Well, you didn’t understand anything. That happens sometimes.
Stop Killing Games is only concerned with the games that are coming to the end of support. If the game is an offline game, the only thing that the developer should do to comply is to not try and make it inoperable with some sneaky patch. That’s free for game developer, since that’s something that they don’t do, not doing things is free, you see.
If the game is online and requires the server to work (this includes multiplayer, or online authorization for the singleplayer game), and the developer is determined to stop maintaining the server and the game, they have many options to comply, including the free one: making the server or the protocol open source. Which, once again, is free for developer even if we account for insane concept like “missed potential revenue” since it’s only takes effect when the developer stops getting revenue from the game.
Doing extra things like patching out online authentication is nice to have and will be appreciated, but not actually required.
You definitely don’t get it. One, this is a future date to take effect. Two, these companies already have a way to run things locally - without Internet services. That’s how the development works. This would force companies to release that local version when they decide to no longer support the game. So like how a lot of multiplayer games already work - steam has a server version that you download, run on a computer, and connect. Nobody who built these games wants them to be unavailable at some future point
Well, you didn’t understand anything. That happens sometimes.
Stop Killing Games is only concerned with the games that are coming to the end of support. If the game is an offline game, the only thing that the developer should do to comply is to not try and make it inoperable with some sneaky patch. That’s free for game developer, since that’s something that they don’t do, not doing things is free, you see.
If the game is online and requires the server to work (this includes multiplayer, or online authorization for the singleplayer game), and the developer is determined to stop maintaining the server and the game, they have many options to comply, including the free one: making the server or the protocol open source. Which, once again, is free for developer even if we account for insane concept like “missed potential revenue” since it’s only takes effect when the developer stops getting revenue from the game.
Doing extra things like patching out online authentication is nice to have and will be appreciated, but not actually required.
How are there no articles that explain any of this, I am going to have to type out the explanation in 3 places.
You definitely don’t get it. One, this is a future date to take effect. Two, these companies already have a way to run things locally - without Internet services. That’s how the development works. This would force companies to release that local version when they decide to no longer support the game. So like how a lot of multiplayer games already work - steam has a server version that you download, run on a computer, and connect. Nobody who built these games wants them to be unavailable at some future point
If only there were some way to edit the original comment…