Edit2: Jesus people, please engage with the actual argument… not some strawman argument I didn’t make.
I must be missing something here.
Company buys land, designs and builds theme park
Company operates theme park.
Theme park isn’t profitable.
Company closes theme park
???
Company must give away designs and schematics to theme park rides for free so people can build theme park themselves that might be in direct competition with new theme park company is trying to build???
Edit: I do think that abandonware should be opensourced at some point… but I don’t understand this level of entitlement.
Good analogy. The battle shouldn’t be about forcing abandonware to be opensource. We should focus on DRM, it makes games almost impossible to play when servers shut down.
OP should have compared it to other medias such as movies. When you buy a box copy, you expect it to work long after the authors/studios/etc. are gone.
The issue is about the lack of legal ways to play older games as time moves on. It will only grow bigger in the next few years with even more games relying on DRM and online servers.
Online only play models are difficult for the consumer. I personally don’t play that many online only games for partly this reason… and partly because I don’t play many online games at all.
It still doesn’t seem entirely equivalent to me. We’re not talking about them giving out the source code. We’re talking about how shit it is that something like software already installed on your computer just no longer will work.
Or let’s use your analogy; why not just abandon the facility instead of shutting it down and chasing everyone away?
Like, don’t get me wrong. I understand that this is the nature about always online stuff and that it can always be closed down like a theme park, but I feel the conversation is more about “why did they design this like a theme park without an abandonment clause instead of a shut-down clause. Historically, most other theme parks have been fine with being abandoned”
And I mean, I’ll agree with you that it’s nothing new, we saw it with Overwatch 1 and countless others, but I feel it’s a conversation one should be able to have without it being dismissed?
(I may have read too much into your comment, but it felt like it was dismissing it as a non-issue since theme parks work like this, when this is not a theme park)
After reading the rest of your comment, you are reading the wrong thing from it, the physical parts of the amusement park would be the extant binaries you already have. They still run the same as they did before, but without maintenance they will deteriorate and become non-functional or only partially operational. In an online system there are server bits that might not be available to the end user and those pieces also need an operator.
To make a slightly more specific analogy, with a water park we could imagine a separate water treatment facility that would need to be run to keep the water in the water park safe. That treatment facility could also have plans and schematics.
The actual facilities in these cases are not independently valuable in the software case. It’s the plans and schematics (the source code) that has value… but in both cases you only need the facilities and operators/maintenance to allow people to attend the water park/play the game.
Could the game company also give away a physical treatment plants so that an independent organization could buy their own servers and run their own game servers so that they could still play in their own private water parks? Sure.
Should they? Maybe. But it’s specifically the entitlement to the plans/schematics that gets me…
Why would I need to elaborate on an argument I didn’t make? I don’t understand? I made my argument, if you don’t understand it, I don’t know what you don’t understand?
It doesn’t matter. Whatever argument you’re making, you’re missing the point of the OP.
Because the analogy I drew was in line with the OP. And you said you were making a totally different argument. So whatever argument you’re making is irrelevant.
My argument directly engaged with the original post that game developers should be forced to open source their software. The analogy you made has nothing to do with open source software, it has to do with payment models…
Edit: and ops position doesn’t make any claims about payment models…
The underlying analogy was totally wrong though because it misses the point of why people are so angry about it. The payment model is integral to understanding the entire point of the discussion.
People have been saying this game is exciting because of the lack of mtx, but it seems to me that any big rpg gets a lot of attention. Eldan Ring got similar praise last year. Bioware was making these kinds of games fairly consistently about a decade ago and then stopped to make shit like Anthem. It’s a design decision not a budget problem.
Microtransactions come with specific challenges. Specifically, you have to give the players a reason to pay them, and that’s usually done by making the game purpously worse for those who don’t pay.
Or the other trend these days, Wich is to remove content from the base game and sell it as dlc or just money-gate it even if it’s on the base disk/release.
I don’t necessarily believe this to be universal. I’ve played plenty of games with cosmetic mtx that I can absolutely play without the desire or need to spend money.
RDR2 is really gorgeous like this. I have some photos that show up in my gallery that I sometimes can’t tell if it’s a photo or RDR2 Screenshot. Though, I do think compression helps mask some of the signs that it’s a Video Game
Wonderful game. It was my Lockdown game where me and my mates would just meet up and do whatever. The boat was our social hub and it was a great game to play in the background while just having a good time.
If I’m getting garbage pizza (yeah, sometimes you do want garbage) I’ll usually go to the Cici’s buffet. It’s worse, but I get to keep going back for the terrible dessert pizza and it’s dirt cheap.
Could be nostalgia. Like, they have good pizza for paying attention to and enjoying, but for shoving slices into your mouth while playing Mario, Pizza Hut completes the connection to childhood.
It’s still pretty dumb. What Senechaud is proposing is that not far off from the Hayes Code. He’s also suggesting going about it the hard way. Instead of simply proposing that players not be able to commit war crimes, he’s asking that there be an in-game system that punishes players committing war crimes in accordance with international law. His stance is also based on the premise that video games now have realistic enough graphics that they could be used to fake footage of real war zones. In no way does a video capture of Call of Duty resemble reality, even when players are deliberately trying to behave realistically due to a combination of things like walking animations still being kind of off, especially when starting or stopping, and gameplay concessions, like bullets spawning in blatantly incorrect positions when guns are shot. It’s really obvious he’s never played these games he’s complaining about.
What Senechaud is proposing is that not far off from the Hayes Code.
I don’t think it’s so much that games depicting war crimes shouldn’t be allowed to exist, but rather wanting a game (or more games) to depict realistic consequences.
His stance is also based on the premise that video games now have realistic enough graphics that they could be used to fake footage of real war zones.
That’s not true at all. It’s not about faking footage, it’s about the games being realistic enough to feel immersive. From their website:
The ICRC is concerned that certain game scenarios could lead to a trivialization of serious violations of the law of armed conflict. The fear is that eventually such illegal acts will be perceived as acceptable behaviour.
If their concern was about fake footage, they’d be calling for it not to be depicted at all.
I have a ThinkPad T61, a laptop from 2007, with only 4 GB of RAM. I can open Firefox with 10 tabs, including a Youtube video at 480p, and still have 1GB of RAM left. Yet people act like 8GB is unusable these days.
lemmy.world
Ważne