4 ms·

A company runs an online game. The actual online infrastructure is a bunch of different services that are held together with string. They have licenced some pro

A company runs an online game. The actual online infrastructure is a bunch of different services that are held together with string. They have licenced some propriatry database. The studio runs out of money and lays off all the staff. What happens?

gear54rus 1y ago
They don't release it unless it also has LAN play option (like they used to before MBA takeover). Otherwise bye bye to jail :)
eviks 1y ago
If only the article covered that... > And some games have online components. Do I expect, for example, Bungie's multiplayer servers to stay up until the end of time? No.
- Negitivefrags 1y ago
  The stop killing games initiative does specifically want to apply to online only games.
  - eviks 1y ago
    No? > neither does it expect the publisher to provide resources for the said videogame once they discontinue it while leaving it in a reasonably functional (playable) state. https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000007_en https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/20... Why do you think that?
    - Negitivefrags 1y ago
      It is incredibly clear looking at this FAQ that this intends to apply to online only games. https://www.stopkillinggames.com/faq https://www.stopkillinggames.com/faq Multiple questions are about online-only games.
      - eviks 1y ago
        But it's also clear that permanent support is not required, so online servers will not be up, just like in the quote from the article. > We are in favor of publishers ending support for a game whenever they choose.
bakugo 1y ago
The game should remain playable, even if via LAN only. How that is accomplished is the responsibility of the studio, not the player - maybe they should think twice before licensing proprietary components that players cannot run themselves. If the company fails to do this, they are effectively committing theft, and should be punished accordingly by the law. If studio execs think this it's an unreasonable thing to do, then they're free to not release their games to the public and keep their proprietary services to themselves.
- Negitivefrags 1y ago
  If the company is bankrupt, who would be charged? Or are you saying that the directors of the company would be criminally liable in this situation?
  - chii 1y ago
    The game would only be legal to sell if they have the plan ahead of time before the game is on the market.
  - scotty79 1y ago
    > Or are you saying that the directors of the company would be criminally liable in this situation? Well, yes. As in any case of any decisions that result in violation of the law by companies.
- simsla 1y ago
  It's these extreme implications why I, as a gamer and software dev, haven't signed the initiative. A lot of these things are just not feasible. And it'll be so much harder on the indie devs than on the Bungie/Blizzards. I'm afraid if this is pushed through, the studios will just switch all online experiences to be fully subscription based. No more purchasing the game, you just pay for a month of the experience.
  - azthecx 1y ago
    As a software developer do you genuinely believe that it is harder for indie game developers to build online infrastructure and pay for its hosting costs rather than build some LAN feature into the game, or to package local server binaries into the game as it was done just a few decades ago?
rgblambda 1y ago
The Stop Killing Games website's FAQ does specifically mention this scenario: >For existing video games, it's possible that some being sold cannot have an "end of life" plan as they were created with necessary software that the publisher doesn't have permission to redistribute. Games like these would need to be either retired or grandfathered in before new law went into effect. For the European Citizens' Initiative in particular, even if passed, its effects would not be retroactive. So while it may not be possible to prevent some existing games from being destroyed, if the law were to change, future games could be designed with "end of life" plans and stop this trend.
- Negitivefrags 1y ago
  So does that mean that games are not allowed to use proprietary technologies in their backends anymore? That seems like a strange restriction to apply only to games.
  - rgblambda 1y ago
    Sure they can use proprietary technology in their backend. They just need permission to redistribute it, like is currently the case with any proprietary technology used by the client. Alternatively they can use proprietary technology in the backend without permission to redistribute, so long as it is replaced before support is ended.
  - aprilthird2021 1y ago
    They are allowed to use that. There just needs to be a way for that proprietary technology to be bought and used on a backend by a user if the company deems providing the backend to be costly to continue. That's my understanding
- kaycey2022 1y ago
  That is just not going to happen. Sweeping regulations that govern how games will be designed and created will just mean no game is made or sold in that market. Or this whole thing will be circumvented using malicious compliance. So end of life plan just means your client works but it stops being a playable game. Categorisation, maybe like even how cigarettes are sold, with big warnings and steam made to add a filter that doesn’t show games with no eol support will go a long way in the market coming up with solutions than just legislation forcing creators to make games in one way.
occz 1y ago
You build the EOL plan in advance.
jojobas 1y ago
Similarly to car manufacturers - even if you're going out of business you can't just say "not more parts" - you have to supply them for 10-15 years. In most countries if you're not willing to continue producing parts you have to transfer IP and tooling to someone who will.
scotty79 1y ago
Put everything on github or torrent. Law that forces you to do that trumps any licensing agreements between companies.
simion314 1y ago
IMHO some ideas 1 do not sell such a game, use a subscription 2 If you sell a online game you need to release the a server, not the source code but binarties, yes I know it is more work, but also lazy people were complaining that adding the mandatory "Unsubscribe" button in email is too much work or even impossible but they eventually do it and nobody dares today to defend that this rule was bad 3 make your game/software work offline, this entire thing was started because a greedy company killed a game that also had a single player mode. So if I bought Minecraft to play mostly single player I will be super pissed if Microsoft kills it because they were really special bastards that decided to force the Microsoft login to let me play the game. When they will abandon the game they need to make a final update and disable the online requirement. 4 The game will not be sold but will be "rended for N years", the customer knows what to expect and the developer is forced to keep the game working for N years from last purchase or refund the users. So if you launch soem AAA battle royale shit and it fails you refund your customers if you don't wana keep the servers running. 5 if all above is too much work then do not sell in EU or whatever USA state is demanding that you will not brick your sold software or hardware when you stop your servers because reasons.

gear54rus 1y ago

They don't release it unless it also has LAN play option (like they used to before MBA takeover). Otherwise bye bye to jail :)

eviks 1y ago

If only the article covered that... > And some games have online components. Do I expect, for example, Bungie's multiplayer servers to stay up until the end of time? No.

Negitivefrags 1y ago
The stop killing games initiative does specifically want to apply to online only games.
- eviks 1y ago
  No? > neither does it expect the publisher to provide resources for the said videogame once they discontinue it while leaving it in a reasonably functional (playable) state. https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000007_en https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/20... Why do you think that?
  - Negitivefrags 1y ago
    It is incredibly clear looking at this FAQ that this intends to apply to online only games. https://www.stopkillinggames.com/faq https://www.stopkillinggames.com/faq Multiple questions are about online-only games.
    - eviks 1y ago
      But it's also clear that permanent support is not required, so online servers will not be up, just like in the quote from the article. > We are in favor of publishers ending support for a game whenever they choose.

bakugo 1y ago

The game should remain playable, even if via LAN only. How that is accomplished is the responsibility of the studio, not the player - maybe they should think twice before licensing proprietary components that players cannot run themselves. If the company fails to do this, they are effectively committing theft, and should be punished accordingly by the law. If studio execs think this it's an unreasonable thing to do, then they're free to not release their games to the public and keep their proprietary services to themselves.

Negitivefrags 1y ago
If the company is bankrupt, who would be charged? Or are you saying that the directors of the company would be criminally liable in this situation?
- chii 1y ago
  The game would only be legal to sell if they have the plan ahead of time before the game is on the market.
- scotty79 1y ago
  > Or are you saying that the directors of the company would be criminally liable in this situation? Well, yes. As in any case of any decisions that result in violation of the law by companies.
simsla 1y ago
It's these extreme implications why I, as a gamer and software dev, haven't signed the initiative. A lot of these things are just not feasible. And it'll be so much harder on the indie devs than on the Bungie/Blizzards. I'm afraid if this is pushed through, the studios will just switch all online experiences to be fully subscription based. No more purchasing the game, you just pay for a month of the experience.
- azthecx 1y ago
  As a software developer do you genuinely believe that it is harder for indie game developers to build online infrastructure and pay for its hosting costs rather than build some LAN feature into the game, or to package local server binaries into the game as it was done just a few decades ago?

rgblambda 1y ago

The Stop Killing Games website's FAQ does specifically mention this scenario: >For existing video games, it's possible that some being sold cannot have an "end of life" plan as they were created with necessary software that the publisher doesn't have permission to redistribute. Games like these would need to be either retired or grandfathered in before new law went into effect. For the European Citizens' Initiative in particular, even if passed, its effects would not be retroactive. So while it may not be possible to prevent some existing games from being destroyed, if the law were to change, future games could be designed with "end of life" plans and stop this trend.

Negitivefrags 1y ago
So does that mean that games are not allowed to use proprietary technologies in their backends anymore? That seems like a strange restriction to apply only to games.
- rgblambda 1y ago
  Sure they can use proprietary technology in their backend. They just need permission to redistribute it, like is currently the case with any proprietary technology used by the client. Alternatively they can use proprietary technology in the backend without permission to redistribute, so long as it is replaced before support is ended.
- aprilthird2021 1y ago
  They are allowed to use that. There just needs to be a way for that proprietary technology to be bought and used on a backend by a user if the company deems providing the backend to be costly to continue. That's my understanding
kaycey2022 1y ago
That is just not going to happen. Sweeping regulations that govern how games will be designed and created will just mean no game is made or sold in that market. Or this whole thing will be circumvented using malicious compliance. So end of life plan just means your client works but it stops being a playable game. Categorisation, maybe like even how cigarettes are sold, with big warnings and steam made to add a filter that doesn’t show games with no eol support will go a long way in the market coming up with solutions than just legislation forcing creators to make games in one way.

occz 1y ago

You build the EOL plan in advance.

jojobas 1y ago

Similarly to car manufacturers - even if you're going out of business you can't just say "not more parts" - you have to supply them for 10-15 years. In most countries if you're not willing to continue producing parts you have to transfer IP and tooling to someone who will.

scotty79 1y ago

Put everything on github or torrent. Law that forces you to do that trumps any licensing agreements between companies.

simion314 1y ago

IMHO some ideas 1 do not sell such a game, use a subscription 2 If you sell a online game you need to release the a server, not the source code but binarties, yes I know it is more work, but also lazy people were complaining that adding the mandatory "Unsubscribe" button in email is too much work or even impossible but they eventually do it and nobody dares today to defend that this rule was bad 3 make your game/software work offline, this entire thing was started because a greedy company killed a game that also had a single player mode. So if I bought Minecraft to play mostly single player I will be super pissed if Microsoft kills it because they were really special bastards that decided to force the Microsoft login to let me play the game. When they will abandon the game they need to make a final update and disable the online requirement. 4 The game will not be sold but will be "rended for N years", the customer knows what to expect and the developer is forced to keep the game working for N years from last purchase or refund the users. So if you launch soem AAA battle royale shit and it fails you refund your customers if you don't wana keep the servers running. 5 if all above is too much work then do not sell in EU or whatever USA state is demanding that you will not brick your sold software or hardware when you stop your servers because reasons.