65
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
65 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
12223 readers
410 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Way I see it is it just stops being a live service game, and stays at the latest version, which is the one you can then host.
Exactly this. It would obviously be disappointing to lose leaderboards or any other massively multiplayer elements like that, but just being able to fire up the game and have fun with friends after the live service has shut down is basically all that needs to happen.
Leaderboards and such could still be kept along with high multiplayer count.
It might not be as 'unified' as a traditional live service, but it's totally feasible.
As long as they actually let you run a server its fairly easy to self host and there are plenty of services that let you rent professional grade systems with enough data and hardware to handle tons of players.
What is to stop devs from sabotaging the preservation effort by releasing a cookie clicker patch the day of server shutdown, that converts the game into a cookie clicker clone? Or more simply, introducing so many intentionally buggy out features that the game is rendered unplayable? Would consumers have the right to pick which version of the game they get to self host at the end?
Lawsuits.