Petition Stopkillinggames.com

Hi everyone loving old games which require internet access.

Companies shutdown servers, rendering the game useless. There is a legal attempt to stop them doing so. Watch the video, see if this applies to you and your location and be ready to sign petitions

https://stopkillinggames.com

Thanks for introducing me to it, signed

There are more options. One option would be to share (or open source) the server program/code and let people choose if they want to pay for running a server. Or to just design them not to require a server (I played peer to peer in the 90s, should be possible now). Or maybe other options that I did not think about.

I do not particularly like the game producers shift from selling you a product (you can choose how you use it, sell it further, etc.) to a service (they decide what you can do with it and when to stop using it).

(disclaimer I did not sign the petition and did not watch the video but read the summary in the top of the comments of the video)

I think that subscription models in software that try to completely recuperate development costs as well are flawed and encourage bad habits (decrease competition, lock-in, buggy software) mostly by reducing the need to do some research before you buy something (ex: 10$ monthly office subscription license vs 300$ office license - people will probably easily pay 10$ rather than consider carefully what they need). I get why it works, and definitely is great for anybody managing to produce software. Not sure regulation is the best answer, but I really hope we don't end up "renting" everything ... I do understand paying a (small) fee for server maintenance and costs, but this rarely happens.

And the reason I did not sign the petition is that I prefer to just "vote with the wallet" and buy games without (obvious at least) server requirements. But I do support the idea of pushing back against "renting only" and the discussion around it.

It's more about time investment. If I sign something I must be sure that I can align with most of the opinions and objectives of the endeavor. There are plenty of crazy people pushing various agendas that have some reasonable parts and some completely crazy parts. And when I buy a game I must check a bit anyhow what it requires / what can I do with it (server dependency is not the only thing which would make it not buy it).

Given that, I would rather use the time to play ZK, which I did not find anyhow...

On the other hand an opinion on the forum takes 2 minutes, so much easier to do while waiting for something.

quote: Try voting with your actual vote, then there's a chance you could actually make a difference.

Petitions (or more correct ECI-s which the mentioned thing is) are an invitation for the European commission to look at the proposed policy or legislation - they are not obliged to act and have done nothing for others in the past (and I am very happy about that, if I look at the list of past ECI that gathered signatures). When I can, I am voting for politicians, at least those have (some) more impact.

As an Euorpean citizen, I also have to take into account that the European Comission time is limited - are digital games the most relevant topic for me? In case you wonder: by far no.

quote: It doesn't matter if you don't buy the game and convince all your friends to do the same

Should I apply this to other topics? Does not matter if you don't have a car and use a bike - someone will. Doesn't matter if you don't waste food - someone will, etc. Note: (partially joking) if convincing all your friends to do something good does not matter, I think the most efficient action would be to get more friends.

I kind of dislike when people seem too passionate and try to push "their solution" using hyperbole. I hope your post convinced someone to "vote" (quotes because registering a petition is barely a vote, it's more like a desired outcome), definitely it did not convince me.

Too long to listen that video so i cant even imagine how they propose resolve such situation. Only fact is that somebody will need pay - game companies or government and i think that nobody from them wants to pay for old game server maintenance especially in these times when everything costs so much not even mentioning about that there isn't even money for healthcare and military from government budgets and everybody living on global big debt...
But from this logic then we also need petitions against winXP/win7 support removal and every old software as well because we loved them as well. :D :D

For multiplayer servers, could there be an enforced requirement for the company to state the minimum time they will keep servers running, so that individual consumers and companies can decide what is right for them and for each game?

I am not against this initiative, although I cannot physically support it, but I am confused by the fact that the initiative calls for a dialogue with publishers and developers to develop optimal rules, but at the same time there is no hypothetical discussion of how exactly the potential bill should be structured. In many ways, in the community of this initiative, in my opinion, there is a big difference of opinion, from placing an "Expiration Date Marker" on games to putting all the bourgeois in chains. And honestly, as I am not at all radical in this matter, I would not like the latter to defend my rights in discussions with publishers and developers. I believe that a bad law can make the situation on the market worse than it is now, so I consider the work on bottlenecks to be the responsibility of both the main team of the initiative and those signing it.

I also do not like the main motive for voting for this initiative. The vote for it took place against the backdrop of a scandal over a number of publishers who used the closure of the game as an excuse to sell the new product. And before the series of scandals, the initiative did not receive significant development. That is, most of those who voted did it emotionally and with the aim of harming large publishers, and in general, this is correct, since the publishers acted clearly maliciously. But the attempt to save all the games, in my opinion, will inevitably fail. The entropy of the universe is inevitable. Zero K is definitely aware of this:)

This all conflicts with the indie segment, where I am a developer. I do not want to waste time working out a plan for the game's exit, have limitations in technology, etc., for the sake of the initiative itself. For the sake of the fans - no problem. But not for the sake of a piece of paper that obliges me, requires my time, and time that does not reward me.