615
Some people just defend the status quo. (lemmy.ca)
submitted 4 months ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world
74 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/34790413

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works 103 points 4 months ago

Their fault. I remember a time when publishers allowed for people to run their own dedicated servers, for FPS at least. They could have modified that existing model, but instead they took that ability away from the user whilst almost simultaneously making excuses about the problem they created.

If their servers can't run forever, give us dedicated servers on a larger scale FFS!

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 75 points 4 months ago

Here is a completely noncontributory comment.

I stumbled across a copy of a physical book from the author of the comic this is from. I wondered to myself if this meme is in it.

It is.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago

THE PROPHECY HAS BEEN FULFILLED!

THE CHOSEN ONE IS AMONG US

[-] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 74 points 3 months ago

It's such a garbage argument when you can just counter with "okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

There are plenty of famous games, including Minecraft (only the most famous game in history) that manage to do that just fine. Acting like it's impossible just so that you can force people to buy the next game is bullshit.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

"okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

Or shit at the very least release documentation on how it works and let the open source community take care of it lol

[-] uis@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago

Both? Both. Both is good.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago

It's such a garbage argument when you can just counter with "okay then, release software which allows the public to run them for themselves".

Which you can help by signing European Citizens' Initiative. If you are EU citizen that is.

[-] Belgdore@lemm.ee 55 points 3 months ago

They cant run servers forever. Which is why they should release the server code when they decide to shut down.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yeah that would be awesome but it’s easier said than done (to no surprise, I’m sure).

One of the big issues I see from a developer standpoint is the potential for leaking proprietary code that they may not want to publicize like things related to authorization, server side anti cheat implementations, etc.

Why would they care? The product is done right? Well every project is not written from scratch and so to publish this stuff it could incur risk to the org’s other current/future projects in addition to helping outside sources get a leg up on said other current/future projects.

This could be dealt with potentially as well but that means extra dev resources and time and potentially inter-org collaboration to develop common OS standards but again that’s work that does not generate $$$

I’m not defending these assholes mind you, I just understand the blockers in the way. The greedy fucks could indeed do this but they never will because of said $$$

[-] uis@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

One of the big issues I see from a developer standpoint is the potential for leaking proprietary code

It is no longer proprietary then.

that they may not want to publicize like things related to authorization,

If it has any impact, then it means they were insecure all along. Or in other words, they had CWE-656 vulnreability.

server side anti cheat implementations, etc.

There are lots of effective opensource anticheats. Server-side, obviously. See minecraft anticheats.

and potentially inter-org collaboration to develop common OS standards

So, POSIX?

it could incur risk to the org’s other current/future projects in addition to helping outside sources get a leg up on said other current/future projects.

It's called anti-social behaviour. "Why help someone else?"

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh, well, if it’s not proprietary anymore, no problem!!! Did you not read the context regarding the impact to other existing and in-progress projects?

Also I like how you threw out POSIX as if that somehow makes this concept not only feasible but also fits into profit margins to be able to secure the additional funding. Who will sign up to contribute time and resources and stick to those same standard long term? EA? Ubisoft? I didn’t say it couldn’t be done I said it’s not something corporate would ever go for.

Go ahead and tell those big corpos to stop being anti social, I’m sure that’ll secure the funding and commitments necessary industry-wide

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AkatsukiLevi@lemmy.world 39 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

"They can't run servers forever!" Open source the server then Let people who want to play it run it themselves then

EDIT: typo

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

I remember being able to run a private World of Warcraft server on my computer back in like, 2009. Surely if WoW can be reverse-engineered, so can many other titles.

But yes, it would obviously be better if they’d just open-source it.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago

Surely if WoW can be reverse-engineered, so can many other titles.

This is solving wrong problem. Or rather, this problem should not exist at all.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 31 points 3 months ago

they can't keep running servers forever

That's exactly why we need it to pass.

Which EU citizens can help with by signing it. We are 40% there, we need your signature.

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago

I feel like wayyy too many engineer minds lean back on “too vague” without understanding how many judgment calls judges make in cases every day. It’s not uncommon for them to have to decide what someone’s intent or knowledge was when taking a certain action.

[-] Limonene@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago

Software engineer here. I find the petition to be very specific, and totally feasible.

Anyway, this isn't a true referendum where its text would become immediate law as soon as it passes. It's a petition that would be presented to legislators who would write the actual law. The petition doesn't need to be written in legalese.

(Also: if the customer paid them even one cent, then they DO owe the customer something. Also: They should be forced to release the server software when they shut down the servers.)

[-] uis@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

It's a petition that would be presented to legislators who would write the actual law.

Oh-ho-ho! It's about to get better: they can instead say, that existing laws cover this. Which will have even greater impact.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] callyral@pawb.social 29 points 3 months ago

If they're not gonna run servers, then they should distribute and open source the server software so players can run their own servers.

[-] Irelephant@lemm.ee 11 points 3 months ago

Whenever google cancels a cool project a small part of me wishes they would open source it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

"Stop Killing Games" is literally a way to force companies to let you host your own servers. That's the intention. The company loses nothing, they can wash their hands and move on.

In fact, they can even continue to sell games without servers.

[-] SpaceScotsman@startrek.website 15 points 3 months ago

To all the people saying they should release server source code: You don't even need to do that (as nice as it would be). At the very basic level all that is needed is:

  • remove DRM (which probably cost more effort to add in the first place)
  • a description of the API for any online components (which any decent dev team will already have internally documented)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Slayan@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 months ago

Meanwhile ragnarok online a 2002 mmorpg is alive and kicking with hundreds of private servers..

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 3 months ago

If your game relies on your servers, I won't buy your game.

[-] Mandy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 months ago

If two guys and a basement can run the guild wars 1 servers for next to nothing (their words) than yes, company's very much could run their servers forever.

[-] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 months ago

Switch this meme with "people want video games they own" and it's this thread. There are still plenty of games you can self host: Palworld, Minecraft, Satisfactory, Factorio, Terraria, Space Engineers, Counter Strike 2, The Forest, ARMA III, 7 Days to Die, Rust, Valheim. The average person obviously doesn't care about self hosting their own game server.

[-] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 months ago

They can connect to a server of those who do care about self hosting their own game server.

[-] kazaika@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

If you want to make this a law, how would anyone handle this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jMKeg9S-s&t=73

This argument holds true for developers of all sizes and is somehow totally ignored by most here.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

If a game has reached EoL then they're just being straight greedy worrying about someone else making a little money off it. Running a public server costs money too.

And again, nobody said they have to release a ready to go and fully functioning standalone binaries. Just the documentation on how it works as a bare minimum would go EXTREMELY far for the open source community and then the whole "ThEY DiDnt MaKE anY ConTrIBuTIOns" goes up in smoke

[-] kazaika@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Stop killing games said that games need to be kept in a functioning state afaik. That means exactly that. I am very for modding games but modding a game does not entitle me to the original creators intellectual property, but merely the part j have added.

Also what documentation? :)

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Because it would almost certainly not happen in reality. The server being released means everyone could spin up one for free. You wouldn't be able to monetize it to any significant degree.

If you want to be generous toward Thor, he is a security expert trained to focus on any hypothetical risks, however unlikely. If you don't, he is a game developer with monetary interest in this not passing and vast experience conning people.

[-] kazaika@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

It may be true that it may not actually happen. However:

  • I have elaborated on monetization in another long comment.
  • it cannot be wrong to have monetary interest in your product.
  • A law (which is the goal afaik) needs to account for unlikely scenarios, thats why its usually so hard to make new ones

I am not against leaving games playable, but the fact that people like the game means that the devs did a good job and their fate needs to be accounted for. Devs who make good games are not an enemy

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

One thing that would go against monetization of servers after hostility to get the original to go down would be that anyone could spin up a free one in competition. Once the server binaries are available to everyone, anyone can run a server. Why would someone pay for something they can get for free?

[-] kazaika@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

This still doesn't cover for the abuse of studios which is the main concern here, after all making games harder to kill off shouldn't come with making the production or maintenance more risky or significantly mor expensive. A malicious party trying to kill a game because they dont like it or part of the community is still a valid motive.

Regarding your Question, minecraft servers are a good example of this: there are many servers out there which monetise in game resources or grind shorteners for real world money. I dont think that it is a stretch to say that a non sandbox game could be adjusted to work in such fashion. Also the point is not that there are other options, but that someone may easily make money with stuff the dont own and have never contributed to in its making.

At the end of the day all of us still want new games to be made. Therefore we need to accept that the people making them need to be able to have a steady income doing their job. Monetising ones own creation is, and should be, well within your rights. Even if some of us dont like it providing a platform in form of a game, as a service / with ever fresh content can be a valid value proposition and there are many studios out there doing this successfully while being well respected, think of Deep rock galactic or path of exile.

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You can abuse studios right now. This would not change that. It would not make maintenance risky or more expensive.

It provides an extremely theoretical motive for people to do the abuse, that is unlikely to materialize in reality.

And if you want to be theoretical, it removes ideological reasons for abuse. Right now, if you dislike an online game, and got the studio shut down, the game would be gone. With this initiative, it would survive removing the motivation to try in the first place.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It provides an extremely theoretical motive for people to do the abuse, that is unlikely to materialize in reality.

Yeah, this whole argument seems like a theoretical spurious hypothetical.

The dude in the video is acting like this is completely legal too, when all of the abuse is already illegal and the authorities just cannot prevent it because of the scale and size of the Internet combined with their own ineptitude.

If I'm in the business generally of blowing up and attacking company servers, why would I suddenly want to pivot to hosting monetized game servers? That's an entirely different business. The whole thing strikes me as "OH NOES SOMEBODY MIGHT MAKE SOME MONEY OFF OF MY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES!!!".

Centralized, proprietary servers for games other than subscription MMO games are complete and utter bullshit. Either make the game a subscription and keep all of it server-side, or allow people to host the servers and stop acting like assholes.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I prepared for this argument very long time ago.

He omits a number of unrealistic assumptions:

  1. Bots buying game somehow is not infinite money glitch for developers. Assumption of complete lack of mental capacity of dev.
  2. Nobody except 'Bad Guy' can run server. Or if there is, none of them will run server just to play game instesd of profiting. Assumption of complete lack of mental capacity of players.
  3. 'Bad Guy' somehow makes more money from servers than spends on botting.

And now I will add new assumption I missed:

  1. 'Bad Guy' spends less on botting, than it costs to reverse engieneer protocol or make new game.

EDIT: forgot most important assumption, that was in another message:

  1. Game should not loose players, or there will be nobody to profit off.
[-] kazaika@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

You dont need bots to ruin a game, ddos is sufficient and cheap enough to come by, probably even easier in the future. Argument 2 already covered in other comment below

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 8 points 3 months ago

ITT: Time travelers from 2009, thinking my_game_dedicated_server.exe is still how all online games work.

I'm sorry to inform you that this is 2024, AWS has invaded every cubic centimeter of computing, and most companies couldn't extract a business-critical system from the rest of their infrastructure in a way that another company could run it even if they had 3 years and 100 million dollars to get it done.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

Found the executive. You're the crow in this meme.

No. They can release source code or documentation for others to work off of, no one is asking them to deliver a fully functioning standalone version.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago

For that matter you could just do community developed servers.

Look at headscale

[-] pixeltree 8 points 3 months ago

My yin, being required to provide what they do have and nothing more would be a huge boon to community driven efforts to preserve it. "Not everything can be perfect so therefore we should do nothing" is a bad take.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago

That's BS

You don't start big. You start small and then scale up from there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Default_Defect@midwest.social 5 points 3 months ago

Maybe its my lack of trust in the government from being in the US, but you guys seem to have a ton of faith that your legislators will take this and not make it a shit show and worse than the status quo.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sirico@feddit.uk 5 points 4 months ago

Getting back to the old status quo

[-] olafurp@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

It would be great if servers were just running in the background with an update

[-] N00b22@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

Or just release an offline patch so the game can be still playable?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
615 points (100.0% liked)

memes

14111 readers
3067 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world
The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website