Ross (Accursed Farms/Freeman's Mind) needs your help to save games from destruction.

[Benggaul]

Some of you may be familiar with Ross Scott, and if you aren't I encourage you to give some of his vids a watch. Deep, insightful dives into games of yesteryear done with passion. Anyway, he has long been against the practice of many video game companies essentially destroying games--particularly multiplayer online games--by ending support for them and pulling servers without any way for people who own the games to set up their own servers or otherwise have some sort of offline play. With the news of the upcoming death of The Crew he's begun to pull resources together to do something about it.

Give the video a watch and see if you are willing and able to help with some research, advice or anything else you think he might find useful in this crusade. I think it's a pretty worthy endeavor. He's especially interested in help from the EU (stronger consumer protections in general) and mentions that he's additionally looking for information from Canada (@Endus) and Brazil and has already compiled a lot of information from various countries, but as he says in the video he's 100% happy to get redundant information rather than risk not getting enough necessary information.



Oh, and the TL;DW for the US in this vid is basically under US law dependent on the EULA even if you own a physical copy of a game all you really own is the plastic or whatever that it's made of. However, if these practices are hit hard in the EU that could have a ripple effect that might help out US gamers as well. Case law for video games in the US is fucked.

[Ghost of Cow]

Still not sure what people expect in terms of "ownership" when it comes to online games.

What, exactly, does buying the disc give you in terms of "ownership" of the servers, back-end, support, development, etc? In what way do players feel they have a stake in those things?

[Biomega]

"I bought the game, and therefore I deserve access to online servers for the game FOREVER!"

Mhmmmm not sure where this idea comes from.

Are those people picketing outside with signs demanding that someone keep a Blockbuster open because they bought a membership, too?

[Edge-]

"I bought the game, and therefore I deserve access to online servers for the game FOREVER!"

Mhmmmm not sure where this idea comes from.

Are those people picketing outside with signs demanding that someone keep a Blockbuster open because they bought a membership, too?

Videogame preservation is hardly the same as demanding a company maintain operations. Nobody is demanding that a publisher host servers for a game in perpetuity or anything, and I'm unsure where you'd get that apparent notion or anything to think it's comparable to demanding Blockbuster stay open.

I don't think anyone is thrilled that we legit only own licenses and all but we understand that practically it largely doesn't matter to us as consumers and there are sensible legal reasons for it. But generally, games as software are the kind of thing that never needs to cease to exist - you can store software digitally and run it via emulation if need be. For offline games this works fine and dandy, but for MMO's and other even games that simply required always-online connections that's not possible since it requires a server - or alterations to the game before it's shut down to be playable offline if possible.

Probably not always realistic, but personally I'm also bummed to see The Crew shutting down so "soon" as well. It was a game I periodically jumped into for fun, and unfortunately wasn't a fan of the changes to the handling/controls in the sequel (haven't tried Motorfest yet).

[Biomega]

personally I'm also bummed

And I am, too.

Don't misunderstand: I'm not criticizing the idea of people WANTING things to keep running (in whatever form).

I'm making fun of the idea that somehow because you bought a copy of the game you can DEMAND that it's kept running (in whatever form), even if that includes people giving away their intellectual property or whatever else would be required.

It's NICE if old games are made available; but people don't have a RIGHT to old games being made available.

Very different things.

[Surfd]

It's NICE if old games are made available; but people don't have a RIGHT to old games being made available.

Given the nature of software, I honestly think that maybe there should be such a right though.

Like, I don't know, maybe modify trademark / copyright / IP law to stipulate that in the event of a software product 100% terminating support / going End of Life / entering a state where no-one is actively holding the rights to it, that it (and any required accompanying back end code, such as server code for Online Games) should be required to be surrendered to public domain archives.

[Biomega]

Given the nature of software, I honestly think that maybe there should be such a right though.

Like, I don't know, maybe modify trademark / copyright / IP law to stipulate that in the event of a software product 100% terminating support / going End of Life / entering a state where no-one is actively holding the rights to it, that it (and any required accompanying back end code, such as server code for Online Games) should be required to be surrendered to public domain archives.

That would be difficult to do and enforce, and would require a CONSIDERABLE waiting period.

As we've seen with other public-domain IPs like the most recent Steamboat Wille Mickey Mouse thing, it's not as simple as "just" putting things into the public domain because they may be part of an ongoing IP.

But of course with software it's even more complicated since you need to be able to run it, and that requires a lot of finagling - which often involves giving people access to the source code, which may run afoul of proprietary encryption tech, software components, and so on.

I applaud the NOTION behind the idea, but I think it's not really practicable. We as consumers should be encouraging the property rights holders to release the material out of their own accord, but forcing them to with regulation is likely to create too many shenanigans to be worth doing.

[Daedius]

You never owned games as far back as I can remember... you just bought the license to play it.

Companies can't be expected to run servers for old games indefinitely. Be great if company's released server software for them... not many games allow for dedicated servers nowadays.

[XDurionX]

You never owned games as far back as I can remember... you just bought the license to play it.

Be great if company's released server software for old games... not many games allow for dedicated servers nowadays.

There's no way from keeping you from playing an offline game on a physical medium though.

- - - Updated - - -

You never owned games as far back as I can remember... you just bought the license to play it.

Be great if company's released server software for old games... not many games allow for dedicated servers nowadays.

There's no way from keeping you from playing an offline game on a physical medium though.

[Ereb]

You never owned games as far back as I can remember... you just bought the license to play it.

Every physical copy of every video game I have ever bought I have owned pre "online only" era

[Benggaul]

Sounds like most of you didn't bother to watch the video in which the exact misrepresentation you're describing is addressed (starting at minute 36).

He's not fighting for companies to maintain servers indefinitely to host games. He's asking for consumers to have the right--and access--to host their own servers for these online-only games once they are no longer officially supported. Right now for games like The Crew it's near impossible because the encryption hasn't been cracked, so fan servers can't even exist.

It's a pretty simple concept with practically no down side for the devs.

[Orange Joe]

You never owned games as far back as I can remember... you just bought the license to play it.

Companies can't be expected to run servers for old games indefinitely. Be great if company's released server software for them... not many games allow for dedicated servers nowadays.

Tell me you never played anything before the ps2 without saying you never played anything before the ps2.

[Ghost of Cow]

He's asking for consumers to have the right--and access--to host their own servers for these online-only games once they are no longer officially supported.

But why would anyone have that "right"?

Even if we go ahead and agree with the argument of "I paid for the game so I own it" that still doesn't mean you have any right to the server-side stuff or other things related specifically to the online elements. Especially if there's the potential for any sort of gain from other individuals/entities.

This certainly might fall under the category of, "It'd be nice if...." but claiming some sort of *right* to it seems off-base.

[SinR]

I'm not watching a 41 minute video.

Is this one of those "WHATS GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN AN ONLINE ONLY GAME SHUTS DOWN FOR GOOD???" videos?

ask Star Wars Galaxies

[Orange Joe]

I'm not watching a 41 minute video.

Is this one of those "WHATS GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN AN ONLINE ONLY GAME SHUTS DOWN FOR GOOD???" videos?

ask Star Wars Galaxies

This is kinda my opinion. If there are enough people that care about the game they will find a way.

[Daedius]

Tell me you never played anything before the ps2 without saying you never played anything before the ps2.

I've been gaming since the 2600, thanks... all you literally owned was the medium the game was on, you never OWNED the game itself but the license to play it.

[mbit2]

Still not sure what people expect in terms of "ownership" when it comes to online games.

What, exactly, does buying the disc give you in terms of "ownership" of the servers, back-end, support, development, etc? In what way do players feel they have a stake in those things?

How about the right to run private servers? Especially if corp closed their official ones saying not enough profit.
And no take back shit like corp reopens official when private server gets popular and tells them ty for marketing now close ;D

[Orange Joe]

I've been gaming since the 2600, thanks... all you literally owned was the medium the game was on, you never OWNED the game itself but the license to play it.

Did you own the game as in you can do anything with the IP you want? no.


Did you own the physical copy of the game that you could do anything you want with. Yes.

[Benggaul]

I'm not watching a 41 minute video.

Is this one of those "WHATS GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN AN ONLINE ONLY GAME SHUTS DOWN FOR GOOD???" videos?

ask Star Wars Galaxies

Then don't comment? Seriously, if you're not interested enough to look into what it's all about, then don't bother posting. To be fair to you, several others here apparently share your inability to refrain from making uninformed remarks.

This is kinda my opinion. If there are enough people that care about the game they will find a way.

SWG got to live a second life thanks to a source code leak back in 2013 that made emulations possible and even then it took most of a decade for several different projects to be "completed". The point is fans--people who bought the game--shouldn't really need to rely on "heroes" leaking code and the ever-looming threat of a C&D to continue to play the games they bought just because the devs figure it's not cost-effective to support them any longer.

I should also add that he doesn't really expect these efforts to succeed necessarily, but at the very least wants to bring more awareness to the issue in the hopes that game devs take note. It's also an extremely terrible practice by game devs in general and judging from the amount of "lol u don't own anything!" comments the industry has succeeded in brainwashing consumers to eat shit. In the US, at least. As I said before (and as Ross indicates in the video) in the EU and elsewhere in the world it's a different story.

[Ghost of Cow]

How about the right to run private servers? Especially if corp closed their official ones saying not enough profit.

You guys keep saying "right" though. Why do people think it's their right to have these servers?

- - - Updated - - -

The point is fans--people who bought the game--shouldn't really need to rely on "heroes" leaking code and the ever-looming threat of a C&D to continue to play the games they bought just because the devs figure it's not cost-effective to support them any longer.

...why not? Why do people think they're entitled to these other parts of someone elses' IP?

Again, this would be a "nice to have" sort of thing, but it's not your "right" or something to have them.