This is like saying I refuse to go outside because this book on nature I have is good enough, the context you get by being in the actual world helps whatever you read have more context. I’m assuming your comment was in jest, but it gave me such a gutteral reaction that I had to say something.
More proof that anti-cheat and bans just isn’t a working approach.
Almost every cheater I’ve talked to or seen interviewed has said they do it because they like winning. If thats the case, pushing them away isnt getting rid of them, its making them try to win harder, and they are literally spending money to make that happen.
This means, there is a market for cheaters, one that publishers and devs simply assault instead of realizing they could replace it entirely.
Create a marketplace in your game for cheats. When a player buys a cheat in game, they can turn it on but only in a specific playlist that cheaters get to play in. You dont need to own or turn on cheats to play in that playlist, in case you feel like challenging yourself, but cheaters can use them as much as they want in that playlist. If a cheater wants to go into cheat free playlist, their cheats get turned off by the game and they have to play like everyone else. Cheat free playlists can have cheat detection, and if you are caught cheating then you get banned from cheat free playlists permanently, but you arent banned from the game or the cheat playlist.
This deters cheaters from paying third parties for cheats, gives them a space to experiment in, makes money for the company running the game, and reduces the amount of cheaters in regular public lobbies. It also creates a space of challenge for people who don’t cheat, sorta like how people will do no death runs in souls games.
Sure, it isnt a perfect solution, but its far better than punishing every player with invasive tech, while simultaneously letting a market of cheat sellers thrive. For a bunch of capitalists, its wild they haven’t realized they are missing out on money with cheats.
Pretty much the same as all the other modern BFs. They all had cheats in the Beta/early release versions. I’ve played and own literally every BF game since the original release of 1942. Cheats have always been present more or less.
Imagine having millions of dollars (or billions) and having enough that even the next 3 generations of your offspring wont have to work and still wanting more.
Interesting. I wonder what new mechanics the sequel will have? To be honest, a graphical improvement and more types of hose attachments would probably be enough to justify a sequel - but I wonder if they’re going to do more story stuff this time around? The original game had a fairly funny story, albeit entirely text-based.
Edit: found some more info
From the discord
We’re excited to announce the next chapter for PowerWash Simulator! Introducing…
✨ PowerWash Simulator 2! ✨
New Career
PowerWash Simulator 2 will feature a full 38 level career set across Muckingham, taking you to places old and new. From Lubri City to Pumpton, and everywhere in between!
Home(base) is where the heart is
There’s no place like home, and you’ll now have a base of operations. Somewhere to relax solo, or gather the team before you venture out to tackle the grime!
Split Screen has entered the chat!
PowerWash Simulator 2 will be getting some co-op updates, including split screen & shared online progression. Sit back and unwind with your partner in grime, or jump online and play with other washers to hose down the town.
Soap-erior Washing
The soap system has also been reworked for PowerWash Simulator 2, allowing your cleaning experience to feel more satisfying than ever. Foam up any dirty surface and easily wash it away with a smooth swipe of your washer.
PowerWash Simulator 2 will be coming to Steam, Xbox Series X|S, Windows Store, PlayStation 5 | Pro & Epic Games
That didn’t look like mk8 though? The character style looked different, Mario looked more like Wonder than Odyssey. His cart was proportioned taller and skinnier than mk8 carts. The race track isn’t one seen in mk8 either
Lets hope the slowly expanding union movement within the industry reaches more countries in the future (yes, I’m aware this isn’t a game dev only problem in Indonesia but hey, change needs to start somwhere).
Maybe one day enough younger people will be in elected that understand computers aren’t magic. There’s no fundamental difference between selling a DVD and a digital movie, from a legal perspective.
Ironically, from what I can see, the younger generation understands even less about computers. It’s like everything is so simple to use (smartphones, consoles, tablet) that they no longer need to understand the technology behind it.
Which, to be fair, is also derived from a word which would be most accurately (with English vowels) pronounced as mah-nuh. Although at this point “manna” is definitively also a word of English whose correct pronunciation is with /æ/.
Short version: it’s a campaign to force publishers to provide some way to play online only games after they decide to shut down the servers. That or letting us know, by law, that games can be killed without repercussion. It’s not about forcing publishers to keep the servers alive forever if that’s what you’re wondering.
Long version: check out the official website for the Stop Killing Games campaign. It has FAQ with all the important info.
Unfortunately not, initiatives can only be signed by EU citizens. For this specific campaign you can help by spreading the word, besides that you can also check the “Take Action” tab on the site I linked previously - there are multiple campaigns started in various countries so you might be able to help with one of those.
Would this include the availability of playing single player offline games without the need to log in to different accounts and signing in to third party clients? That shit makes me completely crazy. I just want to build a pretty little city all by myself, why in the world would I need to be online and sign into shit for that.
Not really. This isn’t about completely preventing publishers from adding account systems etc. (even if that would be ideal), it’s about publishers removing your ability to play games after they the shut down the servers. The former would hopefully be a side effect of a potential law change/ruling but the main point is keeping games playable after the official support ends.
In your example it could be removal of the sign in requirement once the account system is down but not necessarily preventing them from existing in the first place.
Why not just expand on the winning formula for the original Arkham games? Do a forty year time skip and have the player as Terry instead of Bruce. Call it Beyond Arkham. It would probably print money if it’s as good as Knight or Origins, to say nothing of how much they would get if it was as good as Asylum or City.
Yes, but hiring some devs to modify the code to be run on a home server could be seen as an investment towards saving the cost of running the servers themselves.
If a company is going broke and cant afford to port the code to a home market, they could simply open source it, and let the fans do the work.
And as i mentioned to the other guy, i think this should be the law.
Worse, it might depend on licensed infrastructure. Maybe a company can stand giving away their proprietary server, but they can’t legally give away a library toolkit they purchased a $300,000 non-transferable license for. That kind of middleware is extremely common in the industry.
What you say is “easy” is great for a comment on Reddit or Lemmy but it doesn’t really provide anything to the actual problem.
The problem is that a company “just” doesn’t, why would they do this anyway? It would open their IP to be forked, modified and used for something else by someone else. That isn’t what they want you to do.
Since there is no incentive and no one is forcing them to do this they just keep doing whatever they want. It was mentioned in the video that there is absolutely no regulation or anything in that regard available ANYWHERE in the world, not even in the EU.
THIS is what the video and Ross Scott want to achieve, that there either will be regulations for it so that Game developers and Publishers can’t just create games with some mandatory server backend running that is shut down in a couple of years OR that there is at least some way of saying “well, we don’t care” so that the consumer can actually do anything about it on their own end.
So it is easy to say they “just” have to do X or Y but the past and the increasing games relying on things like this have shown that they won’t do anything about it because nothing is stopping them.
Don’t misunderstand me, I absolutely think there should be regulation over this. I’m saying ultimately if a company wants to discontinue a service they should be forced by law to release the server software. That way the player base can still use the product they paid money for.
youtu.be
Ważne