• Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    And blizzard never supported people running private servers, and yet here they are so what’s the difference? I dont see why this game got so much more attention. Is it just pulling the game to sell the next one? Its scummy but its their right to pull their own product if they want to, and noone has to buy the new one.

    • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They did, but that was 9 years ago, so you might not remember. However it was not as popular a movement yet, so they didn’t get the same backlash as people are getting almost 10 years later, when everyone is sick of this. You are right, they can pull their own product if they want to, now. The goal is to make it so they can’t just do that if they want to, anymore.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        If you are referring to blizzard and private servers 9 years ago, you might mean classic servers but blizzard still sends out legal cease and desists to private server owners. You still cannot host a private server on american soil without blizzard stopping you. If thats not what you meant then thats my bad though.

        I also fully expect ubisoft to release “the crew remastered” at some point too, once its clear they can make a profit off doing so, just like blizzard did.

        • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I mean they started shutting it down 9 years ago, it isn’t new, so it isn’t really news now

          Point was, this is about making it so they don’t have the option to do this anymore, with the legal system.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I dont think its fair that is imposed on creators of video games. Is there some clause where this only applies to the developers we all dont like? I think its too much to mandate, although making voices heard about this is important in influencing developers to choose to not kill their games. I think a law is too far.

            • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              12 hours ago

              They will just have to stick to advertised timelines, and allow people to use that software, as they please, after they stop supporting it. I do not see how this is unfair.

              • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                I dont see how turning off servers is preventing people from using it how they please. Those with the game files are free to do whatever they want with it.

                • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  they aren’t just turning the servers off, while there is part of the suit due to advertised promise vs what happened, the second point is they literally pushed an update that made running the software on your own, private, server, impossible. The point is that the game companies are making it so you are not able to do what you want with it. This is just one suit that is fighting for structures that protect you owning what you buy. It is multifaceted, from right to repair, to right to use software you purchase in any personal way you like. there is a broad, multi-industry, movement to make all products a “service”. Software was one of the first, and currently the largest, set of industries that do this. From single player video games needing to contact a company server just to start, to features of your car, house, and appliances requiring continuous payment schemes, where they can just deny access, even though you paid for them. It has gone on for along time, and now the mainstream population is being affected, and some are fighting back.

                  I am clearly on the side of you own what you pay for. They don’t owe you servers, updates, etc. They owe you being able to do those things, for your own purposes (ie not commercial), and not disabling everything when they no longer feel like putting resources into it.