But in short, PirateSoftware had a fall from grace for narcissism and with his previous opposition to the petition, became a “villain” to unite against.
Man, Masquerade was my go to repacker when i was younger. After the website vanished i couldn’t find them and assumed they quit. Glad to see they’re still around!
So back in the days of the Atari ST we had compact disks (sic).
Most games shipped on a single floppy disk (so 720k or 1.4Mb) and rarely used compression given the base system only has 512k of RAM. The crackers would strip the protection, repack the data and patch the loading routines to handle that. Depending on the games they could fit 3 or 4 games on a single disk.
Nowadays the dynamics are different - games on consoles do use compression but they have to favour speed because they are streaming assets just in time. The PS5 even had dedicated decompression hardware to keep up with the data rate on it’s fast SSD.
B) procuring software is a two-way street … the producer assigns terms by which access is obtained, and you agree to those terms in exchange for that access. If the software is SaaS then if the producer chooses to shut down the service then you are SOL. If the software is provided with a long list of terms via Steam, then you are basically buying SaaS with local caching and execution. Maybe don’t reward producers by agreeing to one-sided deals like SaaS?
This kind of headache is what prompted Richard Stallman to come up with the idea for the GNU license. Maybe you think that is too radical… but maybe imposing your ideas of what licensing terms should look like on (only?) game developers is radical also.
For the same reason I think software developers have the right to choose to release under copyleft, I think they have the right to release under SaaS or copyright. I don’t think it is fair to take those rights from them. (I may choose to avoid SaaS or other proprietary models where possible, but I am not pure about it… I just do so recognizing that proprietary tools are a band-aid and could become unusable when any upgrade or TOS changes.)
As one example, keep in mind that some governments may choose to punish a software developer for making “offensive” (by whatever their standards are) content, and rather than fighting a losing battle in one jurisdiction so you in some other jurisdiction can keep using that controversial software the developer may just choose to cut their losses and turn it off for everyone. If you force them to release it anyway then said punitive government may continue to hold the developer responsible for the existence of that software.
There are rights and responsibilities associated with a proprietary model… and IMO you (and your permissive government) should not be overriding those rights for your own short-sighted benefit.
There are rights and responsibilities associated with a proprietary model… and IMO you (and your permissive government) should not be overriding those rights for your own short-sighted benefit.
Kind of sounds like you misunderstood the initiative to be honest. This only affects games which have been abandoned by the developer, the proprietary model stays perfectly intact as long as you actually keep selling your games.
also, no modern game companies with any relevance use a FOSS license.
so the way i see it, gamers have two options:
stop playing videogames or
only play supertuxkart and dwarf fortress
neither of these would happen at a scale large enough to force game studios into making their games FOSS.
the only way i can see of making this happen is by either:
a series of very popular, targeted boycotts at studios, or
making governments regulate the industry.
and with the second option, history has shown that only small changes have a chance of passing. effectively abolishing copyright law for software is not something the EU will ever do, no matter how many signatures a petition gets.
I don’t think they need to make their games FOSS to do right by the consumer. If you have an online game and no longer want to support the server part, it would be super cool to share that code, but at the very least companies shouldn’t be trying to shut down community servers. The same goes for the game itself, the source code would be very cool, but not going after people who still want to play the game they’ve chosen to no longer support seems reasonable.
If a company is ending support their ability to enforce copyright should also end, outside of people that are trying to profit off trying to resell the game as their own (which probably doesn’t happen all that much).
Dwarf Fortress is not free open source software! It's a great game and runs natively on Linux. You can download it at no cost. But it's not open source.
The argument here is that they don’t need to open source or switch over to an FOSS license.
They just need to not actively prohibit people from doing custom servers and they need to release their own server files wheb their support period ends.
If that ends with violating a license agreement they have with another company that is exclusively a that company problem because as shown in the past, law supercedes agreement and contracts.
It will basically put branding companies at a either they don’t agree to let their stuff be used in games and not get the money for it, or they decide that it really doesn’t matter all that much if a community project can use their stuff. Simple choice
They can still release their bespoke parts without any of the third party licensed stuff. Even without instructions on what needs to be gotten and put back in. It’d allow the smarter guys in the community have a headstart to figuring it out anyway. Most licensed software can be replaced, look at the recent decomps like the Lego island one.
To address your first point. Yes it applies to other software, this initiative applies to games because the “buyer purchases a license to allow the seller to remove your purchase at some indefinite time later” practices have been most prevalent in gaming.
Extending the scope too far will bring in more opponents than allies and muddy the discussion. Getting a decisive answer here will inform laws on how other industries should be regulated in separate but parallel legislative processes.
Nice! I gravitate to DEX builds too as it’s just so nice to have bow access. My favourite stylish build is probably dual wielding the Tracers, but that’s basically NG+ only.
I have played a Java version of Resident Evil 1 which is top-down but plays mostly the same, except the combat is turn-based. You don’t go to an environment for battles, the actual walking and shooting happens in the main game, I really enjoyed it back then
Most console games back in the day had a Java port one way or another. Assassin’s Creed upto III were there and the III version even had naval combat. There was a Bioshock port in which you could basically do all you can in the game, combat and hacking minigames and powerups were similar. We had Doom RPG and Doom 2 RPG, I loved that one particularly because for me it introduced me to Doom with a lot of story and cutscenes, the gameplay was really fun too. God of War has a canon java game lmao
Anyway, about RE1 I think it even preserved all of the puzzles! I don’t think I ever beat it but did play a ton of it. It had a layer of strategy because if you shoot the zombie and it doesn’t die then it will get closer to you when the zombie’s turn comes so you had to plan battles out in a way
I know this one is a bit late, but I am hearing buzz about this game but it doesn’t seem like we’ve discussed this one here. “Rocket League without cars” is the tongue-in-cheek description i’ve heard, essentially getting at the idea that this is a soccer/football game with a lot of style that is also more accessible to people that aren’t football nuts.
long time rocket league player and have about 20 hours from open beta + release combined. Have to say RL’s netcode and physics still remain unbeatable, while Rematch tries to hide their input lag during live match through animation length, it’s very obvious when you played long enough and have those wonky lag or desync/rubberbanding even on connection <60ms average.
The game have good fundamentals, but I doubt it will have good skill ceiling for longer term as the main ranked mode is 5v5 which relies on positional play. The dev didn’t mention quite a bit of things in terms of mechanics but players slowly converge to explain things off experience. Like, when you have the boost on, you have higher priority when trying to hit/pass the ball then player that does not activate it. At the moment, because of the lag/desync, person have good ball control/possession have advantage over people trying to defend if purely in a 1v1 situation. If you are goalie/sweeper since it has some modifier to make defending easier, but still most goals are scored 1v1 against goalie because of the options available to attacker and the boost committed shot/pass shot.
5v5 ranked also mean people who solo queue will have much tougher time to grind through ranks to get where people can pass reliably or position proper.
I wish them have more time focus on making the netcode good and reliable and then tweak the options for defender to force a more position/passing heavy game.
Thank you for your detailed thoughts! I haven’t heard some of these critiques yet, esp from someone that is deep in on Rocket League, and they are very interesting. I agree that they really have to fix that net code if they want this game to take off. Hopefully they are furiously toiling away on that as we speak.
bin.pol.social
Ważne