PC Gaming

12234 readers

348 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca

UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca

KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Randy Pitchford shares thoughts on the Stop Killing Games campaign, gets very existential: "It's so sobering to think about the fact that everything will end[...]and I kind of hate that" (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] AstralPath@lemmy.ca 77 points 3 days ago (18 children)

“It's a weird, challenging problem, though, because I think that at the same time, if we're going to have any games that are sincere live services, it seems mutually exclusive to have something that's going to be a living thing that can't be allowed to die. I don't know how to get around that.”

Dedicated servers. Let people host their own servers. How is this so fucking hard to understand? When the company is ready to move on and retire their official servers they can do so without invoking ire from the playerbase.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Or keep the live service model, but label things correctly:

You're getting a subscription to the service that's guaranteed to last at least until [planned minimum end date]. Make it illegal to label anything using "buy" that doesn't grant a permanent, non-expiring license to the software or digital good.

There's nothing wrong with charging for a subscription. If that's their product, and the only way they can offer the product, then clearly market it that way and there's no legal problem under the proposed rules.

Granted, that still sucks for videogame preservation, but at least it's honest. And I'm not sure how many people will be willing to shell out $80+ for a "minimum 24 month subscription" to a new game, or pay $9.99 for a "micro"transaction they're guaranteed to keep access to for ~~8 7 6~~ 5 months.

load more comments (17 replies)