14 ms·

Consumer activity and protest does work from time to time. One lesson to learn about these sort of statements here is not to make them during weekend. In the en

by Ekaros 3y ago

Consumer activity and protest does work from time to time. One lesson to learn about these sort of statements here is not to make them during weekend. In the end backing down here at least for a while is a sensible action.

wakawaka28 3y ago
There should be no "for a while" here. People did not buy the game with that requirement, so it can't rightfully be added later.
- behindsight 3y ago
  > People did not buy the game with that requirement That requirement/disclaimer was present on the Steam store page the entire time the game was actually available for purchase. The main issue was that it was not actively enforced due to server issues at the time - which the studio CEO acknowledged: > I do have a part to play. I am not blameless in all of this - it was my decision to disable account linking at launch so that players could play the game. I did not ensure players were aware of the requirement and we didn't talk about it enough. We knew for about 6 months before launch that it would be mandatory for online PS titles. https://twitter.com/Pilestedt/status/1787076609188483254 https://twitter.com/Pilestedt/status/1787076609188483254
  - wakawaka28 3y ago
    Idk about Steam but even if that's true, some people bought physical copies of the game not expecting that bullshit. Many were not in countries where PSN even operates. It's bad business for sure. If it needs PSN then that needs to be the first thing you see in the description, like "Now available exclusively on PSN..."
    - Hamuko 3y ago
      They have physical copies of the PC version?
      - wakawaka28 3y ago
        Idk, that's what I heard. I looked around and the standard $60 edition comes with PS and PC versions. I can't say if one of those is digital only, but even if it is some people were not happy campers about the PSN requirement not being advertised. I assume the PS versions of some games can be played offline with no account, but idk. I don't have a Playstation or a PSN account.
        Hamuko 3y ago
        All non-free PlayStation games require both a PlayStation Network account and an active PlayStation Plus subscription for online play. Free games don't require a subscription but still require an account as far as I know. And seeing as Helldivers 2 is online only, you need both an account and a subscription to play it at all on a PlayStation.
  - Sakos 3y ago
    The biggest issue is that the game was being sold in countries where people couldn't make an account in that country (and where making an account in a different region would be against the ToS and there's no customer support for these people). You can't sell a multiplayer only game in 177 countries that people aren't allowed to make a required account in, then not expect people not to be extremely upset. In fact, it's insanity that Sony can sell consoles in all these countries without allowing them to make accounts when they literally require it for significant functionality. How is that okay?
  - georgemcbay 3y ago
    > The main issue was that it was not actively enforced due to server issues at the time - which the studio CEO acknowledged: I'd say the bigger issue is that Sony listed the game for sale in many countries in which the requirement to have a PSN account could not be met because Sony doesn't offer PSN there. If PSN were available in all of those countries then having the requirement listed (which of course nobody reads, because we're programmed to ignore that sort of thing) would be a reasonable out and I'd be fine with telling people to suck it up and make a free PSN account, but the unrestricted selling in regions in which that requirement can't be met was a huge fuckup that's entirely on Sony (and likely why Steam rightfully started giving people no hassle refunds).
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    The box said "This is required" But there was a nice little "skip" button there! Not "skip for now", not "remind me later" not "here's when you won't be able to skip anymore" Just "Skip"
tschwimmer 3y ago
Woohoo, we effected about the least possibly impactful change imaginable!
- rrix2 3y ago
  Realistically, look how few people it took to change it. If we want to change something big, it will take a lot more than a hundred thousand gamers.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    You're both right and wrong. You'd be surprised how much impact 100k people can have in national changes. The whole stop killing games initiative is a lot less and it's at least getting a little bit of buzz. But the thing is you gotta do more than downvote on steam to do that. That's where you lose people. I'm sure many web devs here can attest to how much traffic is impacted by an extra click. Ironically, logging into a new website to fill out a form may be enough to kill so much momentum.
bigstrat2003 3y ago
I just wish that people actually would do something about the (far worse imo) requirement to give the game kernel access for anti cheat. But nobody gives a shit about that, so they're never going to change it. It's not really acceptable in my opinion for any game to have these rootkits, but it's especially bad for a co-op game where you're going to be playing most of the time with people you know.
- nirav72 3y ago
  I can't believe this hasn't been a bigger issue. Other than a handful of comments on steam about this when the game was first released, most people have either ignored this or don't care.
  - zik 3y ago
    Most people don't really understand what it is or how completely it destroys your computer's security mechanisms.
  - simianparrot 3y ago
    There’s a lot of posts about the anticheat and the issues it causes players on the steam forum, dozens if not hundreds a day still. But you’re right; enough people don’t care so the developers do nothing. Interesting side effect of this has been that it has driven a substantial amount of people to play the game under a Linux distro using Valve’s proton wrapper for Windows emulation (same as is used on Steam Deck) because the anticheat version for Linux doesn’t have the rootkit element. Conversely most of the cheaters that this system is designed to stop seem to also use Linux, making the entire endeavour pointless from the developer’s side, yet they remain adamant in keeping a system that harms many and doesn’t even prevent cheating anyway…
  - int_19h 3y ago
    Anti-cheat has been socially normalized for PC gaming for a very long time now.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    Welcome to gaming drama. Just like everything else, it's all about timing and vitality. That's why so much legal stuff that actually makes gaming worse gets through. Law isn't sexy, it's not instant. But yea, "victory for gaming" that they don't need to log into an account... As they log into an account to boot the game up. But TWO accounts, absolutely not. Unless it's Call of Duty. Or Diablo. Or Assassin's Creed (which isn't even an online game?). I can't even feel sorry. They bring it all on themselves.
fendy3002 3y ago
weekend / Friday changes are really the pandora's box. It's really enticing to publish on Friday because usually it's a slower business day, and you have time to really monitor the publishing / do the talk to make decision, but it comes with a big risk that you won't feel the impact until Monday.
Slava_Propanei 3y ago
[dead]
braiamp 3y ago
> not to make them during weekend That's old school marketing. Sony knew this wasn't going to be popular, you release bad news on Friday and good news on Monday. The problem is that 1. this is a game, we get more engaged with it on weekends; 2. the internet exists; 3. the entire premise of the game is to band together against unlikely odds, the sentiment of camaraderie is there.
rasz 3y ago
Only if you call Steam a consumer. They pulled game from the store over this.

by Ekaros 3y ago

wakawaka28 3y ago

There should be no "for a while" here. People did not buy the game with that requirement, so it can't rightfully be added later.

behindsight 3y ago
> People did not buy the game with that requirement That requirement/disclaimer was present on the Steam store page the entire time the game was actually available for purchase. The main issue was that it was not actively enforced due to server issues at the time - which the studio CEO acknowledged: > I do have a part to play. I am not blameless in all of this - it was my decision to disable account linking at launch so that players could play the game. I did not ensure players were aware of the requirement and we didn't talk about it enough. We knew for about 6 months before launch that it would be mandatory for online PS titles. https://twitter.com/Pilestedt/status/1787076609188483254 https://twitter.com/Pilestedt/status/1787076609188483254
- wakawaka28 3y ago
  Idk about Steam but even if that's true, some people bought physical copies of the game not expecting that bullshit. Many were not in countries where PSN even operates. It's bad business for sure. If it needs PSN then that needs to be the first thing you see in the description, like "Now available exclusively on PSN..."
  - Hamuko 3y ago
    They have physical copies of the PC version?
    - wakawaka28 3y ago
      Idk, that's what I heard. I looked around and the standard $60 edition comes with PS and PC versions. I can't say if one of those is digital only, but even if it is some people were not happy campers about the PSN requirement not being advertised. I assume the PS versions of some games can be played offline with no account, but idk. I don't have a Playstation or a PSN account.
      - Hamuko 3y ago
        All non-free PlayStation games require both a PlayStation Network account and an active PlayStation Plus subscription for online play. Free games don't require a subscription but still require an account as far as I know. And seeing as Helldivers 2 is online only, you need both an account and a subscription to play it at all on a PlayStation.
- Sakos 3y ago
  The biggest issue is that the game was being sold in countries where people couldn't make an account in that country (and where making an account in a different region would be against the ToS and there's no customer support for these people). You can't sell a multiplayer only game in 177 countries that people aren't allowed to make a required account in, then not expect people not to be extremely upset. In fact, it's insanity that Sony can sell consoles in all these countries without allowing them to make accounts when they literally require it for significant functionality. How is that okay?
- georgemcbay 3y ago
  > The main issue was that it was not actively enforced due to server issues at the time - which the studio CEO acknowledged: I'd say the bigger issue is that Sony listed the game for sale in many countries in which the requirement to have a PSN account could not be met because Sony doesn't offer PSN there. If PSN were available in all of those countries then having the requirement listed (which of course nobody reads, because we're programmed to ignore that sort of thing) would be a reasonable out and I'd be fine with telling people to suck it up and make a free PSN account, but the unrestricted selling in regions in which that requirement can't be met was a huge fuckup that's entirely on Sony (and likely why Steam rightfully started giving people no hassle refunds).
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  The box said "This is required" But there was a nice little "skip" button there! Not "skip for now", not "remind me later" not "here's when you won't be able to skip anymore" Just "Skip"

tschwimmer 3y ago

Woohoo, we effected about the least possibly impactful change imaginable!

rrix2 3y ago
Realistically, look how few people it took to change it. If we want to change something big, it will take a lot more than a hundred thousand gamers.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  You're both right and wrong. You'd be surprised how much impact 100k people can have in national changes. The whole stop killing games initiative is a lot less and it's at least getting a little bit of buzz. But the thing is you gotta do more than downvote on steam to do that. That's where you lose people. I'm sure many web devs here can attest to how much traffic is impacted by an extra click. Ironically, logging into a new website to fill out a form may be enough to kill so much momentum.

bigstrat2003 3y ago

I just wish that people actually would do something about the (far worse imo) requirement to give the game kernel access for anti cheat. But nobody gives a shit about that, so they're never going to change it. It's not really acceptable in my opinion for any game to have these rootkits, but it's especially bad for a co-op game where you're going to be playing most of the time with people you know.

nirav72 3y ago
I can't believe this hasn't been a bigger issue. Other than a handful of comments on steam about this when the game was first released, most people have either ignored this or don't care.
- zik 3y ago
  Most people don't really understand what it is or how completely it destroys your computer's security mechanisms.
- simianparrot 3y ago
  There’s a lot of posts about the anticheat and the issues it causes players on the steam forum, dozens if not hundreds a day still. But you’re right; enough people don’t care so the developers do nothing. Interesting side effect of this has been that it has driven a substantial amount of people to play the game under a Linux distro using Valve’s proton wrapper for Windows emulation (same as is used on Steam Deck) because the anticheat version for Linux doesn’t have the rootkit element. Conversely most of the cheaters that this system is designed to stop seem to also use Linux, making the entire endeavour pointless from the developer’s side, yet they remain adamant in keeping a system that harms many and doesn’t even prevent cheating anyway…
- int_19h 3y ago
  Anti-cheat has been socially normalized for PC gaming for a very long time now.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  Welcome to gaming drama. Just like everything else, it's all about timing and vitality. That's why so much legal stuff that actually makes gaming worse gets through. Law isn't sexy, it's not instant. But yea, "victory for gaming" that they don't need to log into an account... As they log into an account to boot the game up. But TWO accounts, absolutely not. Unless it's Call of Duty. Or Diablo. Or Assassin's Creed (which isn't even an online game?). I can't even feel sorry. They bring it all on themselves.

fendy3002 3y ago

weekend / Friday changes are really the pandora's box. It's really enticing to publish on Friday because usually it's a slower business day, and you have time to really monitor the publishing / do the talk to make decision, but it comes with a big risk that you won't feel the impact until Monday.

Slava_Propanei 3y ago

[dead]

braiamp 3y ago

> not to make them during weekend That's old school marketing. Sony knew this wasn't going to be popular, you release bad news on Friday and good news on Monday. The problem is that 1. this is a game, we get more engaged with it on weekends; 2. the internet exists; 3. the entire premise of the game is to band together against unlikely odds, the sentiment of camaraderie is there.

rasz 3y ago

Only if you call Steam a consumer. They pulled game from the store over this.