🌟 Internet Famous Jason Thor Hall / PirateSoftware / Maldavius Figtree / DarkSphere Creations / Maldavius / Thorwich / Witness X / @PotatoSec - Incompetent Furry Programmer, Blizzard Nepo Baby, Lies about almost every thing in his life, Industry Shill, Carried by his father, Hate boner against Ross Scott of Accursed Farms, False Flagger

Which will happen first?

  • Jason Hall finishes developing his game

    Votes: 38 0.7%

  • YandereDev finishes developing his game

    Votes: 597 10.6%

  • Grummz finishes developing his game

    Votes: 148 2.6%

  • Chris Roberts finishes developing his game

    Votes: 170 3.0%

  • Cold fusion

    Votes: 2,082 37.1%

  • The inevitable heat death of the universe

    Votes: 2,572 45.9%
  • Total voters
    5,607
Forklift Certified said:
Your point is retarded and dumb, already told you EU law make distinction based on the type of commerce under the license sold, it dose not fucking matter if the license itself is a multiplayer horse fucking simulator or a single player Hitler painting jigsaw puzzle.
Click to expand...
It does. The test adopted by the court was whether a game was provided as a continuing service. It was held that a multiplayer online game is provided as an ongoing service and as such is treated as service rather than a sale of good. It's not my opinion, it's how EU courts currently interpret this distinction based on the digital service directive... You can make an argument that this service is artificial and abusive for a single player Hitler painting jigsaw puzzle but it's much harder to make this argument for a genuine multiplayer horse fucking simulator and currently this argument will fail the legal test.
Forklift Certified said:
I bought Helldivers 2 the same way as i bought GTA Vice city, as an one fucking time purchase, advertised as "BUY" not "LEAS" nor "RENT" so based on the commerce its the SAME THING !
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. That's why I said that what the EU regulator is most likely to do is to impose an obligation to advertise these products for what they actually are: services rather sales of goods.
Forklift Certified said:
And classification made by humans and can be changed by humans...
Click to expand...
You don't understand how the EU regulator makes this determination. Just because you want something to change doesn't mean it is actually going to change.
Forklift Certified said:
If you don't understand this 2 fundamentals and keep posting dumb shits im not gonna assume you are a retard im going to know it.
Click to expand...
okay
 
Perfect Day said:
Currently what this initiative is trying to achieve would require either: (1) a different interpretation of the law by EU courts, or (2) a change of law (a new directive partially repealing the current law).
Click to expand...
The point of the initiative is to get the talks going to publicly acknowledge a problem so a solution can be found. The main point is that game developers need to not set their games up with a finite lifespan. We all know it's actually relatively trivial for them to allow people to self host, even if it is a greatly diminished experience, that isn't the point. People want to be able to play the game they paid for.
There are exceptions already made for things like MMOs so.. I don't know why you're arguing here, you seem to misunderstand the purpose of all of this. What do you propose is a better solution to the problem of games/software being set up with an end of life at benefit to the company and detriment to the customer?
 
Last edited:
Perfect Day said:
If you look at more recent games they have centralized matchmaking without servers
Click to expand...
more recent games like star citizen or wow? huge games that look impossible from the outside to have a server hosted from a simple computer, let alone dedicated headless server hosting?
except behind the scenes of star citizen proved you can run the solar system on the same computer you play the game on, it was actually a huge brag of theirs for internal testing.
world of warcraft is no different, i hosted a cata private server on a not so great computer over 10 years ago, it only had about a dozen people, but automation that was scripted worked fine and sql data handling also worked fine on my shitty hdd.

Perfect Day said:
that doesn't mean that the EU is going to force ToS amendments in a completely different area
Click to expand...
except they have.
gdpr affected how games collect data, they affected the anticheat systems in place. (anticheat is middleware)
it affected how middleware is used by companies, and the blame someone can use on middleware for data handling. (publishers had to come up with new contracts for middleware, like anticheat systems)
and they adapted.

Perfect Day said:
I don't disagree.
Click to expand...
except you do because he cited helldivers 2, which you said has super complicated magical matchmaking and not the totally old and outdated dedicated servers.
i need you to understand how raped everyone is in thinking that server hosting is magic.
cs2 has dedicated, local, and matchmaking. local still calculates the 'server' sided values like hitreg and network entity location. ( matchmaking is dedicated servers just without real choice )
world of warcraft has matchmaking. and quite honestly the whole sharding/layering technology is basically matchmaking as well, its load balancing. private servers already emulated these. if private server makers who aren't getting paid worth a shit can do it, i think blizzard can fucking do it overnight. oh wait they already do because how do they locally test their game. if anything them bragging about their load balancing made it more of an argument of how you can totally run a server on your own shit with players if need be.
(which is going a bit further than what skg is asking for anyway)
star citizen's new tech of their own instancing was also demonstrated on a normal computer to work completely fine and seamlessly.
a relatively new game like ready or not or squad has local, and p2p matchmaking. squad has dedicated servers. these are on the newest unreal engine and most of the networking is out of the box which is how easy and not magical it is.

i say all this to hopefully help you get unraped of the big companies trying to make their tech look insane and hard to emulate or accomplish. truth is low latency instancing and layering has been around for decades. it's just now they're more buzz wordy. you have to remember its silicon valley and they want to look very special. same argument can be made for ToS stuff, lawyers want everyone scared of fighting them, big companies want their shit to sound more special than the other guy for investment.
remember that everyone thinks AI is extremely special and cool and impossible to understand, now look at it, it's the most overbloated industry on the planet. and people just now are somewhat realizing it's just mass indexing with statistical autocomplete, but that doesn't sound as cool as artifical intelligence.
it's the irony in having as much saturated competition as possible is that everyone has to be as special as possible. even some vodka brands will put 'glucose free' on their labels, just to point out how far companies will take their retardation.
think to yourself, how the fuck do these people debug their shit locally if they can't test it wholly.
 
Last edited:
Pvt. Parts said:
Mald: Yeeeeeaaaaahhh, when I read your resume it said you were an actual copyright lawyer. We're gonna have to go ahead and let you gooo...yeeeaaaah.
Click to expand...

1000019613.jpg
 
I 100% believe that Mald had something to do with ImPheetus getting banned so he couldnt stream the Rust event.
Its his weird way of feeling better after being GKicked from only fangs. Imagine the internal turmoil he went through after being kicked outta the guild like an annoying child being told no or to leave the bday party.........delicious.
 
Aidan said:
The point of the initiative is to get the talks going to publicly acknowledge a problem so a solution can be found. The main point is that game developers need to not set their games up with a finite lifespan. We all know it's actually relatively trivial for them to allow people to self host, even if it is a greatly diminished experience, that isn't the point. People want to be able to play the game they paid for.
There are exceptions already made for things like MMOs so.. I don't know why you're arguing here, you seem to misunderstand the purpose of all of this. What do you propose is a better solution to the problem of games/software being set up with an end of life at benefit to the company and detriment to the customer?
Click to expand...
A lot of the arguments in favor of the proposal is that it is technically feasible to have private servers. Another issue entirely is whether this would clash with IP rights and contractual rights of the publishers (which people tend to overlook or interpret subjectively). The EU protects these rights very strongly while also trying to balance the rights of consumers. It is possible that community hosted initiatives would be encouraged but it is unlikely that the EU is going to impose an obligation to allow private servers to be set up if the company that own the game doesn't want to do it. This would probably go beyond market regulation and into prescriptive territory (because it is forcing a product to be designed a certain way). Other people have argued GDPR but that regulation was intended to protect individual privacy right which is more fundamental and rank higher than wider consumer protection (this is because privacy is a fundamental rights while consumer protection is a policy objective).

The end of life solution, if it is implemented within a regulatory framework, would typically take into account the type of game that is being offered. In general the EU regulator has tried to move away from one size fit all policies and towards a more granular approach. I suspect that end of life measure would reflect that.
- For single player game that can function offline, there could be an option at the onset to allow users to download a local copy of the game on their machine.
- For multiplayer games, end of life measures will probably be much softer and focus on sunsetting obligations such as an obligation to provide advance notice before retiring a game or disclosing to users that the game is provided as a service and can be removed at any time.
A further measure could be to impose an obligation to keep the game online for a minimum duration or provide refunds for users who have paid for the game. I don't think we will obtain the right to keep game online forever because that would go to too far and the regulators genuinely tries to avoid creating permanent obligations on businesses. The EU would be concerned about the costs involved with these measures (such as punishing failure for example if a game genuinely fails after launch).
tarzor said:
more recent games like star citizen or wow? huge games that look impossible from the outside to have a server hosted from a simple computer, let alone dedicated headless server hosting?
except behind the scenes of star citizen proved you can run the solar system on the same computer you play the game on, it was actually a huge brag of theirs for internal testing.
world of warcraft is no different, i hosted a cata private server on a not so great computer over 10 years ago, it only had about a dozen people, but automation that was scripted worked fine and sql data handling also worked fine on my shitty hdd.
Click to expand...
As I said to Aidan I agree that this is technically possible but to force it to happen would conflict with IP and contractual rights and obligations that are tied with these products. In practice, whether a company may allow you to do this, and the fact that it is technically possible to do it, doesn't mean they have an obligation to let you do it. Under the current legislative framework in the EU, they are not obligated to let you set up servers with their products. The current regulatory framework and decisions of the EU courts have sought to balance control over the service with consumer expectations but I don't think that the court or the parliament would go as far as enforcing mandatory community based solution or permanent access obligations. They are more likely to focus on softer obligations like the one I described above (depending on the type of game)
except they have.
gdpr affected how games collect data, they affected the anticheat systems in place. (anticheat is middleware)
it affected how middleware is used by companies, and the blame someone can use on middleware for data handling. (publishers had to come up with new contracts for middleware, like anticheat systems)
and they adapted.
Click to expand...
My point on this earlier was that GDPR protect privacy and data protection rights which are fundamental rights while consumer protection is a policy objective which needs to be balanced against fundamental right. IP rights and contractual freedom are fundamental rights that consumer protection would be balanced against. I'm not saying that nothing will happen. I'm saying it's unlikely that the regulator would impose far reaching obligation for digital services like it did with GDPR becaus ethe balancing act is not the same.
except you do because he cited helldivers 2, which you said has super complicated magical matchmaking and not the totally old and outdated dedicated servers. [etc.]
Click to expand...
The first paragrpah addresses this point. The fact that something is technically feasible doesn't mean you can force businesses to do it. The whole point of the proposal and the presentation by Ross is to suggest legal reforms. I'm arguing about what might realistically be enacted by European institutions and I'm talking about the general direction of travel around digital services. Neither me or you can predict if this will lead to actual reforms or what these reforms would be.
i say all this to hopefully help you get unraped of the big companies trying to make their tech look insane and hard to emulate or accomplish. truth is low latency instancing and layering has been around for decades. it's just now they're more buzz wordy. you have to remember its silicon valley and they want to look very special. same argument can be made for ToS stuff, lawyers want everyone scared of fighting them, big companies want their shit to sound more special than the other guy for investment.
remember that everyone thinks AI is extremely special and cool and impossible to understand, now look at it, it's the most overbloated industry on the planet. and people just now are somewhat realizing it's just mass indexing with statistical autocomplete, but that doesn't sound as cool as artifical intelligence.
it's the irony in having as much saturated competition as possible is that everyone has to be as special as possible. even some vodka brands will put 'glucose free' on their labels, just to point out how far companies will take their retardation.
think to yourself, how the fuck do these people debug their shit locally if they can't test it wholly.
Click to expand...
wow that sounds awful
 
Last edited:
I just love how this man bandwagons on any game that comes out. Vampire Crawler comes out? He HAS to play it. Surely this game will save his streaming career.

1776792848312.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom