, as in me and you, already had that conversation like 3 times

You know my opinion

The occam's razor for MMOs is they would likely be exempt

[buoyant arrow]

Helldivers?

[wet storm]

just forced to call it a subscription/rental rather than a product

[buoyant arrow]

Vermintide?

[wet storm]

Those games already exist and the initiative is not retroactive

Ain't no way Blizzard releases the server binaries

[buoyant arrow]

People already host private servers for WoW.

[wet storm]

Current private servers are made by bootlegging everything that happens serverside.

EVERYTHING

[cedar shale]

Alright guys, lets use a proper example

Genshin Impact

Its a singleplayer, online-only game

[wet storm]

Oh that game can die

[orchid abyss]

@balmy escarp that's because private servers take away from Blizzard's active game. Who is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies emulator or Warhammer Online? Nobody, because nobody is being harmed by those servers running. There is a distinction there. (Yes, we can argue that those WoW emulator players won't play on a live Blizz server, but it's not a legally valid argument--one that holds up in court--without some very extensive research that those emulator players hosts will ever pay for.)

[wet storm]

idc about the initiative

burn it with knives

[cedar shale]

One day, that game is gonna stop and get shut down

[compact orchid]

Maybe the more simple approach is some form of protection for modders in specific situations.

[buoyant arrow]

Ah, I agree, but that's not a call we should be able to make, now can we?

[wet storm]

The thing with saying private servers for, say, WoW can exist as they do, is one of the points that Thor made I agree with, as well as another I noticed:

What happens when you monetize the server? If it's dead, it's still an IP of the original creator
And my point: what if your private server is a buggy mess? Is it the developer's fault?

I think private endeavours should be relegated to right to repair territory

MMOs should just be exempt and be treated as services. Even purchases of, say, expacs should just be treated as unlocks to enjoy more of the service, not a product

But then comes the issue yea, what is classified as an MMO?

Im glad I'm not a politician

[buoyant arrow]

Videogame genre have no real central definition. It's a goddamn mess that you really shouldn't tie legislation to, imo.

[wet storm]

I'm like 99% sure that if steam is nuked from orbit like 6 months later the Internet Archive has every game in there

[cedar shale]

Thats a good point except that topic has no place to be figured out in the current phase of signing the initiative. There is an order to answering these questions and step 1 does not involve solving hypotheticals for god sake

[buoyant arrow]

There's a Lot of games on steam

[wet storm]

Agree 100%

[proud lily]

Just because something is possible doesn't make it viable or probable.
A team of 30 making a game like Expedition 33 is possible, I wouldn't bet on it happening more than once a decade.

[orchid abyss]

except there already is legislation tied to the category--copyrights, patents, contracts, consumer rights.... and sometimes those things contradict

[proud lily]

Just because you can do something once or a handful of times doesn't mean you'll be always able to do it.

[buoyant arrow]

I stand by my point. You shouldn't tie legistlation to something and fickle and videogame genres. Doesn't mean there aren't legislations.

[proud lily]

While I agree, it is a slippery slope.
Yes it doesn't have a place at this point in the timeline.
But what if the legislators 4 year down the line just frick it up humongously. And now you no longer have a veto and need to accept the bad legislation.

For me personally it boils down to Id rather have no law than a shitty ass law that may or may not improve.

[cedar shale]

Can you give me an example of an EU movement that turned into a bad law?

Or just a bad EU law in general?

[buoyant arrow]

The cookies.

[cedar shale]

As ive said many times, part of the ECI process is consulting all the relevant participants in the issue raised

[cedar shale]

How are cookies bad?

[proud lily]

Because its a nothing-law.
There was a "problem".
And then their solution was "just inform the user about the problem", instead of actaually solving the problem.
And to dthis day it isnt well enforced and doesnt work for shit.

Forgot to tag, this is about cookies

[buoyant arrow]

Excatly. Some tech-illiterate lawmakes got all in a tissy about websites putting things on your computer without telling you. The scandal. Now websites need to annoy use everytime we go there that yes, in fact, they use cookies. The thing that makes websurfing better. Sure, there's a data privacy concern with what those cookies gather, but let's be serious, who really takes the time every single time they get those popus and sets up the cookies allowed? Especially if it's a website you don't frequent anyway?

It was a badly thought out and rushed law.

And anyone affected offloaded the issue onto the user

[proud lily]

The EU has a pretty good track record overall, but in tech they simply lack behind.
And in this even more specialized field of gamedev Id assume theyd lack even more

[cedar shale]

I can give a good EU law as an example

The Air Passsengers Rights provides EU citizens with protection against cancellation and disruption of their EU flights and enforces the airlines to cover their customers with replacement flights, compensation or hotel accomodation.

This is so much better than what is in the US

[buoyant arrow]

Yeah, so

[proud lily]

Yes, the EU can make good laws. They can also make bad ones.
And the chance of bad ones increases the less they know about the subject.

Considering politicans fly a lot, they know a lot about the consumer air travel experience. Of course that laws gonna be solid

[buoyant arrow]

The issue I'm seeing there is that we're not buying the game. we're buying access to the game via a digital distribution. Licenses. THAT needs fixing.

[compact orchid]

To be fair, Brink was made by developers who absolutely knew what they were doing and were extremely competent even if the game bombed.

[proud lily]

Yes, but what about the games only being able to be run with such a model.

You can't make a single purchase WoW.

[cedar shale]

Thats literally wrong. The cookie law enforces websites to inform the users that data is being collected, and it also enforces users the choice of whether some data should be collected or not. And wdym its become an annoying click? I legit dont remember the last time I clicked on cookies

[buoyant arrow]

I genuinely do not know, and that is the crux of it.

Nah, I'm so burned out on WW2 games

If I hear one more midwestern sergeant yelling at me to take out that halftrack ever again, I'mma have conniptions.

Even less interested.

[proud lily]

The question with which the law started was, should the websites be allowed to save data to your device without permission.
The EU deemed "Yes in some cases, but the user needs to know."
Which is fair some sites need cookies to operate. But instead of clearly defining what is fine and what isnt the law is "everything goes, as long as you tell them."
The choice the user has in regards to what cookies he wants? Barely enforced. Even tho its texhnically against the law, noones following the law to a t. Either its exceedingly difficult to disable cookies, or they straight up dont allow it. Or a marketing cookie is suddenly "necessary for operation" and alls good.
And no idea were you got "annoying click" from. I never said that.

[earnest mirage]

the copyright directive about 7 years ago, which would have lead to automated upload filters for all plattforms....
The initiator of this was like "we don't need to be more precise and this won't result in forcing for all plattforms to use automated upload filters and possible censorship". Surprise surprise it did backfire this way. Luckily most of it was declared invalid.
I won't go any deeper into that because of the no politics rule.

[buoyant arrow]

The frick is a zoombinie?

[wet storm]

Like a zamboni but dead

[buoyant arrow]

I'm 34.

I have been called many things, but that's a new one

Oooh I know that one

Assuming I wasn't while having this discussion

[wet storm]

I went through like 5 coop games since this conversation started

Sick leave is awesome

I can't breathe through me nostrils but look at all this free time

Too soon

[buoyant arrow]

Rock on, hope you feel better in a timeframe that allows you get the most enjoyment out of that freetime just enough before it gets boring. Ie, soon.

[wet storm]

Thanks bud

[rotund trout]

that post was kind of unnecessary, don't you think?

[muted robin]

(Looks at latest round of hate comments on thor's videos) ppl are so silly

[elder scaffold]

People on reddit seem to think that thor lied about about skg cuz he is supposedly working on a live service game himself

[muted robin]

If only they put as much effort into supporting the initiative they claim to love in the 11 months they had to support it as they do swarming Thor to blame him for it failing

[elder scaffold]

Is heartbound a live service game?

[faint rapids]

Morning, chat

No

[peak lagoon]

guys did you see the ECI document of stop killing games doens't mention giving dev option to just give expiration date and not make local operable version

[polar sandal]

I'm pretty sure nothing is really mentioned about a potential solution

although Ross himself mentions a few

either way, the company must give you the software required to run the game in some capacity

after the game gets sunset

this could mean server software

and it doesn't have to be possible to run on the user's computer

it might require expensive hardware, but the software for it should be released

after SKG-based laws would be implemented, publishers and game developers would have end of life plans of some form

for new games

as for current games which tie into microservices too much and for those which can't have their server software given to users, those are probably just going to die

SKG was never about current games, it's about future games

Thor has made it painstakingly clear that he is fine with live-service games and the fact that we're effectively buying a license to use them for a limited amount of time

[high ember]

i don't really get why all games have to continue on forever tbh

like you can buy a ticket to a concert and then you see that concert once and move on

with solely online games like that I kinda just automatically assume that they're just gonna end at some point

[polar sandal]

although at one point he is "for the idea that games get preserved"

Thor has continuously been very inconsistent with his opinion

[polar sandal]

it's about preservation for future generations and just being able to play the game later

[brittle rune]

There's nothing inconsistent with being in favor of preservation but against legal obligations to support a product indefinitely

They're different things

[polar sandal]

companies will not have to support the product indefinitely

that just doesn't make sense and is not what SKG is going for

companies would only have to release the software required to run the game in a reasonably playable state

[brittle rune]

That might not have been the spirit of what they were going for, that I respect, but the current proposal was going in this direction

[polar sandal]

the companies would not have to keep running infrastructure for dead games

[polar sandal]

it was not at all.

[high ember]

why not just keep in mind that some games don't go on forever and then play a different game?

i don't buy a burger thinking it's going to last forever

[polar sandal]

That's just what Thor interpreted it as, which is not even correct, I have no idea where he pulled that from

[polar sandal]

It's because people care about preservation

imagine if once a book gets released, 5 years after its publish date all copies get completely destroyed

[high ember]

what if you go to say an amature sports match and nobody records it? it's "lost" forever sure, but you still went to it and had fun

some things just aren't meant to last forever

[polar sandal]

A sports match is an event, meaning it lasts during a set amount of time

[high ember]

ok and games can be events

[brittle rune]

Yeah, so does an online experience

[high ember]

why can't they be?

[polar sandal]

if you buy a game, I expect "buying" to mean that it does not have a set expiration date and therefore I should own it

however, what companies have been doing is closer to renting

...except I never see the word "rent" being used instead of buy

[high ember]

for online games i just kinda assume they have an expiration date

like how many people are gonna be playing WoW 50 years later?

they'll move on

[nova bough]

its the concept of a license/subscription instead of buying.

[polar sandal]

If you're renting an online experience, then it should be clearly stated you're renting, not buying

except companies redefine what "buy" means

[brittle rune]

I do agree that the existence of a deadline, even far down the line should be clearer at the time you acquire a game. But there is an immense amount of nuance when you involve legal process that I think was lacking from the current proposal

[high ember]

can you not just assume that online experiences don't last forever?

[polar sandal]

No, because legally, what companies are doing is effectively marketing it as lasting forever, even though that's not at all the case

[high ember]

ok but logically i can tell that they will end someday

[polar sandal]

another problem is that companies are choosing to live-service games which are single-player and are choosing to require online connectivity even in single-player campaigns

[fallow fable]

if you buy on gog you get the offline installer but on steam they still have to provide the service so you can access the game

[polar sandal]

"someday" isn't good enough either

[high ember]

if you don't like those games then just play other games

easy

[polar sandal]

it's literally never that simple

[high ember]

some things are better when they don't last forever

[brittle rune]

You can actual chose when uploading the game to not have Steam apply its DRM to your game! (but that does mean getting rid of copy protection)

[nova bough]

gog isnt a subscription

[polar sandal]

I really doubt games are better when they don't last forever

imagine I sold you a game that lasted like 5 years since its sale date, you'd pay like 50 bucks for it

[fallow fable]

you were talking about license right

[brittle rune]

Exactly, we agree on the fact it's never that simple!
And that's why in my opinion SKG wasn't the simple solution some people seem to think it is

[polar sandal]

would you like that I shut it down and I didn't give you any way to run it on your machine, completely bricking the game, even though it had a single-player campaign?

[fallow fable]

https://tenor.com/view/as-shrimple-as-that-shrimp-shrimple-simple-as-simple-as-that-gif-25854313

[high ember]

ok and?
i pay $27 for a general admission ticket to an australian football match here

[polar sandal]

no, what I said is "just play other games" is not that simple.

[high ember]

like that's great value in comparison

[brittle rune]

I do want to state I thank you all for keeping this discussion civil, it is appreciated

[fallow fable]

the famous impenetrable steam drm

[nova bough]

license, subscription, and like services. things where you pay for x amount of time to the software. subscription is usually monthly based, whereas license is highly varied. for steam games, its for the life of the platform.

[polar sandal]

so do you really think it's not to your benefit if the game can be preserved and can be played later

imagine you really like that game

[brittle rune]

oh it's far from great, but it's a barrier still

[polar sandal]

like it's the best game you've ever played

[high ember]

i'll find a new game

[polar sandal]

and without literally any notice, it gets shut down

[polar sandal]

so you just don't care at all

[fallow fable]

https://tenor.com/view/cat-mischief-gif-15859557185387868561

[polar sandal]

well, we have nothing to talk about then

[high ember]

i'll be sad sure
but everything comes to an end eventually

[polar sandal]

our values are simply different and I am not going to even try changing your opinion at this point

[high ember]

all good

[polar sandal]

if you're sad, that means you didn't like the companies decision to shut down the game. You have reason to be mad at the company

[nova bough]

i just want games to stop shoving online into my single player game.

[brittle rune]

Can't disagree and I hope nobody would

[high ember]

no?
i'll have in mind the fact that the devs hopefully loved the game too, but they can't support it any more
so i move on

[polar sandal]

the funny thing about it is that it's never the devs shutting it down

it's often the publisher that is the problem

[white mica]

^

[brittle rune]

Yep, that's partly why we always advise against going to a publisher unless you're CERTAIN they'll bring more positives than negatives

[polar sandal]

they want to make more money from other games, so they'll shut down games which, in their eye, are ruining their revenue

that's very often what happens

[earnest mirage]

... no they shut stuff down because it makes no profit and keep cost them money

[high ember]

online games just have an expiration date, and i keep that in mind

i will admit i don't play much of those games, but that's because i'm bad at skill based games

[white mica]

this. for some reason no one can remember that servers COST MONEY

[polar sandal]

that's basically what I said

[polar sandal]

I know

[high ember]

I played Webfishing and that's pretty fun
but I keep in mind that at some point it will end

[polar sandal]

however, the companies do not have to completely forbid any access to their server software

they're only doing that now in order to make people unable to play the game

that is their goal

gaming as a service

and the famous phrase "you'll own nothing and be happy"

[high ember]

temporary experiences exist
nothing has to last forever

[nova bough]

i dont believe this. its not to make people unable to play the game, its that games with microtransactions and gacha type games are highly profitable.

[fallow fable]

nothing lasts. even our sun explodes soon

[nova bough]

do i like that? no. i hate that companies are trying to squeeze every last dollar out of people

[white mica]

the idea of something lasting forever sounds very horrible to me. if a game lasts forever and say its even an online mmo and say the publishers no longer host the servers, meaning no more updates. then at some point im going to have done LITERALLY everything in that game and then go "now what" and move onto another game, thats called having a lifetime

[high ember]

I automatically assume that every online game has an expiration point
Fortnite will die someday, but people will still have memories of it and enjoy the time they spent with it

[nova bough]

i cant personally play gacha games due to the predatory practices. because i have the budget, and i know ill spend way more than the game is worth

[polar sandal]

you don't believe it? Look at what happened with Rovio and angry birds. They shut down angry birds specifically because angry birds 2 makes them more money from microtransactions.

they wanted people to be unable to play angry birds specifically so they'd play angry birds 2

[muted robin]

yeah exactly there are so many things that are fine in principle but making legislation for them to be required for every single person to comply with is stupid. like as an example (i think came up with stuff like COPPA), no one is against the idea that kids should be safe on the internet, but everyone with a brain knows that requiring people to submit their IRL ID card to be allowed online is a stupid idea with a lot of abuse/risk potential

[fallow fable]

but now you cant recommend it to anyone because it doesnt exist or what if you want to play it again in 25 years

[high ember]

and then people can make games of their own inspired by it

and have fresh new experiences rather than the same thing

[muted robin]

something doesn't need to be legally required for hobbyists to preserve it of their own volition

[nova bough]

thats not a slight on the customer. thats a "we only have x amount of resources/money, and this brings us more money". its not because they just hate their customers.

[white mica]

id tell them to go watch a video about the game and then laugh at the fact they never got to play it

i have that kind of relationship with my friends

they woyldnt care

[muted robin]

in fact there are many times where people literally break the law to do digital preservation or to make their own copies of things (e.g. private servers) so to say that mandating end of life support is the only way video games will ever get to be preserved is... kind of absolutist and fearmongering and doesn't line up with what people already do/have done to preserve or pirate dead games

but maybe it's just my 'MURICA ideals of "don't mandate the government to make everything you want a legal requirement bc it'll backfire on you" speaking :P

[white mica]

random topic change, final trailer for the new Fantastic 4 movie dropped about 50 minutes ago

[high ember]

i'm ok with games ending
i just accept it and move on

i'd rather play a game once and have a memorable experience of it, than play it a million times and get bored of it, tainting all my memories of the experience

[muted robin]

also fwiw i think that the argument people make of "it's stupid that companies like nintendo won't let you make your own copies of games they no longer intend to sell" is valid but i'm not sure that making it legally required to make your dead software open use is a logical end point to that. not sure i can articulate why atm tho

[nova bough]

i really think that live service is just being pushed too hard. the easiest way to get that taken back is for everyone to vote with their wallets, but theres too many people who just dont care.

as far as laws go, i would like better laws around communicating the EoL service at purchase, and requiring companies to check boxes before they can make a game a live service - to ensure that the game is truely after that style of experience, and not just shoving online down our throats

[brittle rune]

Is it spoiler-heavy?

[white mica]

exactly this. altho to be honest i dont play any online games anyway the closest i come is games i can play with my friends like gunfire reborn or across the obelisk

[white mica]

ye so far

[brittle rune]

will avoid then!

[polar sandal]

what

Angry Birds didn't contain any microtransactions and, to my knowledge, didn't originally even rely on servers. This means that running the game wasn't even an expense. Only reason it was shut down was that too many played the original, and they wanted to divert attention to Angry Birds 2.

[white mica]

oh yeah just completed it its pretty spoiler heavy

[nova bough]

even if a game doesnt have online components, if its in the store they have to provide support for the game, and make sure its compatible for new android/iphone releases. that takes time and resources.

and any other licenses the original game needed to make it run as a part of development

and that support takes resources and mone7

[polar sandal]

making it compatible is like the cheapest thing ever, and I doubt the game had licenses in the first place

[nova bough]

uuuh :)

it is not that simple and not that easy

[brittle rune]

it's not as cheap as you might think, and even if it was that's still extra costs

[fallow fable]

that happened to overwatch

[polar sandal]

I've developed mobile apps, it really is simple and easy, keeping compatibility working is rarely a hassle, unless you're relying on the most unstable API possible

Rovio most certainly had the money to keep it running

[high ember]

so at some point a hundred years in the future there's gonna be some guy still making sure Angry Birds works on all the holographic glasses or whatever?

[brittle rune]

that's the thing tho, it might be "easy" now, but will it be for sure 20 years down the line? and again that's still extra cost

[muted robin]

will it always be cheap and easy? is that something that can be guaranteed so readily that you can base a legal requirement on it? is that something that every single game dev from Nintendo and Sony to some random one-person studio can keep up with?

[polar sandal]

this is not a hypothetical, this happened

[brittle rune]

not sure I understand this sentence, sorry?

[nova bough]

and ive worked in backend IT support, doing upgrades on the system level. even just upgrading the language to keep it within n-2 costs money. it doesnt always just work on a new version.

[polar sandal]

the only reason they shut it down is to divert attention to Angry Birds 2 which was filled to the brim with microtransactions

if you remember, Angry Birds was actually a paid game

[muted robin]

sounds to me like the problem is ppl being mad at big companies being shitty and jumping to legislative action to fix it under the assumption that these cases apply to the entire industry and that adding legal requirements will fix the problem

[white mica]

in what year did you devlope mobile apps? was it the 2020s or was in in 2009 and up when angry birds first came out and there was not a lot of tools and knowledge when it came to making mobile apps and keeping them updated, i bet the coding for angry birds was pretty shitty and in order to keep it running they woould have had to do massive overhauls which cost, again, money time and other resources

[high ember]

oh no I can't eat the burger I had earlier today again, I should have the fast food resturants invent a self healing burger so I can eat it forever

or I just buy a new burger

[brittle rune]

Well see I do agree that them doing this with Angry Birds does suck for sure
but vague legal requirements wouldn't have been a solution

[polar sandal]

SKG is not a law proposal

it is a citizens' initiative to start discussion about a law proposal

and negotiations that is

[white mica]

doesnt that make it a law proposal

[polar sandal]

no

it is not a law proposal

do you live in the EU?

[white mica]

nope

[polar sandal]

then you don't really know what an ECI is

[muted robin]

the law proposal would be the actual legislation, a citizen's initiative is basically a petition that would require them to look at making legislation about it

[jovial sandal]

still needs solid footing, and a clear goal. SKG's goal was not clear

[white mica]

i never claimed to or intended to claim to

[polar sandal]

SKG's goal was pretty clear

the writing was basically perfect

[muted robin]

so the initiative and legislation aren't the same thing

[nova bough]

and yet a lot of people have different ideas on what its about

[polar sandal]

I've repeated this several times now, many lawyers have been asked about the writing and I even asked lawyers I know personally, it was written very well and is how an initiative should be written

[jovial sandal]

So what remediations did it specifically suggest as possible solutions to the problems it presented?

[polar sandal]

because of misinformation

[high ember]

i think it's pretty clear and obvious to me that solely online games don't last forever

[faint rapids]

If it was that clear why is everyone confused about it lol

[polar sandal]

most of those people didn't actually read the initiative

[white mica]

that sounds like an excuse when you can look something up yourself

[polar sandal]

what

[jovial sandal]

I've read through a dozen successful initiatives, and they all laid out a specific vision of what they wanted to achieve, and the actions they wanted taken. SKG does not

[nova bough]

nah. people presented their opinions on the subject. it wasnt misinformation.

[muted robin]

i mean in fairness "just look it up" has never really been a way to counter alleged misinformation

[fallow fable]

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/reds-first-flight/id1596736236 its so expensive to maintain that they made the game again just to release it again

[polar sandal]

Thor misrepresented what SKG was about, and was completely wrong on what it even did

he didn't even fully understand what an ECI is

he misinformed a lot of people due to this

[brittle rune]

I don't necessarily take issue with the contents of the proposal as they are, it's fairly noble even if I don't agree with everything there. But my stance is that I do not trust politicians to properly look into and legislate on the matter to begin with.

[muted robin]

but also people keep claiming "misinformation" over what's actually just a difference of opinion/interpretation and that's annoying as hell

[white mica]

^^^^^

[white mica]

they use it as an excuse to be mad and imply no one but themself are able to think without having someone else decide their opinion

[nova bough]

no, he mentioned the problems this could pose to games who cannot be preserved, because the experience is tied to cooperation with other people online. without that, the game doesnt work. and banning that means games like that dont get made.

the goal for skg is too broad

[muted robin]

and honestly the way that ppl are spending more time harassing thor over "killing skg" than they did ever promoting it in the past several months, my charity is running thin and at this point i'm going to just say "sucks to suck you had 11 months to counter this 'misinformation' and campaign for it and yet the most effort you mustered was to blame thor when it was already over. cope'

[brittle rune]

Discussing the possible conscequences of legislation on game preservation as it was being presented in the initiative is not misinformation. You're allowed to disagree but it is still relevant to the global discussion

[faint rapids]

If the initiative said what thor thought it should have said it wouldn't be shooting so wide

[lunar moth]

It really wasn't at all. What it wanted to do was to change how games are designed to have an "endpoint" as to force developers to provide an "end of life"-plan for continued existence, but it did so attacking how it could be designed, funded, and what systems needed to exist to make it possible for it to exist indefinitely even if it wasn't supported indefinitely.

All of these points were brought up and discussed by Thor 10 months ago and see constant examples of why this is a terrible thing, because people actively attack servers to nuke the profitability of a game and furthermore, forcing games to have an expiration date also forces all future games to be built with planned obsolesce in mind, not as a necessary evil but the intent of the initiative was functionally to make every game have an expiration date. That forces a game to be built with "the game won't be functional at X point in the future, so here's the tools for it to remain available to anyone who bought it."

Which then gets into the issue of distribution, copyright, future non-legal monetization, and hostile takeover attacks in order to force said planned obsolesce to occur even earlier.
DDoS attacks are the best example of what this looks like currently and what SKG would've forced, as Scott were pushing for, would've created a pseudo legal way to take over other people's games by forcing said data and server infrastructure to be publicly available once the expiration date had been reached.

[polar sandal]

I've repeated this several times by now, the point of an initiative is NOT to pass laws, it is to start negotiations between parties to make laws that work well based on what the European Commission decides and what the parties want. An initiative is literally the only way we can change this and SKG is our only chance at the moment. Starting that initiative took years (as Ross has actually stated several times).

Also, many, many people agree with what SKG is proposing. There are way less people who disagree, most are just unsure and are repelled by it due to the drama that Thor spiraled up with his badly researched videos.

[lunar moth]

SKG was a slogan, nothing more

[brittle rune]

Yes, and Thor's points were discussing the possible ramifications of such negotiations end result. So still very much relevant

[oblique palm]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1362989235254067373/1387434990798635178/image.png?ex=685d5507&is=685c0387&hm=4ef08b7712394764cf0b720868386637c2737f203d7cb4bdc4920a5a75366990&

[nova bough]

i would agree with SKG if they would narrow the scope to defineing what a live service game, and cutting down the trend of making all games onlone

[lunar moth]

You don't begin an initiative by making concessions meant to "appease" politicians - that's someone starting off a conversation conceding their point in favour of "hey, it is able to push through this because politicians don't understand it and something, something, easy win because we can pander to people who liked the slogan."

[brittle rune]

And if a single person on the internet can on his own "repel" people away from an initiative, maybe there's deeper issues present here?

[lunar moth]

I read the thing and this is what the initiative was all the way back 10 months ago

[muted robin]

also ngl what if I as a creator decide that after I end service for my game/stop selling copies of a game that means it's final and i don't want people to keep distributing it. of course you can go "well people will pirate it anyways" but i think there's a big difference b/t random people distributing copies online in grassroots archiving versus me being told "no you legally have to keep giving people access to play/replicate your game even if you want it to be done"

[high ember]

honestly all this talk just makes me want to make a temporary game

like the youtube series Unnus Annus (I didn't see it but from what I know the whole point of that series was that it was only available for a year and would be gone forever after that, which makes it mean more)

[faint rapids]

You guys couldn't get 1% of the EU to care

[high ember]

ARGs don't always last forever

[faint rapids]

I'm sure thor is why it only got 500k signatures in a place of 449 million

[lunar moth]

Ross' video confirmed this by his weird obsession about Thor in his video by not understanding that Thor took Ross' inititive and suggestion to its logical conclusion discussing it from a monetary and development position, something he had no interest in engaging with because "Thor was mean to me because he hated my political movement of killing games."

[white mica]

what makes it even better is when mark and ethan began copywrite striking people who were reuploading videos from Unnus Annus, AND PEOPLE WERE ON THEIR SIDE FOR IT. its exact proof something does not need to last forever and the public is fine with that if they missed out

[brittle rune]

Additionally, claiming Thor doesn't know what he's talking about because he's American is a moot point when the face of your initiative is also American.

[high ember]

100%
the fact that it was temporary makes it more memorable

[polar sandal]

The problem here is that that's quite literally not what it would be doing. When designing a game, you would have in-mind what infrastructure you should go for. It would not be extra expenses on top. All it would do is make companies have a plan such that, when the game ends, they can keep it reasonably playable without having to keep any infrastructure running. This can mean server binaries. This can mean making it work single-player offline. This can mean a plethora of solutions.

It would not destroy games and it would not require games to be supported indefinitely.

It's also not forcing games to have an expiration date, that also was not its goal.

[high ember]

if I go on holiday to a place I'll be far more amazed at it than if I lived there

[lunar moth]

Exactly, and looking at the examples he gave for his "We don't like this but Thor likes this" and like half of the examples are MMOs or online integrated games that had stuff like auction houses or player trading

[lunar moth]

He openly stated that the goal was to force games to have an expiration date, because when he compared things between a purchase and a service - "services have expiration dates."
That's not me misunderstanding him, that's me quoting Scott.

[polar sandal]

It's not just a single person, it is a massive streamer and content creator who misinformed a large amount of people, who then told a much larger amount of people, and the whole thing spread. Not to mention all the other creators making videos on that topic, causing drama to be sparked in the process, turning people away from signing it.

[jovial sandal]

There would be extra expenses, though. Developers have landed on their current practices for a reason. They integrate tools and servers because they fulfill a specific function they want out of the game. In order to create a version of a game that works with alternate solutions for EoL, that takes extra development time and resources

you cant just say something will not incur extra expense

[white mica]

as someone who doesnt know literally anything about cybersecurity im stating my opinion here that if a studio stopped supporting the game and handed over the server stuff to the public that sounds like an easy way to spread viruses and other stuff, because then you dont have experienced people mainting the servers, you have random people who for all you know are a psychopath who wants to watch the internet burn and finally found a way to spread some rando virus he made in his moms basement

[brittle rune]

You just asked here if someone was from the EU and when they said no you claimed they and Thor "don't really understand what the ECI is"
That is what I was referring to

[muted robin]

also, stuff like private servers didn't kill World of Warcraft, but it feels like there's an inherent conflict of interest/working against your own best interests to legally require ppl to make their games available post-mortem. like why should i as a publisher have to work to make my game accessible after i end services when it's in my best interest to promote my game while i can actually profit off of it instead of handing it off as a tool for other people to use (and potentially profit off of after i said "i don't want to support it any more, i'm not running it and i don't want you to run it or make profit off of it either")

[polar sandal]

The problem with your assumption is that you're only considering current games. The initiative is aimed at future games. Believe me, it is not hard to build infrastructure to comply with SKG.

[lunar moth]

Exactly, and this was the point that Thor was making and why he tied it back to the monetary structure of both game design, game development, game distribution, and server maintenance - all of it is based on how games are designed as a business and product, as those two are intrinsically connected.
You can't make a game perfectly free, not to make, not to distribute, and not to maintain.

[faint rapids]

He's not big enough to ruin the movement when he only has 2.6m subs and penguin has 16m

[jovial sandal]

Why should I believe you? What are your credentials to make me believe that you have any experience in development?

[high ember]

I mean how many people from anywhere are gonna instantly understand a legal acronym or what it stands for anyway?

[brittle rune]

as for "Drama videos" Thor made 2 videos 10 months ago and nothing else since, not sure you can blame 2 videos for the failure of a year long campaign

[muted robin]

asmongold also covered it when thor's videos on the topic first came out and he had more subs than him at the time (and still does)

[nova bough]

yea dont trust random people. but, it would be open source, and code reviewed by the internet. but how much review it would get would depend on the programmers who have interest in it to do it for free.

[polar sandal]

I've had over a decade of experience in various development fields, including game development. I'm also not the only one who says this.

[muted robin]

so many youtubers besides thor covered it immediately after he covered it and yet none of htem apparently have any culpability or responsibility to promote SKG despite the fact that many of them didn't agree with his points either. interesting

the fault is entirely with thor and not any of the people who covered him, literally did argue against him/disagree with him publicly on streams that did as good as thor's or more. and yet it failing is all thor's fault

this is literally just peak scapegoating i can't take it seriously at all

[lunar moth]

Exactly, and this gets even more complicated because it effectively also kill off expansions to games because when an expansion is added to a game or just a general update - the copyright is updated. At that point any law would be applicable, even if it retroactively wouldn't, meaning a game like WoW couldn't have expansions since how do you build onto something which previously was fine because it was the "old or current" but now there's no way to add to it without also making it comport to this weird idea of "it needs an expiration date."

[white mica]

another opinion of mine. i feel like if SKG even DID go through, a law was made, and so on and so forth. i feel like it wouldnt accomplish anything. not because it wouldnt make devs do what is needed, but it will just force large studios to no longer make online games in general due to the risk of being legally sued and lijkely loosing due to not upkeeping the game and adding tools to upkeep the game. it will lead to the EXACT reason live services currently have a life time, possible profits or lack there of

but thats my opinion

[brittle rune]

To be clear: It is absolutely fine if you disagree with Thor or anyone else on this topic. But using him (or anyone else for that matter) as a scapegoat for the failure of the initiative is simply not acceptable

[lunar moth]

Exactly, also that's not really much of an opinion because we see how games are affected when developers announce that they'll shut down servers in X amount of time for Y reason.
Any forced expiration dates will completely nuke the game and its community.

[faint rapids]

The math doesn't math

[fluid dome]

Morning lads

[brittle rune]

I appreciate that you've been more than polite about your disagreement tho, my previous statement wasn't a dig at you @polar sandal

[high ember]

and then the "stop killing games" movement would've ended up killing a whole genre/a whole lot of games of that genre

ironic

[white mica]

fair. i have learned to say everything i think/type out is MY opinon because its true. i didnt just copy that from someone i made a logical thought process and formed my own opinion based on my experiences in life and stuff. now days people think others are just sheep and cant have their own opinion

its become a refelx to type "my opinion" at this point

reflex*

[high ember]

mood

[white mica]

worm

[nova bough]

a lot of people let streamers/youtubers do their thinking for them. its good to get other opinions, and weigh expert opinions... but still make your own conclusions

[fluid dome]

Gamers, peak has been acquired.

Doesn't cost $80
Doesn't need online
An iconic franchise
quality experience that works out of the box
it comes with a ducking manual

I love physical media so much

[faint rapids]

What if all the trolls actually signed the thing😅

[white mica]

rated pg tho. should be rated R for dragons

[polar sandal]

here's a simple graph I drew up

[fluid dome]

Also Doesn't need an End of Life plan

[high ember]

i need to play the spyro games at some point i feel like

like i grew up playing games with spyro in them but that was skylanders

[faint rapids]

Never saw a pg game🇺🇲

[lunar moth]

It ain't a bad reflex to have, espeially with the number of people who just keep going "You just heard it from X place" online and think one can't critically analyze an opinion or information, just because it originated somewhere. I agree with a lot of Thor's take on stuff like SKG, but that's because I heard about it, then researched it, and critically analzyzed whether it was reasonable or not. Thor's position is literally just taking SKG to its logical conclusion based on their movement, and with Scott's crashout video - all of it was confirmed to be the case essentially.

[brittle rune]

I'm a fan of the PS1 games but never played this one, I should

[fluid dome]

The PS2 era of Spyro is rlly good

Just keep an open mind on Enter the Dragonfly

[white mica]

exactly this. i said it last night, but whenever i find a video or post that interests me i dont just read that post and go "ok thats my opinion too" i look up news articles, other vidoes, if its about a person i go and watch some of their content to get a feel about them for myself, ect. i hate that nowdays everyone is thought to be a sheep and the people who are are the ones acting like the other guy with the actual opinon of their own is the sheep and think they are the smart one

[fluid dome]

Also I am unsure if thor's opinion of physical is positive or negative but I swear I remember he talked about it in some capacity

[lunar moth]

And this was the point that Thor made 10 months ago that building games like this would literally force smaller studios unable to combat mass DDoS attacks in attempts to do a hostile takeover of their servers to give it up for free. Because if it is given to the public at the end of the expiration date or earlier, that provides a legal way of taking over someone else's game that they have made.

This was covered 10 months ago and explained succintly then. Making it "SKG compliant" is the same thing as saying "please don't hurt me, because then I have to give people attacking me my game for free."

[white mica]

also random topic change question. when does the full videos of thor playing blue prince come out?

[earnest mirage]

just you like yourself, don't play spyro.
I have nightmares about hunter.

[lunar moth]

This is why Scott's obsession of an expiration date makes "Stop killing games" into "Let's murder games via legislation."

[fluid dome]

I remember him being playable in Hero's Tail

[brittle rune]

Spyro 1 is peak and doesn't have Hunter, play that one

[earnest mirage]

could be, i haven't played them in ages.

[glass horizon]

In my opinion, what happen with SKG is the same thing I see with many initiatives. There is a relatively small number of intense supporters who care passionately about that issue. Then there is a larger group that agree with them, but will not take the extra step to support them if there is ANY friction to show that support (and even larger group that really doesn't care at all). In the end, the core supporters end up surprised when they don't see the support they thought they had reflected in the area where it actually matters: signatures to petitions, emails to politicians, whatever they actually need.

[polar sandal]

The thing is, Thor explicitly supports the killing of games

[brittle rune]

He does not.

[earnest mirage]

no

[white mica]

i feel like calling it "stop killing games" didnt help. to me the word killing gives the implication that games are INTENTIONALLY being ended, as in the studios are not closing it due to profits or rights to assets like The Crew or so on. to me it implies they are killing the game because they want to and no other reason i feel like it could have had a little more success with the name "stop ending games" but idk

[brittle rune]

This might be the way you interpreted it but then you're doing exactly what you claim he's doing with SKG which is interpret and not actually understand

[white mica]

^

[earnest mirage]

just watch the second steam from yesterday.
Thor said HE don't like it. YOU should go and look into it and decide by YOURSELF.

[lunar moth]

Folks not playing a game anymore is not the same thing as "killing a game"; SKG want to kill off games that they don't like, specifically MMOs by Scott's actual list of games he used to argue his point - that's the difference. The end of a game is the end of a game. If it is an online game it requires the online presence of other players to function and provide the intended experience.

None of this is solved by forcing games to have an expiration date and for games to be forced to be designed in such a way where they are online games that are indefinitely playable, regardless of support or not.

[fluid dome]

Thing is, I don't even think it's reasonable to suggest that's what's happening either. Games are active and then they're not. That's just how it goes

[lunar moth]

This is why I call SKG a slogan and not an initiative, regardless of it being filed as an initiative or not - the entire thing was run as a slogan and nothing more.

[high ember]

yeah
it's not a violent killing
they just pass on

[fluid dome]

Companies shut down servers all the time

[honest sage]

That just isn't true at all. SKG doesn't require an expiration date, it suggests it if it makes sense. It simply wants there to be plans in place for when it is time to sunset a game, then it can live on via the community.

[white mica]

my first pictured thought reading this was someone being stabbed vs granny in a bed for some reason, like i had a vivid pictured thought of those two events

[fluid dome]

Nintendo ending Miiverse etc

[brittle rune]

"Suggests if it makes sense" legally requires to define what "makes sense" means. That's where the detail lies

[lunar moth]

Scott's main point he brought up repeatedly was to argue that "games as services require an expiration date" - that's the entire basis of his entire thing. He openly stated this in his hour long video where he whined about Thor not being a fan of games being forced to have an expiration date.

[high ember]

lol
going with that analogy, should people be forced to use necromantic spells to keep their grandmother as a skeleton wandering the earth forever?

[fluid dome]

I'm also like, confused as to why he used The Crew as an example, when there were better alternatives to use

[white mica]

if you live in an anime world where there are no conseuqences? yes. in the real world? no

[fluid dome]

It would have been better if he focused on a system's dedicated servers instead of the games hosted on said servers

[white mica]

probably because it was the easiest one to use, was recent, was live service, ect. but he obviously didnt care it shut down due to the amount of casual players and the passing of rights to the entire point of the game, having real life cars. i cant even imagine how much money it would cost to renew those contracts vs how much money they make with the still existing players

[lunar moth]

We can only speculate on it, but my guess is that he was playing an old version of The Crew and didn't want to get any of the newer versions of the game.
Again, this is one of those things that Thor mentioned that a game like The Crew that receive updates that are so fundamental that it requires building an entire new game to function (both development and monetization-wise) ... it'd be like complaining that "Why is there a Guild Wars 2 when there was a Guild Wars (1)?"

[white mica]

would probably vbe VERY heavy losses

[high ember]

if i lived in an anime world with no consequences I would find out how to summon Cthulhu to play video games and hang out
...okay I think this analogy is getting away from me lol

[white mica]

xD

[earnest mirage]

Is "i need her to tell me the waffle recipe" a valid reason?

[high ember]

i mean how many ways are there to make a waffle recipe?

[white mica]

only for her to tell you it was given to her by her grandmother so you have to ressurect your great great grandmother

[high ember]

iirc aren't a lot of family recipes just from a cookbook, but you hide the cookbook to make it look more impressive?

I think I heard that somewhere

[muted robin]

where are you getting games that old for only 5 euros bro 😩 are you a creepypasta protagonist

[earnest mirage]

actually there is a metric crap ton of recipes. We have tried a lot but can't manage to get them near the ones she made. 😦

[lunar moth]

By the way, Little__Ham, if you are still here keeping an eye out on stuff - how is it like to be a moderator whilst stuff like this happens?

[fluid dome]

Cex my guy

[high ember]

damn
yeah ig the more ingredients there are the more variables there are

[white mica]

i read and mentally pronounced that VERY differently from how it actually is

[muted robin]

damn i have not heard reviews that positive about their prices ever, i heard they were pricey as hell when Thafnine explained them to the non-brits once

[fluid dome]

This is also the same store chain that offers pokemon heart gold and soul silver for £250 and £210 respectively, pokewalker included

[wary drift]

Actually, as someone from the worst EU country (You know the one. Yes, that one.) I noticed that weirdly some of the translated names of the project are different.
It technically doesn't change much, I don't think it's required that ECIs have the same name across languages, but where I live, it's titled "Let's save games" if translated literally back into English, which is a little better from the perspective you're saying, but is also pretty broad in a kind of "High schooler's first community project title" kind of way.

[high ember]

speaking of games I better get tf to work on this game jam platformer game I'm working on lol
I still have to add the ending and a menu and music

[muted robin]

heard from a brit that Cex is literally pronounced like "sex" tho so you might've read it correctly the first time :P

[fluid dome]

The duality of capitalism

[brittle rune]

that's what demand does to pricing yeaH

[white mica]

one is playstation one is nintendo, makes sense to me

[brittle rune]

unfortunate

[high ember]

yeah i really wanted to get Silent Hill to play it bc i really like that kinda atmosphere

but its like $200-300AUD lmao

[fluid dome]

"Games are so expensive now"

My guy have you seen the prices for old games

[polar sandal]

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx08WhpLgflmiW8xsdlJksXDoyP9c8iejt?si=a0e-eU4irCwutoKN

[brittle rune]

"this needs regulation" but there is.
TOS are not law as written and when attempting to apply them CAN be challenged

[fluid dome]

This is kinda why I don't take the $450 switch 2 debate seriously bc mfers will really complain about a luxury item they do not need and spend the same amount on a phone with the durability of wet tissue paper

[high ember]

also I remembered I got Elden Ring as a present a while ago but I still haven't played it that much
bc I suck at it lol

[polar sandal]

nope, there's a hole in the EU consumer protection laws, allowing companies to do this legally

specifically related to directive 93/13/EEC

[white mica]

show us this hole then

uwu

[wary drift]

https://tenor.com/view/spray-bottle-cat-spray-bottle-spray-bottle-meme-loop-gif-25594440

[fluid dome]

"Were in a cost of living crisis."

You wouldn't think it with how frivolous purchases are prevalent

[lunar moth]

"Or when it is a service, you are told when your access ends" - in other words, he's arguing that online games that function as a service (WoW, League, The Crew, etc.) require an expiration date.

[white mica]

https://tenor.com/bJH4e.gif

[swift lily]

I’m starting to wonder if Thor should have just not said anything about SKG, but Ross’s video (from what I heard) blamed him for the failure.

[honest sage]

Why? Plenty of laws makes sense without a strict definition of every word. In Denmark you have to ensure you car is in good order before you drive it. No where in the law is it defined what good order is, and cars aren't falling apart all across the country because the law makes sense in a european country

[polar sandal]

nope, the alternative is that the game has to remain in a playable state. He never stated that live service games must provide expiration dates.

[swift lily]

I hope Thor and Dr K talk again, he needs the support

[white mica]

which one?

[brittle rune]

remain in a playable state after an expiration date yeah

[polar sandal]

nope, again not what he stated

[fluid dome]

My take is that he should have kept quiet on stream, done his research first and then just released the video.

What you say in the moment vs what you say on a script are wildly different

[high ember]

some games just can't do that

so those games would end up just not being made

[brittle rune]

"Or when it is a service, you are told when your access ends"
told when access ends is synonymous with "provide expiration date" quite literally

[sacred junco]

huh, sounds exactly like this: https://www.youtube.com/clip/UgkxWZehfaUgXGADquH9Skq1_uKk4bCVOc8Z

[high ember]

speaking of games
you all just lost it

[white mica]

it doesnt matter that he stated it verbally or not, he is comparing it to a produce THAT TELLS YOU its expiration date and HAS an expiration date, giving the viewer the implication that he wants gaames to tell you their expiration date and have a set expiration date

[fluid dome]

I respect thor as much as the next nerd but that doesn't mean I have to agree with every take.

[lunar moth]

You literally quoted the part that proves that you haven't even listened to the initiative you are pushing hard onto others. The section you clipped proves that you and Scott argues that online games require an expiration date. The only thing is that elsewhere in this video and overall, he also argues that even after the expiration date, the game still has to be left in a playable state.

This is why SKG is bonkers and doesn't make any logical sense, it doesn't comport to any practical way of making this a reality, without also creating the situations that again... Thor pointed out 10 months ago.

[swift lily]

Possibly, but there’s what he said on stream and the tweet he made. I’m for Thor defending himself, but it just makes the hate burn brighter

[brittle rune]

And that is perfectly fine!
So long as you remain civil with that disagreement (which you seem to have been, thanks)

[dull star]

Is Thor gonna make another video about SKG soon?

[brittle rune]

Unlikely

[swift lily]

Highly doubt it

[white mica]

probably not

[jovial sandal]

doubtful, nothing's changed

[fluid dome]

I try to avoid being emotionally charged in discussion online nowadays because it can come back and bite you if you aren't careful. I'm also just very tired of drama at this point lmfao. Dad was a real one that could argue with the best of them but ultimately know that it doesn't matter in the end

[dull star]

oh ok.

[lunar moth]

Nvm, I misread what you said - ignore me... ^^'

[polar sandal]

You misunderstood what he was trying to say. He provided "or if it is a service" as an example. It's not what he explicitly had in mind for games. The idea is to force companies to either keep future games in a reasonably playable state (THIS DOES NOT FORCE COMPANIES TO KEEP INFRASTRUCTURE RUNNING), OR state an expiration date. It is not an and.

[honest sage]

I think this slide sums up my point pretty well. An expiration date is not required, but an end-of-life plan would be. I can't seem to find a point in the video where he states that SKG requires an expiration date, but maybe i've missed it

[brittle rune]

So he is providing examples using phrasing that does not apply to the actual initiative? Doesn't seem very constructive to me

[fluid dome]

Asking for an expiration date like its ducking milk

[polar sandal]

what

it was a literal example

[brittle rune]

I might have misunderstood you then

because I don't see it

[fluid dome]

Although I suppose PS+ kinda does this. Game in the catalogue are added/removed on a timer I believe.

[high ember]

"aw darn i ate my sandwich and it's gone, the sandwich should be required to last forever"

[polar sandal]

This slide sums it up insanely well

[honest sage]

Sandwiches are sold with an expiration date though...

[lunar moth]

GlisteringLime literally clipped the video where Scott explicitly stated it: "Or when it is a service, you are told when your access ends."
If access has to be made available to an online game after the point of access, you are asking for an expiration date for the game (and its servers) in totality. This is literally just applying Scott's argument consistently, which we also see he takes issue with because the games he's upset will die he lists multiple MMOs or games that have integrated social systems such as player trading.

[fluid dome]

It's more like ordering a pepperoni pizza and complaining after you ate the pizza and wanting them to keep supplying you with pepperoni pizza when they wanna make Mexican pizza

[swift lily]

Won’t be surprised if I’m wrong; SKG is basically “Stop Live-Servicing Games”, right? In a nutshell?

[high ember]

true

[delicate shell]

Having an end of life plan is not the same as having an exact expiration date. I think the idea is like the consumer should be able to know what to expect when that game is no longer supported by a company BEFORE that happens. This would allow them to make an informed decision on purchase.

[wary drift]

SKG is this. It's not a long read https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000007_en

[polar sandal]

nope, that's not at all what it is

[white mica]

copied the wrongf message

[high ember]

i already make informed decisions on purchasing online games by assuming at some point in the future that i do not know it will end

[white mica]

#streamchat message

[fluid dome]

I think the very fact mfers can't agree on what SKG actually is, is an issue that should have been addressed before starting the initiative

[high ember]

and in some cases that makes me appreciate it more

like i don't want to know the exact time and date of my death

[delicate shell]

But I think that there are also some parts of single player games that would be affected not just constant online only or live service games.

[polar sandal]

You're misquoting Ross.

The quote in question was part of an example, it is NOT an explicit requirement for every game. Just read this slide:

[honest sage]

Ah yeah i see your point. But that clip has context around it though. The expiration date only applies if the publisher doesn't want to implement an end-of-life plan to make the game available when they it down. The clip doesn't convey that point, but the rest of the video does though

[fluid dome]

Is Ross legitimately acting like July 31st is the definitive cut off point? Bc I don't think think that's how putting forward initiatives work lmao

[polar sandal]

This is true.

It is either:

• Provide an expiration date
  OR:
• Provide an end-of-life solution

[polar sandal]

the ECI is the most powerful initiative for SKG. There are other avenues for SKG to maybe pass, but they're less likely to be effective.

[fluid dome]

Okay but it's not like ECI is never meeting again tho, right?

[polar sandal]

what

[jovial sandal]

its not. initiatives can be resubmitted

but they have to go through the process again

[sour sierra]

Why does Pirate not read the entire Stop Killing Games document?

[jovial sandal]

Why do you assume Thor (as he is actually named) hasn't?

[lunar moth]

If the "end of life plan" create a circumstance in which the game has to be designed and planned will continue to exist in a playable state, that means that a game is designed to have an expiration date.
To quote him verbatim: "Now, of course, publishers can't support games indefinitely, but by not giving expiration dates or end-of-life plans, that might be the situation they've put themselves in."

This is at 3:06 when he's talking about "how long does video games last" - this entire intuitive is to extend this "lasting period" to "indefinitely" which he argues can be done on the basis of stating an expiration date (which makes no sense because that's not how video games work) or providing "end-of-life" support making games indefinitely playable. Which would create the situation that Thor talked about how people can nuke a game's profitability in order to force developers to hand over their games to the public.

I haven't misquoting Scott, I'm taking his arguments to their logical conclusion and explaining how his initiative will KILL games rather than anything else.
He is arguing for games like World of Warcraft to have an expiration date "because it can continue indefinitely, but can also be terminated at any point" - which is a clause that exists because online games are finnicky and if players stop playing the game altogether, they can stop providing the server infrastructure for players to play the game. Welcome to why this is a monetary argument that Scott is completely ignoring because to do so would be to admit that Thor's point from 10 months ago are entirely valid.

And I need to stress this again: in his video, he lists MULTIPLE MMOs as examples of what he considers to be "killing games."
It is abundantly clear what point he is arguing for.

[polar sandal]

the ECI (European Citizens' Initiative) for SKG (or formally, Stop Destroying Videogames) has a set deadline for July 31st which is the point when it should be getting a million signatures, along with meeting the minimums in at least 7 countries. It is a deadline that, if it is met, the European Commission will be legally required to consider the initiative and start negotiations between the two parties (in this case, for SKG and against SKG).

[white mica]

but its not like the ECI only meets once every decade or something correct?

[jovial sandal]

The European Commission is the body that meets, the ECI is the proposal being brought up to them for consideration

[median hornet]

That is insanely spot on

[white mica]

ah, im not in the EU so idk how any of this works, why im asking the question

[polar sandal]

because he quite literally has been misquoting and misrepresenting it a massive number of times. He didn't even read the slides correctly after watching one of Ross' videos (as an example, Thor saying companies would be required to keep games alive indefinitely, even though Ross explicitly stated in one of the slides that that's not at all what the initiative is aiming to do)

[granite robin]

i swear the european space commission all died at the start of cyberpunk vros

[high ember]

seems like they did a bad job on their part if they didn't get the signatures

if it's so great and lots of streamers (with more subscribers and reach than Thor btw) were advertising it, how didn't it get the signatures?

[lunar moth]

Thank you, I try to argue in good faith and actually engage in good faith with folks

[sterile nexus]

and if WoW ever became "not profitable to continue running" in blizzards eyes an end of life plan is as simple as release server software. no expiration date needed anymore. private servers would then exist (as they already do) so users could continue to experience it instead it becoming soemthing oldheads talk about years and years after its been unplayable and unexperienceable due to server shutdown.

[wary drift]

For the record, a key point in what you said is that if the 1 million limit is met then the EC is required to consider the initiative.
If it doesn't hit the 1 million limit, that doesn't mean that the European Commission would simply memory hole the entire issue and never look at it again.

[jovial sandal]

Just because Ross says that's not the initiatives goal, doesnt mean that it isn't a logical endpoint of what the initiative lays out

Ross isnt magic, he can't just say things and warp reality

[lunar moth]

Which, again, literally just means that "If you kill off a game, you get to run the game for free."
I keep referring back to Thor's video from 10 months ago for a very simple reason: that's the argument he made back then that you are now saying is the point of the initiative.

[polar sandal]

that's quite literally not the initiatives goal, it is written in the initiative itself

[buoyant arrow]

The initiatives goals stand seperately from its potential unintended consequences. I don't see how this is hard to understand.

[honest sage]

Well yeah sure, but that assumes nothing happens when malicious action is done towards a game. Seems more like a lack of faith in law enforcement to me.

[jovial sandal]

it doesnt matter what the stated goal is. Thor's point is that implementing the concept laid out in the initiative may lead to that end

[polar sandal]

that's not how it works

[sterile nexus]

if blizzard decides it isnt profitable anymore then they wont be making money off of it anymore anyway, it just allows people to play it and experience it. who cares if its free then?

[jovial sandal]

stated goals and actual effects are two very separate concepts

[lunar moth]

One word: copyright.
You don't get to do a hostile takeover of someone else's work just because you want it for free.

This applies to what you said as well, @sterile nexus

[honest sage]

How does copyright take down a game? Or am i misunderstanding you?

[fluid dome]

https://tenor.com/view/matrix-merowinger-aktion-reaktion-gif-20000212

[sterile nexus]

or organize a route for people to spin up private servers at a cost of thier own through blizzard so they can make money off it without the server costs being thiers. theres plenty of clever ways to do it

[wary lotus]

https://tenor.com/view/μανταμφρικαρω-eating-popcorn-joker-gif-15586585

[fluid dome]

Every action has unintended consequences

[polar sandal]

give me a moment

[jovial sandal]

That still leaves Blizzard needing infrastructure to allow for that, and employees to maintain it

[median hornet]

No, that happens a lot, actually. The execution of a concept into law is slow, rarely unanimous in execution, and often ends up with loopholes and unforeseen consequences

[indigo wadi]

AHHH, good morning! It's so nice to see that we're all not talking about SKG.

[sterile nexus]

currently yes, but new laws open new avenues of action. things can change for the better, but megacorporations dont need us to defend thier rights. they already have more leeway to do anything they want and get away with it.

[wary drift]

I might be thinking of a different instance, but the only instance I know of where Thor said anything like "companies would be required to keep a game going indefinitely", he didn't actually say that, and someone else from the Ross side of things produced an understandable misquote of what they thought they heard Thor say.

Thor said something along the lines of "companies would either be required to keep a game going indefinitely or not want to make them at all", with many people on Ross side missing the word "want" in that sentence, making them think he's saying games would either have to be supported forever or not be released, when in reality it's that games would either need indeffinite support, or present an end of life plan which plan's creation itself is such a headache companies wouldn't want to bother with it.

[polar sandal]

here is literally one of the FAQ points:

[jovial sandal]

Servers are not fire-and-forget tools, they need maintenance

[indigo wadi]

FAQ can't be included in Initiative, so pointing to it, is a moot point

[polar sandal]

Thor quite literally glossed over all of these and misrepresented what SKG was about

[wary lotus]

Issue with SKG is that it raises a valid customer concern (shutting down games that people wish they would play) - but disregards the entire process of "how to do it" and what the unintended consequences would be.

People wrongfully think that "oh, Devs will just MAKE IT HAPPEN" - while in reality Devs will go "Yeah no, I'll just go make finance software for money".

[gentle mortar]

GOOD morning, this has not AT ALLL have been going for a entire day

[indigo wadi]

Clearly

[sterile nexus]

outsource it to any number of massive server farms that would take on the business in a heartbeat and sublicense it to wannabe private server owners. not complicated in business

[indigo wadi]

Lets see if I can play more WoW than talk about this today

[honest sage]

Proposals for new laws doesn't really concern itself with how to do something, that could get ugly very fast

[cyan adder]

asskissers

[fluid dome]

playing WoW

Cringe

[indigo wadi]

Someone raised a point yesterday. Look at the proposals that did pass. Now compare that to SKG. Notice why those passed?

[sterile nexus]

correct and it cant. the law serves to protect not to dictate exact how to's

[indigo wadi]

it's more cringe to be cringing over what one plays

[indigo wadi]

ha..ha..ha..ha....

[buoyant arrow]

The law doesn't dictate how to?

Ever heard of a speeding limit?

Literally how to drive

[indigo wadi]

It it illegal to commit murder. That is a how to.

[white mica]

im sorry is that not EXACTL WHAT A LAW IS FOR? to dictate how to's?

[wary drift]

Or just, you know, the entire concept of Red Tape

[sterile nexus]

yep, the speed limit isnt the law, its the how to put in place on each road by the municipality. the law says obey whatever speed limit is posted, not what the speed will be everywhere. important distinction

[honest sage]

Well yes, but it doesn't tell the police how the police should measure the speed, which is what you are asking for, when you are asking for the law to tell developers on how specifically they should support a game

[indigo wadi]

Speed Limit is the law, which is why it's enforced?

[buoyant arrow]

That's... still telling you how to drive though.

[wary lotus]

I understand the concerns of SKG. I wish I could just play some of my old games that no longer exist.

But that would require untangling a lot of other issues - and I doubt law makers would EVER pull the pin on that grenade.

[white mica]

idk about where you live

[sterile nexus]

but the numbers on the signs are not set by the law. they are set by the municipalities that govern the roads and set per road for the situation of the road

[round bolt]

What a weird argument

[indigo wadi]

but the law still dictates you to not speed.

[zenith summit]

regarding skg, how do people think nintendo switch 2 games that only contain a key will work once nintendo kills their online services for that console? They have lots of unavailble content for older console due to dropping services

[sterile nexus]

correct! it does, but the details are not in there. they are set elsewhere and in many ways

[lunar moth]

Let's say I make an online game about planting potatoes and I sell it for a very small amount of money. Enough where I can run the servers so folks keep planting potatoes.

Someone else now want to plant potatoes but don't want to give me the money to access my server.
So they DDoS it, to the extent where I can't provide the service anymore and now the "end-of-life/expiration date"-requirement is in action because I choose I cannot afford to do it anymore. Either because I can't, or I don't want to.

Now I need to release the actual server infrastructure or game in some capacity where it is indefinitely playable without my server.

This means that now the game becomes available outside of my control and I no longer have control over the game, and it is readily available to anyone effectively speaking. Either as a single player game that people can distribute, or because someone else can set up a server and plant potatoes.

The person DDoSing my server decides to run their own server of it, or play it on their own, but now that they have access to the game in full - I have no longer any effective control over it. Meaning that they can set up their own paid servers or use the game to make their own game of it. I couldn't afford to run the thing anymore, or I was so emotionally drained from it, that now that someone else has taken over the role I had as the original developer and person running the server - they now have that role effectively instead, and if they make money of this, I now need to fight them in court or else I lose my copyright over it (this is what even companies like Blizzard does when private servers decide to monetize their products; if they don't fight 'em and make them stop it, they lose their copyright to the product).

All of this means that the DDoS attacker have now taken over my game, and I now need to continue to defend it even after it was no longer profitable (or 'worth' it for let's say health reasons of getting constantly DDoS'd) for me to run the game... and I need to do this indefinitely, or else I lose my copyright.

And this is why your position, @sterile nexus, is not just anti-big corporation running their own game and servers ... but it is inherently anti-developer, anti-consumer, and entirely pro-"hostile takeover." Regardless of whether it is an indie or a big corporation.

[wary lotus]

That's why I didn't buy the Switch 2.
We don't need laws - we need to just not buy the stuff we don't want to keep seeing.

[high ember]

if I drive 300 kilometers per hour am I not breaking the law?

[buoyant arrow]

The Straßenverkehrsordnung (Road Traffic Law) in germany, where I live, dictates most if not all eventualities of participating in public traffic. It's a law.

[zenith summit]

not buying does not work, not enough people understand future issues for it to make an impact

[delicate shell]

Does no one see the similarity between things like SKG and digital purchases for media? I think folks would be in support of having a digital movie purchase be downloadable after you buy it and be against buying it if the hosting company could just take it away on a whim. Doesn't that inform your decision when making a purchase of digital goods? When you buy a blu-ray you get to keep it and it still functions in the state it was when you bought it. If you buy netflix you are explicitly aware that you do not own that media and they can remove your access whenever they want. But both options are explicitly laid out before you buy.