this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
1538 points (98.4% liked)

Games

40594 readers
1085 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 61 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Copyright was invented so artists would be able to sell their art, and more art would be made.

When copyright is protected on a product that's no longer sold, less art is made.

When a copyright holder stops selling their art, copyright protections should immediately cease, and they should be responsible for copyright obligations - releasing the source code to the public. Use it or lose it!

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago (3 children)

This is the most level headed approach to IP I've seen. If you're not willing to use the property you forfeit it. It's a common contact for licensing rights for movies that forces a studio to make a movie or lose rights. That way people can't squat on a licence to prevent others using it.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 8 points 6 days ago

Sony has to make a Spiderman movie every few years even though DVDs of the old ones are still being sold, but Ubisoft can just delete games forever and they can never be played again.

[–] MunkyNutts@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

A good book on this is: Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity by Lawrence Lessig

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

The same thing should apply to private property, especially in cities.

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Pretty sure it was so publishers (printing press owners) could have a guaranteed profit. Those two things (publisher and artist profits) were correlated at the time. Not so much anymore. Streaming/subscription mentality is like planned obsolescence for IP.

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Anti-murder laws are cuttailing my choice! What if I someday would like to make a choice to murder someone?

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

Yes! When I read that, I immediately thought "curtailing developer choice is exactly the point."

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 37 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"... curtail developer choice" - This from a bunch of people for whom the term 'executive meddling' was created.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 5 points 6 days ago

Sounds like they just put together a bunch of meaningful sounding words. I know what they want to say though: "Noooo! But mah freedumbs! NOOOO 😭 "

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 32 points 6 days ago
[–] TwinTitans@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago

Well when the choice is anti consumer, too fucking bad.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It needs way more people, because I guess a lot of people from all over the world used VPNs to sign the petition and will get nullified.

So if you planned to do it, don't, you will hurt your goals more than you're doing an good.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I think people are overestimating what this petition is going to do. It will likely just end up in a response from the EU listing pros and cons but effectively saying "can't really do anything about it, sorry!". It's still good, even MMOs have server software gaming companies could release if legislation forced them instead of causing fandoms to die. Games are culture. They may also be entertainment, but that's culture as well. But I wouldn't hold out hope.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I think forcing MMOs to release software is a bit much.

Opted for large scaled systems. It's more than just simple software. There is a ton of infrastructure and proprietary solutioning that goes into it. That's likely used for other games as well.

It may not even be possible to release the software because it is not just software and the resources to prepare it for releasing may not be available.

However, if a game company shut down their servers, they should not be allowed to prevent other people from try to reverse engineer and make their own servers.

Single player and local games 100% though should not be allowed to be killed.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Opted for large scaled systems. It’s more than just simple software. There is a ton of infrastructure and proprietary solutioning that goes into it. That’s likely used for other games as well.

Doesn't mean it can't be released, just that it might be difficult to reproduce. It would still be much, much easier to reverse engineer that than to reverse engineer everything from the client and network communication captures.

It may not even be possible to release the software because it is not just software and the resources to prepare it for releasing may not be available.

In other words, so you don't know, and vague assumptions on a closed box because closed boxes allow you to make them.

Most MMOs usually have multiple instances running, each which need to be maintained separately. That means they have usually gone through the process of encapsulating the server functionality in a way that can be reproduced and recreated into new instances. They have to be maintained at the same time, so they need to be relatively standard. At one point those supposedly absent resources to duplicate the instance of a server have likely existed, and just need to be packaged for public release. Proprietary portions can simply be excluded - an incomplete release is preferable to an absent one. Can't release databases, they can release schemas, etc. Incomplete > absent.

You largely seem to be giving MMO companies the excuse that if their server solution could theoretically be proprietary and convoluted enough, even if it really isn't, that they not be subject to the Stop Killing Games initiative. MMOs, unlike single player games, have a far more notable sociable and persistence factor to them, a bigger cultural footprint within those communities, that makes the Stop Killing Games Initiative particularly applicable to them. There's one simply way not to be subject to its demands - don't kill the games.

[–] Alloi@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

"but black dynamite!....... i sell drugs to the community!"

[–] moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago

Yup, that's correct. What about it?

[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 347 points 1 week ago (18 children)

Companies would still be cutting flour with chalk if they had their way. "It's limiting blah blah blah" that's the point you corpos, consumer rights are about the consumer not the bottom line

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Decq@lemmy.world 270 points 1 week ago (52 children)

This is just pure fabricated bullshit. They themselves started limiting options. Remember the old days where you could host your own server with basically any game? They took that away, not us. So they themselves are 100% responsible for this 'uprising'. Besides they could just provide/open-source the backend and disable drm. Hardly any work at all.

But of course it's not about that. They just try to hide behind this 'limits options' argument. But they simply don't want you to be able to play their old games. They want you to buy their latest CoD 42.

[–] FreeLikeGNU@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

I remember the "old days". That was when dialup internet was still popular and running a server usually meant it was on your 10Mb LAN. When we got DSL it was better and you could serve outside your LAN. This was also the time when games had dark red code booklets, required having a physical CD inserted or weirdly formatted floppies (sometimes a combination of these). You could get around these things and many groups of people worked hard at providing these workarounds. Today, many of these games are only playable and only still exist because of the thankless work these groups did. As it was and as it is has not changed. Many groups of people are still keeping games playable despite the "war" that corporations wage on them (and by proxy on us). Ironically, now that there is such a thing as "classic games" and people are nostalgic for what brought them joy in the past, business has leapt at this as a marketing opportunity. What makes that ironic? These business are re-selling the versions of games with the circumvention patches that the community made to make their games playable so long ago. The patches that publishers had such a big problem with and sought to eradicate. This is because the original code no longer exists and the un-patched games will not run at all on modern hardware and the copy-protections will not tolerate a virtual machine. Nothing has changed.

We can even go back as far as when people first started making books or maps that had deliberate errors so that they could track when their work was redistributed. Do the people referencing these books or maps benefit from these errors?

Why do some of us feel compelled to limit knowledge even at the cost of corrupting that knowledge for those we intend it for (and for those long after who wish to learn from historical knowledge)?

load more comments (51 replies)
[–] bungle_in_the_jungle@lemmy.world 154 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Lol. We're gamers. We know that if we encounter enemies we're going in the right direction.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 124 points 1 week ago

"curtail developer choice" is such a weak argument because you could equally apply it to literally every piece of regulation ever passed. Of course it curtails choice, that's almost the dictionary definition of an industry regulation.

load more comments
view more: next ›