Pirate Software/Thor

[Galant]

Anyone following his channel/streams?

https://www.youtube.com/@PirateSoftware

Not watched his gaming streams etc. just his live 'chats'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2mqnuRalYA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwoAmifo9r0

[Jonj1611]

Never heard of them to be honest

[AGTDenton]

Yes, he maxes out my Shorts feed.

Thoroughly interesting, not sure I could sit through his 10 hour streams though!

[Galant]

Sorry, the post was a bit vague. He started showing up in my Youtube feed and I've enjoyed hearing a bunch of his shorts. Seems like a genuine, nice guy, with some interesting insight into the software world.

[Disturbedguy]

Yeah I watch (well more listen while working) pretty regularly. Always comes across a super genuine guy, always willing to give advice and not only that, links to loads of free materials for learning lots of different things via his Discord.

His working history is interesting, game dev at Blizzard, game dev at Amazon Game Studios then worked for US government hacking powerplants. Has three black badges from DEF CON.

[AGTDenton]

This is very much worth a watch regarding a very poorly thought out EU petition that aims to challenge game termination by publishers/developers.


Part 1


Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jMKeg9S-s

[Disturbedguy]

Watched part 1, need to watch part 2.

The amount of comments I've seen from people saying Thor doesn't understand the petition or he's being biased is ridiculous, but then again, they are from Reddit

[AGTDenton]

I think he's right, if anything comes of this petition, that when a game is cloud based it needs to be made clearer to the buyer that you cannot play it indefinitely and you are not buying a game to own, rather a license to access and play it. That would just need some sort of stamp/wording on the physical box or the online blurb where the game is being advertised for sale.

It would be pretty poor from any developer to make a single player game reliant on the cloud to be able to play it and turn it off as and when they choose, but if thats the case it needs to be made clear to the buyer as well.

Additionally it may need to be stated that even if a single player game doesn't get turned off online, there is no guarentee it can still be played in the future because computer architecture adapts and moves on.

To expect a developer to make any game last forever is absurd, let alone anything cloud based.

[Disturbedguy]

I think he's right, if anything comes of this petition, that when a game is cloud based it needs to be made clearer to the buyer that you cannot play it indefinitely and you are not buying a game to own, rather a license to access and play it. That would just need some sort of stamp/wording on the physical box or the online blurb where the game is being advertised for sale.

It would be pretty poor from any developer to make a single player game reliant on the cloud to be able to play it and turn it off as and when they choose, but if thats the case it needs to be made clear to the buyer as well.

Additionally it may need to be stated that even if a single player game doesn't get turned off online, there is no guarentee it can still be played in the future because computer architecture adapts and moves on.

To expect a developer to make any game last forever is absurd, let alone anything cloud based.

Yup I'm in agreement, people aren't looking past the "I want to play this game forever" / their dislike of Thor and are missing both the point his is making and the technical aspect of what it would take to make a "live service" game playable if the servers should ever get shutdown.

[Output]

I've not watched the videos and as such am basing it on the comments in this thread, but I had assumed that the petition was demanding the release of server files (like I believe should be done) when official servers shut down.

I'm not sure what solution would make sense for live service games, but multiplayer servers at least should be releasable in my opinion (and should have been an option from the start just like lots of games did in the past) without it requiring the developer's attention forever.

[AGTDenton]

CnCNet is a great example of it working. And somehow it didn't become a complete free for all.
EA actually had a small heart 20 years ago and made the 3 original CNC Games freeware, which I didn't realise.

This is worth a read: https://answers.ea.com/t5/Other-Comm...ad/m-p/5429299

But a lot of classic server based games where I've re-installed and joined custom servers, the game is modified or full of hackers it's a complete waste of time, and you'll rarely get the experience you had when the game was new and fresh. I've tried BF 2142 a few times but it's a hackers paridise and that's not really what I wanted to get out of it. Not to mention there just weren't enough players.

If you go and play an old COD game where the multiplayer aspects are still officially working the experience is dire, you end up on fake servers where you float around and get given 100% points and all sorts. Just a pointless experience.

I still don't believe it should be legislation that dictates and forces a developer to release any part of their game to the community.
If an Indie developer wants to make a sequel, they may no longer be able to after having been forced to release the original game to the community they might not be able to win back their customers, so effectively that IP is dead because of that legislation.

Personally I think it's down to the community to ask the developers to keep an IP going in some way, and maybe the developers consider licensing it in a controlled manner say to a non profit setup so that costs can be covered in a way that is fair for all. That way the developer can still take back control when they might want to make a remaster, sequel or even close it if it directly competes with new IPs coming out.

I really wouldn't want government intervention, it eats away at the spirit of the community for me.

[jimbouk]

Anything which requires an online connection for all or part of the game should be required to have a supported until date, with a refund (partial) if they pull the plug before hand. It would make it (painfully) obvious when you're buying a game how long you can use it for. Developers could just say 'forever' and release the self-hosted server software at the end, or people would understand that their £70 Sports/Shooter game 202X will stop working in two years.

Same should apply to anything really, not just software. I mentally just put a two year shelf life on anything that requires an app on online connection when making buying decisions