Video game maintenance and preservation. How do we feel?

[atxcyclist]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

Because they want to play it with their friends. Did you not understand anything in the thread?

 

There are ENTIRE videos of people doing things on private servers of MMORPG's because they've either:

- The RPG has stopped being available (eg FFXIV V1.0, Wizardry Online) 

- The people who played it got banned but still want their fix

- The people want to play for RP/eRP and don't need the entire server infrastructure to do it. (GTAV)

 

Less you dismiss this point, https://fivem.net/ is literately a private server system for GTAV for RP. The maximum it would cost you is $1000/mo if you wanted to run a massive RP server that supports 1024 players. If you only pay for 10 player slots, it's only 12$/mo. And before you go "isn't this illegal or something" no, the fiveM stuff is blessed by Rockstar for RP stuff. These costs are almost entirely for the software license.

 

 

Yeah, a lot of people want a lot of things that are not attainable. Questioning whether I 'understand' some completely unattainable utopia where game developers just hand you your subscription money back and refund you for stuff you willingly bought in-game, is honestly wild; You seemingly do not understand that developers don't have and should not have a responsibility to give you money back that they used for operating/payroll/marketing costs, nor do they have any compulsion to release the code to run servers when they deprecate an old game, especially when they may be using aspects of that programming in future titles.

 

I used to play on Quake III servers back in the day, and I even ran my own Minecraft server a few years back for some of my friends and family, I'm aware that private servers for certain games have existed. That doesn't mean every game is built that way or could run on consumer hardware, something like an MMORPG is going to be very expensive to upkeep, just one example like GTA V doesn't describe all online games.

[Kisai]

10 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

Yeah, a lot of people want a lot of things that are not attainable. Questioning whether I 'understand' some completely unattainable utopia where game developers just hand you your subscription money back and refund you for stuff you willingly bought in-game, is honestly wild; You seemingly do not understand that developers don't have and should not have a responsibility to give you money back that they used for operating/payroll/marketing costs, nor do they have any compulsion to release the code to run servers when they deprecate an old game, especially when they may be using aspects of that programming in future titles.

 

If I pay $20/mo to play a MMORPG, and all that grants me is access. That's fine. The minute I spend $7 dollars to buy an asset in the game, Now you must refund me that $7. If that subscription fee also prevents the demolishment if my house in the game, now that subscription fee is like paying the bank a mortgage. $20/mo * 12 *10 years = $2400, now multiply that by the 10% of players who actually own houses. There is also the unlocking of additional storage, which are addtional fees. In the case of FFXIV, That's 2$/mo per retainer. Some people have like 15. https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/playguide/option_service/additional_retainer/

Note your data isn't destroyed when you stop paying for the service. You just lose access to it. If you stop paying for service, your house is destroyed, and the items in it "put in storage". But if they shut the game down, everything is gone.

 

You don't want to accept the idea that a player's time and experiences have a cost. The company shouldn't be able to destroy your intangible property any more than they can destroy your real world property.

 

 

10 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

I used to play on Quake III servers back in the day, and I even ran my own Minecraft server a few years back for some of my friends and family, I'm aware that private servers for certain games have existed. That doesn't mean every game is built that way or could run on consumer hardware, something like an MMORPG is going to be very expensive to upkeep, just one example like GTA V doesn't describe all online games.

Every game is built that way. If it's lobby-based, there is zero reason why a private server can't be run on someone's $200 desktop set aside to run it. MMORPG's have multiple software servers to operate the game, and the game client seamlessly switches between these connections to the same server. There is no requirement to those to be a separate machine from the game client if the player is playing solo.

 

Which is another point you seem not to want to understand. If WoW, FFXI or FFXIV:ARR shutdown, a "Single player" option could be developed to run on the same computer as the game client, and the player could play all the story and dungeon content with NPC party members. That ensures the game still can be played. If you want to get your 8 friends to play that content with, they just connect to YOUR machine. No server infrastructure is required. All they have to do is in the final patch to the game client, allow the player to define what server to connect to. Presently these private servers just interdict the connection to the non-existent servers by manipulating the hard coded IP addresses in the launcher.

 

[atxcyclist]

2 hours ago, Kisai said:

 

If I pay $20/mo to play a MMORPG, and all that grants me is access. That's fine. The minute I spend $7 dollars to buy an asset in the game, Now you must refund me that $7. If that subscription fee also prevents the demolishment if my house in the game, now that subscription fee is like paying the bank a mortgage. $20/mo * 12 *10 years = $2400, now multiply that by the 10% of players who actually own houses. There is also the unlocking of additional storage, which are addtional fees. In the case of FFXIV, That's 2$/mo per retainer. Some people have like 15. https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/playguide/option_service/additional_retainer/

Note your data isn't destroyed when you stop paying for the service. You just lose access to it. If you stop paying for service, your house is destroyed, and the items in it "put in storage". But if they shut the game down, everything is gone.

 

You don't want to accept the idea that a player's time and experiences have a cost. The company shouldn't be able to destroy your intangible property any more than they can destroy your real world property.

 

 

Every game is built that way. If it's lobby-based, there is zero reason why a private server can't be run on someone's $200 desktop set aside to run it. MMORPG's have multiple software servers to operate the game, and the game client seamlessly switches between these connections to the same server. There is no requirement to those to be a separate machine from the game client if the player is playing solo.

 

Which is another point you seem not to want to understand. If WoW, FFXI or FFXIV:ARR shutdown, a "Single player" option could be developed to run on the same computer as the game client, and the player could play all the story and dungeon content with NPC party members. That ensures the game still can be played. If you want to get your 8 friends to play that content with, they just connect to YOUR machine. No server infrastructure is required. All they have to do is in the final patch to the game client, allow the player to define what server to connect to. Presently these private servers just interdict the connection to the non-existent servers by manipulating the hard coded IP addresses in the launcher.

 

You're too far gone into the void dude, and not listening to important things like, 'game developers should not be required to release multiplayer code for old games as they may continue to use parts of it in the future.' If you put money into digital items there's a huge risk you will lose them in the future, but they're not your property and you're not owed a refund for digital subscriptions or items under any laws that exist or likely will exist, because companies are not going to zero-out their finances when they stop supporting a game.

 

I'm out.

[WhitetailAni]

17 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

So my question is; With you understanding some of the server-side costs and complexities, why do you think some random enthusiasts are going to float those costs for a game? 

https://pretendo.network/

[Thaldor]

On 4/20/2024 at 10:27 PM, Kisai said:

-

There's property and then there's "property". Like I think I pointed out you may own a painting but do you really OWN the painting or just a license to have it? If I commission someone to draw me a character, is that character mine to do whatever I want with it? Or is the character still property of the artist? After all, the artists "support" ends when the files are send. Even if paid only for the jpg-file, shouldn't the artist also send the psd-file because the client may want to alternate the image in the future?

 

Immaterial rights are kind of bitch when it comes to this. Also just the freedoms of everyone, imagine going to some electronics manufacturer and demanding them to release the final drawings, schematics and designs for every product they don't make/support anymore. Also just forcing people to do stuff they don't want to do, that's some real shit there, mate.

 

Then there's the plethora of technologies involved. "Open sourcing" a game by force, especially a larger one, isn't actually as simple as just "do it", at the best just forcing the developer to open source their part will just make another MacOS "open source" game that, well parts of it are publicly open source but can you make a game from those public parts? Nope. And that would be probably what every a bit more bigger game company would actually do if they were forced to open source their games after they drop the support, rip anything with immaterial rights from the game and open source just the parts only they have made because they don't have rights to open source other companies software.

 

Also there's a simple solution to fight this that won't require going all Ace Attorney. Don't buy SHIT. If Square Enix does shit with their games, don't buy them, not even the good ones until they have changed their company policies. That Chocobo statue remains in the store until Square Enix has actually shown they have changed, no matter how good Final Fantasy remake they did. Don't even watch the trailers or the reviews until there has been a change, the company isn't worth your time. ubishit does shit with The Crew, don't waste a second of your time with the Star Wars Outlaws, the company isn't worth it. Even if you're a game reviewer or whatelse, don't touch that shit. Actually, if you're a game reviewer and have a good foothold, especially don't touch that shit, make an actual stand and make it public that you're making a stand.

Will you miss something? yeah but that's the point, you rather give up something than touch their shit. Especially for any kind of influencer, that's some really respectable thing to do and can do a lot for the cause. Like imagine if Jay wasn't such a soy boy and instead of just making 13 minute rant video, about Nvidia being bad releasing new flagship GPU among the GPU shortage, had actually put on his man pants and said "fuck it" and probably sacrificed the million views of the RTX 3090 Ti review just for that he thinks it's wrong from Nvidia to release the GPU and not focus on manufacturing affordable models. Or Linus wouldn't have accepted Facebooks money for Quest 2 review after he "took the stance" against the binding the device to the users Facebook account during WAN show.

 

But nah, you gotta buy the newest Final Fantasy, EatAss, Ubishit, Actifucking-Buzzer game because you might miss out a great game and that would be "terrible". Just like influencer virtue signaling because that brings them views and then taking the money because that's what they actually are after.

 

Seriously, any kind of law process or court case in this case is pretty much doomed to be waste of money because the big corporations will lobby and pay ten times the money against them and it won't even hurt them. But just not giving a shit and walking away is basicly free and pretty much only costs some inconvenience and missing out some shit and "oh boy, oh boy" if people could just do that and not be some fucking stupid sheeps, it would literally bring any corporation to their knees and they couldn't even just buy themselves out of it.

 

But no, not buying the newest shit would require managing impulses, suffering through some inconvenience and missing out some shit. Completely unacceptable and inhumane!

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

There's property and then there's "property". Like I think I pointed out you may own a painting but do you really OWN the painting or just a license to have it?

Technically, outside the US, you don't. You've purchased the right to have it. If you deface it, the copyright holder could sue you. Moral rights exist in Canadian and Japanese law.

 

Often though, the artists don't know this. You can not transfer the moral rights to a work. If and only if the work was "work for hire" , eg you commissioned someone to make a thing that is permanently attached to your house/garden/etc, then it gets into the weeds, since you have to transfer the rights to that work if you ever move and a new owner thinks it's junk and wants to dispose of it.

 

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

 

If I commission someone to draw me a character, is that character mine to do whatever I want with it? Or is the character still property of the artist? After all, the artists "support" ends when the files are send. Even if paid only for the jpg-file, shouldn't the artist also send the psd-file because the client may want to alternate the image in the future?

 

 

It's the artists unless you negotiated otherwise. Again, you can not alter, or vandalize a work. They are within their right to not send you the PSD as the PSD is not the finished work. The Jpeg is.  and that PSD won't be openable in 30 years but the JPEG still will. Given how complex images are, and stupid formats like webp require immensely complex decoders, there's a good possibility that artists will just save images as 99 compress JPEG to save having to figure out if someone's 1995 PC can open it.

 

But this gets away from my argument.  If you've commissioned an image, and your PC catches fire, and the artist hates you now for some reason and doesn't keep their original PSD's (many do not,) you can not demand they remake the image. It's gone. 

 

A real artist who is business savvy would know this is a possibility and keep all their clients works on at least a DVD, SD card or a USB stick in a safe somewhere, just in case. Sometimes that art can be sold again. Sometimes not. Maybe the Estate when the artist dies might find value in it. Who knows. But if the artist dies, you are not getting it back.

 

Which is the point I've been making. If you're purposely destroying the game, then you should be required to de-facto open source/public-domain it. If you're not willing to sell it indefinitely, you have no excuse not to short of licences inside the game running out. You can still patch that out like we've seen with the GTA and Crazy Taxi games.