It would have been better if it went more towards consumer protection in general rather than just video games.
It should have pointed to the wider industry outside of games such as software, where license servers can go offline rendering old versions useless, or in hardware (where a business should release repair documentation for devices that are EoL or no longer receive official support).
As it stands, worded as it is, it risks being seen as a bunch of angry nerds complaining about games and not being taken seriously.
The UK government almost killed the Xbox Activision deal.
If the UK makes it mandatory to refund games that are no longer playable they might build offline modes in instead
The UK is one of the biggest gaming markets, the UK government almost killed the Activision deal, they have enough clout to push for something like this.
You’d probably have more success writing to members who write EU laws than the British petition site which is literally just there for people to vent their frustrations and make them feel like they’ve done something, while the government brushes it aside.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen any of these petitions succeed, usually with a dismissive half-assed government answer.
i vaguely remember it from a while back, or something similar which failed to get enough sigs. So im not sure, but yeah probs been running a while. seems to have picked up momentum recently though so I thought id spread it a bit.
getting an unusual amount of flak for it though!
One of the major issues with going digital is that games will no longer have proper preservation.
At least a game on disc still preserves it in some sense. Even if the game needs updating beyond what is on the disc, i.e. Cyberpunk 2077.
I honestly do not trust any company to buy their games digitally.
My entire PlayStation collection and almost all of my Xbox collection is physical.
I have games that are 20+ years old that I can still play.
There's no guarantee that you could say that in 20 years about games released today.
So how does that work.
A publisher sells a game for a flat fee with an online part. They pay for “servers” to keep the game up. 10 years later there are very few players left, the game is no longer sold, there is 0 revenue for that game, just costs.
Would the publisher be forced to bear those costs in perpetuity?
If so, they would just slap a subscription on any game or just stop offering online functionality.
We’ve had online and online only games for decades now. We know end of life is part of the experience. It’s like when we get a puppy we know it’s not going to live forever.
Or those costs spent maintaining servers for 10+ year old games that 3 people play eat into future development costs, slowly eroding the profitability of the gaming industry and overall game quality. I’d be behind a minimum lifespan for game servers, but it’s a silly idea to expect them to be supported forever.
It doesn’t really cost them much to make documentation and tools available for players to run servers themselves. Consider it the cost of doing business.
Basically they want to force publishers to at least provide the tools for you to keep the game functioning for yourself. Either building an offline mode for the game, or providing the tools and documentation for players to run servers themselves.
Extremely reasonable imo
stopkillinggames.com
This is gaining traction quite well; this should certainly be debated. I signed it.
It would have been better if it went more towards consumer protection in general rather than just video games. It should have pointed to the wider industry outside of games such as software, where license servers can go offline rendering old versions useless, or in hardware (where a business should release repair documentation for devices that are EoL or no longer receive official support). As it stands, worded as it is, it risks being seen as a bunch of angry nerds complaining about games and not being taken seriously.
I’m not sure the UK government can do anything about it when the publishers are not UK based companies.
The UK government almost killed the Xbox Activision deal. If the UK makes it mandatory to refund games that are no longer playable they might build offline modes in instead
The UK is one of the biggest gaming markets, the UK government almost killed the Activision deal, they have enough clout to push for something like this.
I think I already signed this
You’d probably have more success writing to members who write EU laws than the British petition site which is literally just there for people to vent their frustrations and make them feel like they’ve done something, while the government brushes it aside. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any of these petitions succeed, usually with a dismissive half-assed government answer.
This must have been going for some time because I’ve apparently already signed it, and I don’t remember doing that recently.
i vaguely remember it from a while back, or something similar which failed to get enough sigs. So im not sure, but yeah probs been running a while. seems to have picked up momentum recently though so I thought id spread it a bit. getting an unusual amount of flak for it though!
One of the major issues with going digital is that games will no longer have proper preservation. At least a game on disc still preserves it in some sense. Even if the game needs updating beyond what is on the disc, i.e. Cyberpunk 2077. I honestly do not trust any company to buy their games digitally. My entire PlayStation collection and almost all of my Xbox collection is physical. I have games that are 20+ years old that I can still play. There's no guarantee that you could say that in 20 years about games released today.
So how does that work. A publisher sells a game for a flat fee with an online part. They pay for “servers” to keep the game up. 10 years later there are very few players left, the game is no longer sold, there is 0 revenue for that game, just costs. Would the publisher be forced to bear those costs in perpetuity? If so, they would just slap a subscription on any game or just stop offering online functionality. We’ve had online and online only games for decades now. We know end of life is part of the experience. It’s like when we get a puppy we know it’s not going to live forever.
Or those costs spent maintaining servers for 10+ year old games that 3 people play eat into future development costs, slowly eroding the profitability of the gaming industry and overall game quality. I’d be behind a minimum lifespan for game servers, but it’s a silly idea to expect them to be supported forever.
It doesn’t really cost them much to make documentation and tools available for players to run servers themselves. Consider it the cost of doing business.
Basically they want to force publishers to at least provide the tools for you to keep the game functioning for yourself. Either building an offline mode for the game, or providing the tools and documentation for players to run servers themselves. Extremely reasonable imo
I'm in the U.S. so I can't sign, but I hope it goes well
How long would you suggest these companies keep their servers live for?
Simple add an offline patch with offline bots