No, they should have zero say because they have weaseled themselves into a position that is the equivalent of a utility or whatever ISP are classified as. Their only involvement is whether they complete transactions between parties in a legal way.
Early release was supposed to be in 2024. We have halfway through 2025.
Lead devs have said the game is ready for early release, so they are likely taking a break from a game they feel is being delayed by the publisher. The publisher is whining about expectations, not obligations or anything along those lines.
I’m with the devs on this one, project burnout is real.
A publisher trashing devs of a beloved game with personal attacks certainly was a bold move.
However, instead of participating in the game development, he chose to focus on a personal film project.
We are deeply disappointed by the former leadership’s conduct, and above all, we feel a profound sense of betrayal by their failure to honor the trust placed in them by our fans.
They did not have any reason to personally attack the leads except out of spite, and odds are high that doing so will only anger the player base towards the publisher.
Trashing the devs was a terrible idea, and what they wrote was clearly petty and spiteful.
However, instead of participating in the game development, he chose to focus on a personal film project.
My assumption is that Krafton expected the leads to put in 12 hour days 7 days a week to meet ridiculous expectations and the leads took some vacation time or something along those lines. That would match up with common publisher behavior, especially the ones that trash people publicly.
If they typed out an explanation like the game was massively changed for the worse after the vast majority of their game time then they are probably legit. Like if there was suddenly an additional 3rd party login added, or the game became unplayable due to a bug introduced and not fixed, or something along those lines.
Most “reasons” for players with thousands of hours tend to be pretty reasonable in my experience.
Their licensing will change so that it doesn’t restrict keeping the game alive after servers go down or their license can’t be used to kill an otherwise functional game. That’s it.
Games will be designed to include the ability to do private servers after the company servers go down. It will be a cost of development just like anything else they are required to do. If they don’t want to include that, then they can choose not to make an online game.
When the law passes, the owners of proprietary functionality will adapt their licensing to meet the requirrments or go out of business when everyone stops using them.
None of those things will be affected because this isn’t about making games open source. It is about making games that have a design that allows them to potentially function indefinitely instead of allowing the companies to design them with planned obsolescence like tying single player games to server verification.
When starting a new game, don’t include that stuff. Not including proprietary stuff without meeting the licensing requirements is already a step in the process.