Please stop this guy from suing ubisoft. If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed. He wants to make it where people can't take their games down when it's no longer financially feasible. A lot of us game developers will lose money if we are forced to keep games online. Please stop his lawsuit if you care about the game industry. Don't let ubisoft get sued.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed. He wants to make it where people can't take their games down when it's no longer financially feasible.
It's a shame there's no way to make a game where the players can host their own servers. Maybe like a dedicated and a listen, some kind of browser, you could search and filter. Impossible dream I guess. Damn shame.
research shows that self hosted servers become a hotbed for alt right and russian recruitment of children
where's the downside though?
then larry fink can buy free servers for every dead game to prevent this
>research shows
>alt right
And that's a good thing.
>research shows
But how does this affect you personally?
bump
>research show that lack of centralized censorship result in people not being leftist anymore
Oh.
My.
Science.
>experts agree
>research suggests
>scientists recommend
not my problem
Research shows your mouth is a hotbed for wieners.
Lol okay and so what? The u.s.army does the exact same thing. But only uncah' sam is allowed to do that, right?
Please stop baiting this hard, post quality is very important.
Thank you (°u°)
you morons really want to be oppressed so hard
stop associating the right with russia. russians are subhumans and should be gassed
You deserve to be taken down. How dare you try to dictate what other people say you little fricking nerd.
When did everyone turn in to pussy footed homosexuals.
quite literally not my problem
I bought a product not a service, I should have access to that product, period
wtf I love self hosted servers now
>y- you don't understand CHUD! We HAVE to remove your fun or the EXTREMISTS are going to RADICALIZE THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!
>but think of the ___!
Well actually I have a peer reviewed study here that says 97% of people think you should have a nice day anon
I KNOW this is a shitpost. But:
If some think tanks had came to a conclusion that player owned private groups fostered mindsets they deemed harmful to their goals, and that played a part in why player hosting is almost not a thing anymore, I wouldn't be surprised.
What’s stopping you lefties from doing the same? You guys literally trooned out /LULZ/(which I’m actually a fan of you guys doing btw, frick those guys) and still continue to do changposting with great success. I don’t see why you guys can’t do the same.
>It's a shame there's no way to make a game where the players can host their own servers. Maybe like a dedicated and a listen, some kind of browser, you could search and filter. Impossible dream I guess. Damn shame.
Someday this will be forgotten that it was the standard for all online games.
Frick ubisoft.
>someday
it's already forgotten lol
ask any zoomer under the age of 18 if he has ever used a server browser and he'll stare at you like a moron and start drooling. to them, multiplayer = matchmaking.
the concept of playing a game online without the developers having full control every step of the way is completely alien to them.
Incredible. For anyone here confused.. Ubisoft should be sued because the game should have been set up so that if there are no servers to be found you just press a button to make one. Then everyone joins you.
Ubisoft shut off the service and no one could even start the fricking game.
It's bullshit and they deserve this.
Haven't played the Crew, but my understanding is that it could easily run offline if you're happy to just drive around and explore. Scott would be fine with a patch that allows this. Hell, even just removing the heavy DRM (to make it feasible for modders to develop an offline patch) would probably placate him.
Exactly.
Code patch literally 2 lines..
>If cant connect to server that ubi shut down
>Run game offline without other players
That's why ubisoft has no chance of winning this lawsuit. there's no feature or mechanic that requires online to justify taking the game down for everyone. Ubisoft has no argument for the courts. and their slip up is now going to kill all live service games
>no chance of winning
they have all the money in the world for the lawyers, ross is screwed regardless if he has a good point
He's not filing a lawsuit, deliberately. Watch the video.
he wins even if he "loses". It doesn't matter if they spent 10 billion on the lawsuit. They have to take it to court even if he "loses". That means they have to explain to court why singleplayer games can't function without a server. They have to make it clear. and then once they do, it affects the entire industry now that it's established where the line is drawn.
Ubisoft loses this regardless because now it will be in writing what they are allowed to or not allowed to do regarding shutting down games.
Oh, so it affects DRMBlack folk too?
Damn, it keeps getting better and better
they would be required to create a distinction between games you don't own and games you own. meaning when you go to ubisofts store page it will say "Rent our game for $60, this game may or may not disappear in the near future and be taken away from you"
It will hurt them really bad. There will be games you buy, then games you rent.
>Ubisoft has no argument for the courts.
>You agreed to EULA
>checkmate drumftards
strange how israelites can cancel a sitting president aint it
They killed one too
EULAs actually aren’t legally binding
They always make you sign one but it actually hold no legal weight in court. Just nobody had the money to sue over video games so they keep doing it.
It’s just a fun irony
With this lawsuit, even if he loses. they will now have to make it clear. You can't call it "buying" a game anymore. If you don't own the game, you didn't buy the game. Steam will have to restructre itself, and instead of saying you can buy a game, it will say you're renting them. Because you don't own them.
Steam doesn’t revoke access at any point. This would probably just impact always online games and they should be sold as a different kind of item with a finite lifespan. Another anon said Assassins Creed but even that can be played offline I think. This would probably be for stuff like The Crew.
The crew is singleplayer, none of its features or mechanics require online. The reason you can't play it offline is because ubisoft said so. Just like hitman games. There's singleplayer games you can't play offline.
>new genre cements itself as time limited digital releases that will eventually be removed from the storefronts
>FOMO tactics shift into maximum overdrive with all manner of rare once in a lifetime seen content that only the day one buyers will ever experience
>C&Ds getting handed out like candy to anyone caught breaking the exclusive content embargos as this business model relies purely on those that buy in only
>Another anon said Assassins Creed but even that can be played offline I think.
Assassin's Creed 2 has DLC you can buy but never actually play because you have to connect to servers to 'activate' and actually download them but they're offline. Some other games have the same case too, single player content they still sell to you but you can't actually legally download and play despite despite still being sold for money at this current moment.
It's funny how this internet meme from the 90s still continues 30 years later despite case law that says otherwise.
To be fair, it may have been true in the 90s. It just quit being true in 99.
>EULA
meaningless in a first world country
Except the US, where it is legally binding. He covers this in the video.
anon...
Please watch the video. Three American Judges effectively gave up all video game consumer ownership rights in the late 90s before the term "game as a service" was even coined.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProCD,_Inc._v._Zeidenberg
Anon....You didn't get the "first world" joke
Yes. It’s basically like Forza Horizon, where the multiplayer is pretty seamlessly integrated into the game *but* there is literally zero reason why it would need to be mandatory. Can’t see other players on the road, so what?
>it’s like Minecraft
ohhh
zoomers don't really know you can host minecraft servers either
most of them play the console/windows store versions that don't have that shit
No they don't. Java is still the way to go.
t. Zoomer
Minecraft has dedicated servers
They could, the issue is that where there’s money to be made these shitty fricking companies won’t allow it.
So you can kill the game to save money
But if people want to host the game on their own, they think “hm, there’s still money to be made somehow. We can’t allow this”
And then they’ll fricking rape you
It’s fricking pitiful
Haha yeah, what a shame. There's no way such a convenient and efficient idea could exist.
FPBP. If your game is "no longer financially feasible", that's not my fricking problem. I'm a customer, not an investor. It's not my responsibility to take on the financial risk of your dumbass company that everyone hates.
When my car turned out to be defective, the manufacturer was legally required to offer free repair services in regards to the problem to ensure I could continue using it (and a class action check to compensate me for the danger for driving a defective car.) A developer is no different - you're going to release the basic amount of work to make sure I can continue using my purchase.
>nooooo my trillion dollar industry shouldn't be held up to the standards that every other company on the world is held up to
Eat a dick. If you can afford to release always-online FOMO shit, then you can afford to patch it or release your server software.
The technology just isn't there yet, maybe in another 100 years or so
Hell I'm not even asking for that. Just don't make it online-only and support LAN if the game has multiplayer.
Jokes aside, these are actually big security risks.
While it might not be a big issue for now, once neural chips are more common it could be life threatening
Why do you trust a company to host a server but not an individual? A company has MUCH less legal liability than a person.
The company hosting it means they know what’s being shared out and connected to.
If users own the server they can start sending whatever bullshit out to whoever connects
Think the CS servers for example. There’s a lot of server commands that can completely frick over clients but if valve has control over the server those commands are benign
I know when I was a kid we’d regularly troll each other with mod commands of the server. And new people would often be the ones getting goatsie spam on their screen during important moments. But this is only possible when random people are given control over server commands. And anyone running the server has to have access to those commands.
The company has vested interest in it having people send malware using server API though
>new people would often be the ones getting goatsie spam on their screen during important moments
sounds like skill issue to me.
>have goatse spammed in your game
>or
>the game is permanently rendered unplayable
Guess which I prefer
>you will install the chip
1.Anyone with a neural chip deserves to be threatened
2. There is way more reason to not trust a big company compared to literally anyone else.
The technology just isn't there yet
are you telling gamers to keep playing the games they like instead of buying NEW game for $70 + tip???????????
PLEASE THINK ABOUT THE SUICIDE SQUAD
Ubisoft adds female protagonist into its every game including a fricking racing one. It should die.
>Ubisoft adds female protagonis
If you have a problem with female protags you're not a Gankerirgin
I have a problem with you not getting drafted which would prevent me from avoiding that shit to enjoy my pirated male protagonist games in peace female protaggays.
I don't have a problem with that. Unlike you homosexuals, I don't like imagining other men inside MY CAR
women can't drive for shit
Why can't they just release an offline version? Like Japanese devs do?
Because that means people would be able to keep playing older, better games instead of being forced to consoom the newest slop every time. The most extreme version of this can be seen in the recent trend of old games being outright deleted from existence as soon as a "sequel" comes out (overwatch 2, cs2, etc) and this practice is only going to become more prevalent in the future if it's not stopped.
wait the original counterstrike is gone?
I thought valve kept all their multiplayer games up even if only 5 people played it a year
I think he's refering to CSGO, not og CS.
regardless, the point still stands
Only to zoomers. The good CS games have always been on the store and never taken down.
You can still host private CSGO servers since the server software was freely available for a decade, but the official servers are dead and tge game's delisted
>deleted overwatch
Oh no, we must stop them!
because people might like that and end up playing old offline game instead of buying 5 new ones that would come out in that time span
modders might make the game better than the devs can
>Like Japanese devs do?
Name 3
Dragon Quest X
Mega Man X Dive
Seven Knights
They fear having to compete with their old products.
Because then they'd have to do actual work instead of sitting around releasing bad products that barely work and getting paid for it. You think it'd be legal to sell a car in the same state a dev puts out a video game these days?
There are cars, today, where you need to pay a subscription for heated sets.
I still drive a car from 2005
>need to buy a consumable booster pack for more horsepower
anon...
Yea the IRL car DLC shit is old hat already. We’ve moved onto new dystopias.
>pop the hood
>money stolen
while you have a point, whens the last time you saw someone buy a NEW car?
besides the insanely rich who we're all complaining about right now.
I just bought a C8
But it doesn’t have any of that bullshit
But if GM makes the onstar bs manadatory going forward (which they’re clearly trying to do on mine but Apple CarPlay overrides those issues) I’m not buying from them again on principle of hating subscription bullshit
But it’s also why I didn’t buy a bmw or Tesla, among other reasons.
>while you have a point, whens the last time you saw someone buy a NEW car?
>besides the insanely rich who we're all complaining about right now.
not an argument for it being a bad practice
yeah, i'm still holding onto my saab.
Motoisraelites
>state approves the mandate to remove all petroleum based vehicles from public roads by 2040
>doesn't put in any incentives to reduce the extortionate pricing on the alternatives
It's like they want people to go back to the ole horse and cart. Might even see a return of the faithful honky on wheels for those who want an extra kick.
Sadly, horses aren't street legal a lot of places. Still, thats only local law. So if enough people wanted it, the law would be forced to change.
frick off maybe don't design your games as a one and done throwaway trash title instead
not happening. when you've bought the game you've already agreed that developers have a right to take away the game from you.
actually that's why he has a chance of winning this lawsuit... ubisoft screwed up in how they handled the crew. so he is actually going to win his case most likely. that's why this is big. it will set a precedent in court that affects all live service games. This guy suing needs to be stopped but ubisoft is losing the case at the moment.
>the guy going after a scummy triple A dev needs to be stopped
have a nice day right now homosexual
Already addressed in the video
>when you've bought
Lmao. Nice try, I will never buy GaaS slop, let alone made by modern ubisoft.
Don't buy online only games.
Give us the option to make our own servers. Problem solved. But of course you're not going to do it, otherwise you won't be able to charge us for skins and other bullshit..
Give players the tools to start their own dedicated servers, problem solved. Fans keep the game afloat forever, to a point you can release HD/8k/10 000k virtual brain chip versions of the game in the future. Pic related.
>provide server files so people can host private servers
>one last update that allows offline play
Imagine the horror, oy gevalt you're literally bankrupting us
or
or
or
Ubisoft could release the game for the fans to create their own personal servers
or
or
don't sell multiplayer dependent shit you fricking morons
>a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed
sucks to suck
YOU FRICKING IDIOTS. IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE. NO ONE IS GOING TO MAKE A LIVE SERVICE GAME IN THE CHANCE IT MIGHT FAIL AND THEY ARE FORCED TO KEEP SERVERS UP. YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING? YOU CALL YOURSELF GAMERS?
They won't be compelled to keep the servers open, they will just have to make reasonable provision for a private server to be hosted.
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE.
Good. Yes, gamers who like to play the games we paid for.
Are you fricking moronic? Or do you just work for ubisoft. Both?
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
You actually convinced me to support the lawsuit. Frick mobile gaming
ok, now i support the lawsuit
>LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE
I was already on board with this anon, you didn't need to convince me further
Good.
>DON'T YOU GUYS HAVE PHONES
what an lolcow
Holy shit i knew our laws in the US were bad but i didnt know they were this bad.
Save us euros.
I can't tell if these are ironic anymore.
>no more baseless gamble live service games
>at best only IPs that got success on a first, non-live service game will have a chance at doing it with a second game now
Well at least it will filter slop out a bit more now. I have no issues with live service. I have issues with slop tier games pushed out just to farm battlepass and dogshit tier cosmetic shekels.
This is obviously a disguised bait post worded in a way to make people agree with the opposite. With that out of the way, yes, shutting down live service games is what needs to be done. Developers will have to make good games from get-go, just like they used to before
Where's the downside?
I want to beleive these are from a game developer who is panicking because he may have to shut down his shitty live service game.
God, yes.
I really doubt ross is going to win against a mega corporation but at least they'll be forced to admit you don't own your games even if they're sold as a product
He did say in the first video that even if he didn't win it didn't matter if the confirmation truly is that we have in writing we don't in fact own our games. That would also be a win because as of right now it's a complete grey area.
but ubisoft already admits that
It's not for Ubisoft to make law, that's the distinction here.
a blog post isn't the same as the law in writing.
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE.
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
I love how you're trying to make us seem in the wrong by posting things that are absolute cancer in the modern day industry. If this lawsuit goes through, video games will start to heal.
Yeah, I call myself a gamer.
I game the system so the developers I don't like go bankrupt.
Hell, yeah. It's time for us gamers to force some change.
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE. NO ONE IS GOING TO MAKE A LIVE SERVICE GAME IN THE CHANCE IT MIGHT FAIL AND THEY ARE FORCED TO KEEP SERVERS UP. YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
Yes
YES I AM, MOTHERFRICKER!
is that mutahar?
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
>mobile industry
and nothing of value was lost
>"game as service" dies
>mobile gaming dies
>always online games forced to offer offline modes
>whole industry improves overnight by order of magnitude
Yes goes in all fields.
>NO ONE IS GOING TO MAKE A LIVE SERVICE GAME IN THE CHANCE IT MIGHT FAIL
OH YES
FRICK LIVE SERVICE CRAP
FRICK GAME AS A SERVICE
DEATH TO THE GAAS INDUSTRY
TOTAL GAAS DEATH
FRICK YOUR FOMO SHIT
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
where do I sign?
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE
shut up and take my money
gaygggootttt
YES. YES. YES.
>Gacha get absolutely annihilated
YES
thing is gatcha could easily be made offline with minimal effort becoming a VN when the service ends so unfortunately they are going nowhere.
Well, at least paypiggies would keep their PNGs if servers were to be shut down.
Right?
YES!
If Ubisoft can pay their interns to make shill posts here maybe the years I've wasted here can actually be of use.
Based, Destiny 1 and 2 were the only good ones and even then Destiny 2 has been in a shit spot since the last expansion. We don't need any more of these.
>shitty bait like this gets more than one (You)
Just shut down this place.
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING?
Yes, frick phonegays
Obvious, but still solid, bait
Good riddance to mobile trash and live service cancer
>YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY DYING
damn right i am
>THE ENTIRE MOBILE INDUSTRY
the what? is this another one of those overpriced consoles that can't run above 25fps? gaming is pc only. everything else is a downgrade and sucks major balls
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE
Greatest thing I've ever heard.
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE
Jesus, let's hope Ubisoft does one thing right before blowing up
Only live service game that ever worked was D1.
Thank you very much, I will support the lawsuit and hope Ubisoft dies horribly.
Sometimes it's really hard to tell if zoomers are joking or if they are actually just this fricking stupid.
I should only hope
Stop, I can only get so erect.
We get the point moron, no need to bait like this
>THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE.
Don't threaten me with a good time.
Bait post but forcing the servers to stay up is not the argument he is making. At the end of life of a one time paid game, it should either be playable without a server or the server software is open to all.
lmao the exact same post from the thread before, have my (You)
beyond horrible bait, Ganker still ate it up, excellent
posting in epic bread
I HAVE TO MAKE THE MOVIE
Please post more panic in all caps. I'm almost there.
Don't threaten me with a good time.
The Crew has a 61 on metacritic. Why are we preventing the death of a shitty video game? Is this the final form of contrarianism?
THE LAWSUIT WILL SET A PRECEDENT THAT AFFECTS ALL GAME COMPANIES IF IT WINS YOU DUMBASS. THEY WILL STOP MAKING LIVE SERVICE GAMES IF HE WINS AND HE NEEDS TO BE STOPPED OR IT WILL KILL SO MANY GAME COMPANIES. IF YOU LIKE GAMES LIKE GENSHIN IMPACT AND MOBILE GAMES THEN YOU NEED TO BE ON UBISOFTS SIDE.
>THEY WILL STOP MAKING LIVE SERVICE GAMES
No they wont lol.
>THEY WILL STOP MAKING LIVE SERVICE GAMES
Is this supposed to be a bad thing?
>IF YOU LIKE GAMES LIKE GENSHIN IMPACT AND MOBILE GAMES
...Do you even know where you are?
Finally, what i've been waiting for. The sweet death of video games as we currently know it.
AND it will prevent further mobile/live service games from being made you say? why, this deal keeps sounding better and better.
>GAMES LIKE
>GENSHIN IMPACT
>MOBILE GAMES
Games-as-service needs to be recognized for what they are: ONLINE SERVICE. FOMO, motherfricker.
Well I’m on the plaintiffs side when you put if like that. Looks like a single player renaissance coming after this lawsuit wins.
It's gonna be funny watching you useless morons have to try to get real jobs soon. Good luck lmao
>Total Gacha Death
>Total Live-Service Death
Too bad we live in an unjust world, so this will never happen. I'm jealous of our alternate selves that know this bliss.
Heck yea, live service games and Genshin will not be missed
It's not about the game itself on it's own but games being terminated once their servers are shut down with no end of life plan making the game for lack of a better word, dead with no way to play it.
You want to watch that crap movie from the 70s that your Dad liked on VHS? Sure!
Want to play that game you liked from a few years ago that you bought and paid for? NOPE SERVERS ARE DEAD WITH NO OFFLINE MODE TOUGH SHIT GAME IS DEAD AND LOST FOREVER.
The truth of the world is that no creator would refuse the option to remove their work history from existence if it was possible. It's the final form of copyright.
>every creator is le tortured artist who secretly hates their work being enjoyed by the public
Shut up
>le artist should have the right to permanently exterminate a game that's been out in the world and enjoyed for years
If anyone in literally any other medium made the claim that the artist holds the right to permanently destroy their work after it's been in the wild for decades and could easily be preserved they would be called an insane person.
For some reason, people only (unironically) peddle out arguments that actually permanent shutdown of fairly easily preserved works of media is a reasonable thing to expect or when it comes to games. Out of contrarianism, I can only assume.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA
I hope that guy wins the lawsuit and every publisher with his "GAAS" bullshit gets fricked hard in the ass
so add LAN/Custom servers options and your problem is solved instead of your israeli online shit
This is like Gamergate all over again. You pretend its all about muh rights and muh morals but you just want to hurt Ubisoft because he wins they will have to fire a lot of women and you hate women.
It's really fricking depressing how every single board on this site now has bots spamming this type of shit in every thread. Impossible to discuss anything without being constantly gaslit into thinking you shouldn't care that your race and its culture are being erased in front of your very eyes.
go save the white race by having sex with a white woman then and stop posting on Ganker forever
that's right you wont lmao
I can do a light skinned Latina or an Asian.
best offer
Leftists mentally poisoned our women.
women have always been crazy b***hes, they just have the right to vote now and that made even more insufferable
It's worse than before.
>they just have the right to vote now
not that anon but you realize that's been the case for at least 100 years
Its just video games moron. Stop taking them so seriously. Nobody cares.
Do you actually think that the sex abusers at Ubisoft actually care about women?
No, but that's actually a nice bonus.
>they will have to fire a lot of women and you hate women
That's just a bonus 😉
Anything that hurts the French in the long run will be considered as a service to the entirety of mankind.
196th post best post
i'll be honest with you, i didn't think about that by myself
but now that you've made a case for it, i'm on board
let's sue ubisoft
That, too, of course. D'uh. Who doesn't hate women, anyways?
Can you explain? If these women were hired just to fill a quota, good riddance.
that's every pol thread on v
>you hate women
oh really? then why do I have over two terabytes of naked women on my hard drive?
>and you hate women.
Why yes, I do.
>they will have to fire a lot of women and you hate women.
sold, where do I support this?
>and you hate women.
And Black folk. Must not forget Black folk.
I literally don't care!
If something is bad for Ubisoft, it’s a good thing for me.
>If something is bad for Ubisoft, it’s a good thing for me.
They could easily turn to heroes by not stealing from people who paid for their games. Arrogance on their part.
Good bait, some homosexuals thought you were serious.
>us game developers
You all suck and this whole industry needs to implode and your filth needs to go infect some other hobby. All new age games are garbage, and so are all of the design philosophies you follow. Cry more.
The multiplayer becoming unusable I couldnt give less of a shit about but the fact that you can buy a game and then the servers are deleted and that game is by all definitions of the word literally worthless is criminal
>A lot of us game developers
you deserve it for making this
is there a version if this with audio?
yeah but it just has some trendy bullshit acoustic song with some chick singing and the sound of a guy sucking dick
Yeah sure it cost a lot of money to maintain a game online with 100 players
anything that doesn't cost zero dollars is too much
As someone who is somewhat knowledgeable about the topic I fricking seethe every time I see zoomers parroting this rhetoric.
Developers tell them "we shut down this game because we can't afford the servers" anymore and they unironically believe it, they are convinced that it costs hundreds of thousands to host servers for 100 players even though it literally costs pennies.
>no game is allowed to shut down their servers anymore
Misleading title, did you even watched video?
watch the video you argument is addresses in full.
Oh no games will have to be good now before release? The horror.
>GaaS will get screwed cause they won't get to shovel out low effort slop
>you will have to actually closely cherry pick and hire someone with good ideas for a game (aka not college grads cause all their creativity and soul got grinded out of them by the system) and actually care about quality assurance
>only live service games with appealing characters, interesting stories, high quality settings and high QA will be able to take the GaaS risk
Sounds like a win to me.
Let me guess:
there is a link to send him money to cover ''legal fees'' attached to it somewhere in there,isn't there?
Nope.
no, it's just him giving updates that he's winning and ubisoft is fricked
No, he said he'll only set up a fundraiser if he knows exactly what the money is needed for and he can't front it himself.
actually, he will pay some of the expenses out his pocket.
If you live in france you can send a strong worded letter to ubisoft for legal purposes and he will pay the fees.
Get fricked troon
No, in fact he will pay you for the postage to mail your complaint to your consumer protection agencies (If you live in France).
>Buying ubishart games
>Buying games with online functionality that is dependant solely on the game developer
Nah, you deserve what you get
The problem is that sometimes these online only games are genuinely good.
Good ragebait OP
Is it really that difficult for The Crew to have an offline mode patched in before the servers go down?
No, but why should they?
There are TWO sequels already, they should move on to the newer inferior ones.
The one that is the same but with less content and the one with shit boat/plane gimmick that makes the map worse.
>IF THIS GOES THROUGH THEN LIVE SERVICE GAMES WILL STOP BEING MADE
i fricking wish it goes through then lmao
You're literally moronic. They can make them work offline or allow dedicated or peer to peer, they just won't. If they do that, this problem goes away.
The crew doesn't have any features or mechanics that will make peer to peer make sense. It's an online only game despite being singleplayer. Ubisoft is shutting down the game because they built it from the ground up to be online only.
And they can’t patch it to work offline because…?
because they intentionally programmed all the singleplayer features to require a server. While the server itself doesn't serve a purpose to game mechanics or features. It's just there so they can argue in court why they had to shut it down. you won't be able to open the menu's without the server being connected. They can argue that it costs too much to simply "patch" it. They intentionally program the game so it takes a lot of money to make it offline.
hitman did the same thing where when you use crack version you couldn't even save the game. even though it's an entirely singleplayer game. they can code their games to require a server so that you can't patch it to work offline. It's a loophole to get people to move onto the sequels. It's like if you tie your jump button to require online connectivity. it will be lots of effort to patch that to work offline. They do it for everything
Or you make it so we can host our own servers you piece of shit. Through location or p2p.
They won't lose
Did you even read or watch. Ubisoft made a singleplayer game that requires online. They have to tell the court why you need an online server to drive around in singleplayer campaign.
>Ubisoft made a singleplayer online service.
This will be Ubisoft's defense in court. Developer DRM.
And ubisoft has to explain what that means, and put it in writing that no one owns their game. You don't realize that they can win in court but lose the real battle by saying that. EU will rip them a new one to say that nobody owns their games.
>And ubisoft has to explain what that means, and put it in writing that no one owns their game.
I just want them to admit that they should've never called it a game. If you call your work a game, it should be able to exist without the internet.
They will legally have to call their products something else from now on, to make it clear whether or not we own it. The court will require a distinction for customers so they know whether or not the product they buy is theirs or not. So them not calling it games anymore would actually make legal sense. You could easily argue that people need it to be called something else, to know whether or not if buying means they own it.
Imagine Hasbro sending a Cease and Desist over your copy of Monopoly, demanding that you never play it again.
Imagine a Gambling Commission employee peering through your window to make sure that you aren't playing unregulated Go Fish.
Fricking ridiculous that vidya is treated so badly.
You can argue in court that instead of saying you "bought" the game, they legally are required to use the word "rent". Imagine if Ubisoft and all Live service games, say "Come RENT our game."
This is actually a massive blow. If Ubisoft "'wins" their court case. Ubisoft will legally be required to say that you can rent their games but you can't buy them.
>Imagine if Ubisoft and all Live service games, say "Come RENT our game."
Absolutely nothing would change because zoomers are perfectly okay with renting everything. They already do it with music, TV, movies, etc
A lot would change, it opens up more lawsuits for false advertising. It leads to companies breaking the law by trying to tow the line. For marketing purposes they want to say "buy our game" so they will try it then break the law and get raped in court. You say zoomers will be okay with it. But companies won't. Their goal will be trying to "sell" a game, even though legally they're letting you rent it.
>if Ubisoft loses
Hope he wins now, idgaf what he's suing for. Take all my energy.
but I dont want servers disappearing after paying 40 bucks, and everyone else payed 40 bucks but the dev somehow ran out of money for servers?
>ubisoft
lol die die die
No joke, couldn't Ross try to contact Notch to help him pay for lawyers? He has more money that he knows what to do with it, seems to genuinely like games and already helped in paying lawsuits in the past with Karl Jobst.
If Ross directly asks, then Notch will see it as another attempt to get money out of him, like all those indie devs that tried to blame him for their shitty games failing to sell billions, so he should pay them.
The only way Notch would give money is if he found out about it indirectly and decides to give money because he thinks it is a good cause.
Unless you can get a hold of Leonardo DiCaprio and 2010 Ellen Paige, then your best bet is to @ him with the video and try to get his opinion of it.
You think Notch is aware of Ross? I wouldn't be surprised since Ross is Ganker famous
*shrug*
It's a 50/50. Filters exist.
he doesn't have to "win" the lawsuit to win here. The court will force them to put it in writing where it stands when you purchase a game. Do you own the product you bought? It will be put in writing that we don't own our games, and that leads to a huge shitstorm with the EU legal system. imagine the court saying we don't own the stuff we buy lmfao
>poster begging on behalf of corporation
Totally not a shill post at all. I hope all of you and your subordinates die in boiling water
ahahaha cope harder fake shill
>doesn't even like the crew
>only using it as a means to challenge ubisoft
how is this not fraud or something
Isn't that an ideal lawsuit? You present it not because you have personal investment, but because someone crossed a line and now has to admit to it.
>wanting to own a product you bought is fraud
I wonder ~~*who*~~ could be behind this post.
why would that be fraud? if anything, trying to fight for something you don't even care about because you know it's scummy is even better than fighting for something you have a personal stake in
loser lmao
how’s New Delhi?
>pajeet strawman
Whatever helps you cope better ameriBlack person lmao, just remember you morons did this to yourselves
why are gamers so entitled?
do you really expect us to keep paying for servers for games nobody plays forever?
>do you really expect us to keep paying for servers for games nobody plays forever?
If you were too dumb to provide an alternative in the first place: YES.
Now kys troll moron
Make games with Offline capability/private server capabilities then moron.
when you charge 80 bucks for a game and include in game transactions on top of it, yes, I fricking do.
I can't tell if posts like this are bait anymore and that's concerning
their posts not bait but they're also tourists.
I stopped assuming trolling before moronation years ago. Now when I encounter a post that seems too dumb to be serious I have to assume that it is, indeed, not a troll.
?t=2198
>Ross's lawsuit actually starts to gain traction
>hundreds of zoomer youtubers and streamers immediately start a smear campaign against him
>half of them are paid half of them are just moronic
>Ross being moronic but goodhearted won't be able to defend his points in some zoomer-brained live interview
>dead on arrival
I feel bad knowing this will happen
It's already happening in these threads though I suspect it's one or two morons shitposting because their lives are that depressive. Yet it's enough for people to focus on the shitposting and not the subject in question.
It's literal paid divide and conquer shills, there is no diplomatic way out of this we just have to start killing israelites.
>Yeah, so this Nazi adjacent chud is trying to sue Ubisoft and hard-working POC devs for no reason
>this kind of shit is natural in capitalism
>>Ross being moronic but goodhearted won't be able to defend his points in some zoomer-brained live interview
he does alright in his viewer update livestream videos where he does a monthly q and a
>hundreds of zoomer youtubers and streamers immediately start a smear campaign against him
>half of them are paid half of them are just moronic
doubt
ubi and especially the american consumer rights have passed such a point of no return of such moronic proportions literally ONLY the "think of the poor devs and their jobs" argument to have any semblance of weight
and the kicker is, that is still 100% on the companies being greedy and making moronic decisions
the main problem is kids not understanding the predicament, not knowing any better or too moronic to care as it's not mr. beasts new sextape collab re-action that's trending X (formerly twitter) or whatever they do
they really need to disable posting on weekends and school holidays
I hope the people win
Don't let Mario get the six golden coins.
Don't let Mario reach the palace.
>wahh let us keep scaming you wahh
get fricked developer . hope you scammers die fast
>A lot of us game developers will lose money if we are forced to keep games online
don't care, get fricked
I hope you lose your job.
GET FRICKED
GO ROSS! HAIL MELON THESE FRICKERS LIKE YOUR /TURNLEFT/ BRO!!
Not your personal army. I see what you’re trying to do. Every anon taking you seriously is a gullible dumbass.
Robert, why are you working in a gamestop? Did the local kinoplex close down?
>live service game is about to shut down
>before shutdown release a patch so game can work offline
>even better also release dedicated server software
>THEN end game service
This should be standard practice
I know some of these post are ironic, I can't play along, its too fricking moronic, anyone defending the destruction of products deserves a extra large horse wiener up his ass with sand.
DRM and planned obsolescence are legitimately evil things that will kill people.
>sar, your plane is outside of the designated flying ranging
>Plane OS will be shutting down
>please call this number to increase your flying range
cool
what are the actual chances ubisoft loses a lawsuit like that though?
Not a lawsuit. He's trying to arrange mass complaint filings to consumer protection agencies in Europe and Australia. If those go through then the government sues Ubisoft. As for the chances of that succeeding, its 50/50. European courts have no love of corporations, especially anything tech related. This kind of suits are how we got Steam refunds.
based as frick, I hope he succeeds
Steam refunds were achieved thanks to Australia suing homosexual Gaben.
>its 2027
>theyve known the day is coming
>after 3 years of "we believe these old games are a hotbed of nazi activity" the time to go to court arrives
>the youtuber finally fights against Ubishit in court, and against all odds, wins
>all gaming companies that sell in europe now have to provide a means to keep playing an online-only game
>they cant just give you a shit server either, the server has to be "good enough"
>this forces game developers to stop the live service shit
>a return to "true offline" single player games begins
>but then... ~~*they*~~ arrive
>they create a third party server hosting company
>"we will provide servers for your games for the lowest price!"
>eventually all gaming companies go with this new server host (because it's part of the plan)
>server host goes down, the owners of the business disappear, along with all data on these games
>"whoops! looks like ALL data on running those servers has been lost, forever!"
>multiple game companies no longer have to provide access to those games due to """extraeneous circumstances"""
that's not how EU law works
They'd have to find something new if the judgement was handed out, you can't just lease something you legally need to do out and then when the company you leased to fails say "Oh I guess I don't have to do what I was legally supposed to anymore because the company I was leasing the responsibility to has tanked'
>literally addresses OPs homosexual point in the video
have a nice day OP you fricking baiting homosexual.
Remember that gaas Avengers game, it got delisted last year, and in the final update crystal dynamic added an offline mode to the game.
Just saying
Imagine the board meeting leading up to that decision. Must have been like pulling teeth knowing how much they pissed away on this shit up until this point.
They had a ton more content planned too like adding She-Hulk, Captain Marvel/Mar-Vell, War Machine, Ant-Man & The Wasp, The Falcon, etc.
That's why in the final update they gave out a War Machine skin for Iron Man to anyone who got an achievement beforehand, they were already working on adding him as a full character before getting canned.
Sounds like the same thing that happened to Anthem with their rebooting efforts before EA took them out the back. People forget that Fortnite started life as a mediocre tower defense game before they started to steal ideas to pivot towards. Everyone wants that money now but none of them can get past the first checkpoint without blowing their own dicks off from sheer incompetence. Just like Gaylo Infinite was meant to be a ten year game and they peaced on the 3rd.
>People forget that Fortnite started life as a mediocre tower defense game before they started to steal ideas to pivot towards
And now Fortnite is attempting to branch out more in case the battle royale well ever dries out.
They have the distinct advantage of cultivating a userbase over the last five years rather than outright antagonizing them. They could make miniseries based off the original lineup and it would sell like hotcakes. Whatever they end up doing there will be a few million zooms waiting to see how it pans out.
>They could make miniseries based off the original lineup and it would sell like hotcakes
Well they did put out those Marvel/DC Fortnite comics.
And that's why they're based and I bought the game at 5 bucks. Ubisoft been trying hard to make sure you don't own your game for years now, I know people zeroed into this
now, but even before that, if you don't log into your Uplay account periodically they can just, delete your games.
It'd be nice if developers were required to release server files X years after its release or shutdown. I'd play the hell out of Rumbleverse if I could organize a once-a-month session of it.
Luullll i thought you v gays were on the side of the people!
I'd love that. Frick companies that do this. If they want to not have to do that, make your games not be able to be deleted from the cosmos in the first place.
he has an extremely gay voice. I can hear the doritto covered fingers of a 35 year old balding fat basedboy.
I hope for his sake he got extensive legal advice before he decided to tangle with the big boys. ubisoft has enough shekels to hire a whole army of the most israeli aggressive attack lawyers just to frick him up.
Why are catgays always the ones with the shittiest take AND glaringly didn't watch the video first?
Part of a greater drive towards removing catposting from the internet. Same thing happened with smug animeposting.
>falling for a moron shilling his video
why are you a moron?
Yeah I never understood why it suddenly became a problem to have hobbyists pick up the slack after devs give up on a game. Must be because of consoleturds, before 2010 if a PC game sever shut down you had countless other alternatives to play online, then this suddenly ended because of forced matchmaking being popular on consoles.
It's because of fricking matchmaking.
I remember when avp2 shut down, not even a week later people were playing it again. Zoomers sadly don't even have the requisite experience or information to fully comprehend how much OLD GOOD, NEW BAD is actually true. Players have gained literally nothing with new systems and have lost everything.
matchmaking and the (false and scummy) reasoning that a player playing an old game = 1 less possible player to buy our newest product
it started because of matchmaking but it became the standard for all games because of paid cosmetics, lootboxes and such. can't exploit the whales if there's an offline version where ANYONE can play with the coolest skin or even mod cooler skins into the game. reminds me of how you could use custom skins in CSS multiplayer, no problem because it's just cosmetics, doesn't give you an advantage, right? CSGO comes out and suddenly you can't mod shit any more because they started monetizing skins. I guess TF2 was the turning point but any way. to monetize every aspect of a game you need to lock down every aspect of a game. you can't leave any backdoors for players to make their own fun, you lock the game down completely, online-only, no mods. that's the meta.
And yet everywhere it's full of Valve dicksuckers.
I want the game development sector to disappear.
This dude is either brave or dumb for going up against israelites
Just don't make single player games always online or live service and it solves all of your problem.
kys ubisoft marketer and or troll
imagine being american lmao, you vill eat ze bugs
our legal system protects pirating as long as we don't profit off of trademarks
does it actually? i've heard a lot of stories about americans needing vpns because if they try to torrent normally their ISP blocks access to internet, or ISPs straight up trying to block torrent access in general
or is it more like a per state basis?
this is a genuine question btw i'm not american and i'm curious
I hope ubishit goes out of business
>A lot of us game developers will lose money
Why does it smell so strongly of cow dung in here?
>Please stop this guy from suing ubisoft. If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed. He wants to make it where people can't take their games down when it's no longer financially feasible.
better get started on printing disk's and making single player/ self hosted multiplayer games again then.
But how does this effect mold, personally?
If it succeeds, the man shaped mass of mold formally known as Ross Scott would be very happy.
damn, do i love ross's game dungeon. they're peak comfy shit to watch
man if only developers made new games good so there was a reason to play them instead of sticking to older games which we know are good
Big game companies deserve to loose money. They take advantage of customers and engage in practices nobody likes but the people wo makes money from them. Tekken shop is and example of it, or Rushed Kombat 1 selling story characters as dlc. Everyone would prefer that these things not happen, they'd choose that these things not be as they are if they had the choice unless they are moronic, but these companies care more about money than doing something good. If companies start losing money they received from these practices, it'd be beautiful. I hope companies are forced to do good. People need to understand their power to stop these practices.
Good
Total gaas death
>Please stop this guy from suing ubisoft. If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed
damn, i hope he wins
have a nice day code monkey
At the very least publishers should be obligated to patch always-online games to be playable offline when the game enters EoL so this is completely fine.
the real lose for this would be steam and other streaming services as they would be forced to stay up forever it would be cheaper to include a disk with every purchase and mail it to your door, this would kill dlc as they would have to send it to you on a disk as well could you imagine the cost of sending a disk for every 5mb piece dlc
ESL moron
There's a reason why expansion packs gave you more content(and for less money) than modern DLC packs
>forced to stay up forever
He clearly said he doesn't expect that to happen. He wants an alternative where the game is made to be playable offline after they decide to pull the plug. Like Unreal Tournament.
Also Ubishit already did this with AssCreed always online DRM attempt. Same with EA with Sim City. It's not hard let alone impossible.
>He clearly said he doesn't expect that to happen
he may not expect it but these kind of ruling tend to unexpected results, Just the risk that a future law might make that happen would be enough for the bean counter's and suit's to make some very rash decisions and that's without the investor class getting jumpy.
All of these are good things
Just stop making GaaS trash and stop making always online games, you disgusting israelite homosexuals. It's literally that easy. I hope Ross proceeds with this and wins. israelites will lose. Gamers will win.
I wish him all the best. Also frick America lmao you buck broken C U C K O L D S
He's going to win.
he not going to win, but he surely not losing either.
OP, it simply means games will have to add dedicated server support.
You can’t be a very bright game dev of you think we can do anything about it. But why would we, the death of gaas is a single player renaissance.
I will pray for Ross to win. Ubisoft and their ilk are evil yiddish filth and should be dealt with without any remorse and as much damage done as possible. Godspeed, Ross, you based bastard.
Sunsetting multiplayer games sucks, but at least there's a logic to it from a business perspective. But sunsetting a game that has a significant single player aspect like the Crew, where the forced online connectivity doesn't inform the actual experience whatsoever? That's just being genuinely evil and petty for no reason.
I don't quite understand, he's not a filthy rich to fight ubisoft in court, why would he do that? he's not even a millionaire youtuber like mr.beast shit.. his channel wasn't even that popular nor it get more than 10k views..
It's not about the money, it's about the message
He wins even if he loses the case. Money has nothing to do with it. Games have been in a grey area regarding a lot of things, and this creates a distinction between games you own and ones you don't. if it can be taken from you, then you never owned the game to begin with. This fricks up EU customer rights laws and will destroy ubisoft if they have to put it in writing that no one owns their games. (That is deemed false advertising too) The other advantage is. going forward, all live service games will now say "rent" instead of "buy". Imagine assassin creed on steam says "Rent our game for $60" instead of buy and every video says "You can now pre-rent our game for $60. Disclaimer, this game will eventually be taken away from you without notice." Even if he loses the lawsuit, this still will happen
This. He is just a nobody. What he can expect to achieve? This just seems like pointless to me. He could spend better his time and do anything else besides this frivolous lawsuit.
read the replies moron, people said why he wins even if the court case fails.
But it's pointless to win. He is just trying to ruin the games industry. Why anyone will support shut down the company that makes great games? He is just wasting his time. Nobody should support this person.
Bait
This. You might not like Ubisoft but at least they create competition in the market. The more games is better. Companies should only be sued for scam but Ubisoft never made a scam. This lawsuit is pointless, waste of time.
>Ubisoft never made a scam
I can't imagine being so demoralized and lacking in basic principles you can only envision millionaires and Youtubes doing anything regarding the legal system or making any positive change in society. This is what they want, this is how they want you to feel, that you are helpless, weak, and can do nothing ever so you shouldn't even try
he's an autist and a gamer and instead of just complaining is trying to do the most he can in what is in his eyes the best opportunity to do so and set a precedent
He's trying to get the French Government to fight Ubisoft in court. Games as a service may violate French law, which means they would get criminal charges for doing it.
>$100 settlement to the dude
>no precedent set
Waaooowww I love the legal system
This actually would be the best course of action for ubisoft. They lose if it goes to trial and they have to define it in writing no one owns their games they bought. But if they bribe him, it will never reach court. He will 100% take the bribe.
>But if they bribe him, it will never reach court. He will 100% take the bribe.
Not everyone is a filthy greedy ratisraelite like you. I'm sure Ross would refuse any settlement off court.
anon, if I offer you $5 million, you would reject it just for what reason? Zoomers will zoom all day, if you help them from one game, they will move to the next stupid thing to get addicted to. While your ass stays broke. You aren't fooling anyone. You'd gladly take millions
imagine not having core values
money is a core value. It can be used to help starving children, donate it to help people with their surgery. you can save lives with that money. as opposed to video game bing bing wahoo entertainment. The fact you think it's more important to protect mindless video games, than to help save lives makes me think you have no core values
>money is a core value.
Go into the oven, yid filth.
Okay commie
Whatever you say, subhuman israelite.
post documentation of your charitable contributions in 2023
>While your ass stays broke
I'd rather be broke for my entire life than take money from these scumbags. I'll tell them everything I think about them and then spit and walk away with one finger pointing at their ugly faces.
>your wife leaves your broke ass to sleep with the man who has the millions from settlement.
Finished your story for you anon
>your wife
Imagine actually falling for the marriage scam. Couldn't be me.
getting them to the point they bribe him is honestly already a good thing in my book
In that case, what would stop thousands of other people to file similar lawsuits if they know Ubisoft will always pay and settle? Everyone who owns any ubisoft game with forced online functionality would have a right to file that same lawsuit.
same reason not every woman and black person sues companies even though you know they always settle.
I don't see Ross as the bribing type. He lives in destitute poverty, and has for the past 14 years because he refuses to accept sponsorships on his videos or even do the most basic of YouTube money making tactics. The man is a terminal autist.
>Moldman is the kind of dude that will save all his pennies for a rainy day on the off chance that he needs to live off them indefinitely
I'm pretty sure he does. His main source of food is discount canned beans that he buys in bulk, his phone is a nokia brick from 2001, he doesn't own a car, wears his shoes till they literally fall to pieces, and we all know where the name mold man came from.
>His main source of food is discount canned beans that he buys in bulk, his phone is a nokia brick from 2001, he doesn't own a car, wears his shoes till they literally fall to pieces
Sounds like a man who has his priorities straight.
>buy game
>game support stopped
>servers shutdown
>can't host servers of your own
>money stolen
its over
Just support community servers.
There's no fricking way to make game developers legally obligated to keep the servers running indefinitely. I guess you could create a law against always online DRM, but even that would be hard to enforce.
>cant play the game you bought?
>refund!
imagine being such a massive homosexual that you get inb4d by Ross
36:12 Addressing a specific criticism
So OP is misrepresenting the issue then. I also addressed the point the e-celeb made in the video. Imagine being unable to read.
no you didn't
>I'm a zoomer who cant read: the post
>There's no fricking way to make game developers legally obligated to keep the servers running indefinitely
Make them legally obligated to release the server source code after a shutdown then so the community can keep it running.
Watch the video. He addresses this. He doesn't want servers to stay on forever, he wants games to not require central servers in the first place, or have the server software released at the end of life of the game.
>A lot of us game developers will lose money if we are forced to keep games online.
Don't be leeches, stop shoving GaaS shit, add more P2P or dedicated hosting options to prolong the games life.
It's not hard, moron.
get fricked
how about, instead, part of EOL is updating the game so players can host their own servers?
Why are shills so desperately trying to shift the narrative from "just patch the game to allow community servers" to "these psychopaths want to force the poor multi-million dollar companies to run the servers forever!!!!"
because they haven't figured out that we'll gladly watch the building burn down around them
It's people copy pasting reddit posts
Obviously it's bait. No way a person could be that moronic to say that.
>Why are shills so desperately trying to shift the narrative from "just patch the game to allow community servers" to "these psychopaths want to force the poor multi-million dollar companies to run the servers forever!!!!"
wishful thinking, I want that to happen to force these greedy fricks back to selling disk's and stopping dlc.
because they're relying on zoomers not even being aware of the concept of "community servers", moldman even covered it in the video (although he also pointed out that even Minecraft has fricking dedicated servers now, so they have no excuse, they're just morons)
Trying to kickstart the fanatic corpo programming that has been cultivated over the last 15+ years. Brands are people too and you would do well to remember that. Economic radicals engaging in misinformation campaigns are a danger to the continued existence of these entities.
>make customers pay for games they'll never own, and the publisher can take away at any time
Let Ubisoft get sued to oblivion.
>to monetize every aspect of a game you need to lock down every aspect of a game. you can't leave any backdoors for players to make their own fun, you lock the game down completely, online-only, no mods. that's the meta.
This is the general mentality that a lot of companies are intending to follow in the foreseeable future. Take the whole mod scare from Capcom when Chun Li's fat breasts were swinging out in public. homosexuals tried to pin the blame on coomers. That is just the public facing farce the real reason for the crackdowns is to stop Patreongays from siphoning off easy cosmetic dollars by looking their own shit behind a paywall. Why give Capcom 20 bucks for a one off costume you can pay someone $5 a month for a more revealing outfit. And another $5 more to see Chun Li's succulent Chinese meals in all of their glory. Skyrim remains the biggest example of what happens when you let the users run wild without having the foresight to lock these systems down and charge a usage fee for every download that passes through the game on an engine level. You could've charged 5 cents for every download that ran through Nexus today and you would make more money then the game ever would've gotten over the entire sales lifetime. You can crank the thumbscrews up further by taking a 75/25 split on every piece of user generated content that was ever made using your IP.
You take 75, 25 is spent on maintaining the archives and you pay out a flat contract rate on everything that gets the okayed. If they used this model 15 years ago when horse armor was doing the rounds it would've set a precedent that would be about as commonplace as paid online is today.
meant for
I'm not convinced this kind of thing would work. I'm sure this is how publishers calculate and why they keep trying. but in a world where Skyrim (or Oblivion) tried to make mods a purchase each mod would have gotten such a tiny fraction of the attention they did receive in reality that the math falls apart. I used a ton of mods in Oblivion and if they had tried to charge a penny for any of that shit I would have just played vanilla and then uninstalled after 20 hours. or maybe I would have never started playing the game at all because I distinctly remember only playing Oblivion with the UI fix on PC. if the UI fix was a paid mod I never would have played Oblivion at all! Skyrim, similar story. everybody tells you out of the gate you need mods to enjoy these games. playing them vanilla is not an option so if you're considering buying them you're looking at becoming a repeat customer of various mods all while hoping the mods will eventually be enough to make the game fun.
and didn't Bethesda already try the paid mods thing and it failed?
They've tried it three times already and they all failed. The motivation was to use the CC as a way to bypass Snoy's certification systems to sell stuff directly to the players there since they couldn't really use the mods normally. It failed on the other platforms because who pays for a mod on PC and xboners were too busy finding ways to optimize their lists to get under the 2 GB limit. The last update caused an immense amount of butthurt because it broke a bunch of premade lists and forcibly updated the games of people that didn't lock off their clients. I only bring up the per download rate because horse armor started off at a couple of bucks for a cosmetic that people still rightfully shat on them for at the time. Compared to now where something like Diablo will expect you to cough up the price of a full game for one in-game item. If you had set the precedent at 1c a piece it would look very cheap now since you wouldn't know of a world where this stuff used to be free and widely available. Very likely many people would've been turned off at the start if they went hard but what they want now is to capture the OCDs with plenty of money to burn and no sense of value management. Just looking at the sheer amount of total downloads since release that was a lot of money that they never got to see because the systems were never put in place to collect it.
You add into the fact that all of the above can be seen as supplementary since all you did was collect a toll while the modders did all of the legwork, bugtesting and public facing management on their own time. It would be like having three forms of a contract employee in one that you didn't even need to let into the building for an interview. As of now the few vidya that have managed to make this model work is tied between Minecraft and Robolox with the later losing a crap ton of money despite having a vast userbase to draw from. And the former continuously shooting themselves in the face.
>charge charge charge charge charge
maybe you should work in a fricking bank and not video games
you will never understand why I only buy japanese games that have been given passion now and not, EAs latest shit on a turd.
He has my full support. Total game developer death.
why not just allow self hosting
All shitposting and baiting aside, how true is the OP statement? And is such a thing possible if it is true
i mean why not just pirate the game?
What if when an online only game dies you put out a single player version of it or allow people to host their own games so they can play with friends? The frick? FRICK YOU!
um, don't you know how hard that is? it's totally impossible to put it the bare minimum effort to modify the game to work offline, or even just release the server code as is and let players handle that on their own, no-one would do that.
it's not like people have been running private WoW servers for over a decade, and without even having access to the server code and instead needing a bunch of dedicated autists to reverse-engineer it from scratch, that didn't happen
I hope moldman delivers the legal RKO to the disgusting fr*nch at ubishit
vidya just might have a chance to not be shit
HAHA SUCK IT YOU FRICKING homosexualS!
I hope that guy wins. That would mean mandatory singleplayer mode and the death of GaaS.
That guy is a hero. I hope Ubisoft is dead and buried this year. The death of French Canadian game development would be a boom, 90% of the troons and feminists killing gaming are in Montreal rather than California.
>A lot of us game developers will lose money if we are forced to keep games online.
Uh oh!! Someone didn't watch the last 3 minutes of the video like a fricking moron!!
Sounds based to me. You belong behind the cash register at a McDonald's.
>all these replies to a thread in which OP presents a bad faith argument that was already addressed in Ross's video AND in the first reply
STOP FORCING US TO DO MORE WORK. I JUST WANT EASY MONEY, NOT MAKE GOOD PRODUCTS.
Reminder that a israeli CEO has more in common with the average israelite than with a white CEO.
>no game is allowed to shut down their servers anymore
20 years lifetime is enough, to sweeten the deal they should be forced to release dedicated servers for people to run
i don't care about this crying that shit needs to work "forever" in this world
we are not talking about life saving important tech here
>Please stop this guy from suing ubisoft. If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed.
Is it impossible for you to be sincere? You obviously want the obvious so just say so. You write like ~~*them*~~.
36:12
You're a clown
>accursed farms
he still working on that movie?
It's THE MOVIE.
HE HAS TO MAKE THE MOVIE
I'm aware OP is probably just shitposting to get people to side against him, but still, I couldn't care less about what companies want. I'd like nothing more than the complete death of live service games and GAAS as a whole.
it's a decent message but The Crew is a terrible messenger.
You're telling me CEOs will earn a couple less million bucks in bonus salary? Frick that saddens me deeply.
I just want Ubisoft to fail
Just let people host dedicated servers lmao
Wish granted
>You have to pay monthly subscription to be able to use dedicated server.
>Oh and it's on our terms so that will be $1000+ tip each month.
Malicious compliance.
schizo larping quotes nobody ever wrote
frick off
>all forms of communications are monitored within the servers
>anyone found breaking our TOS will cause the server to be shutdown immediately
>no refunds will be issued
schizo continues to misuse quotes like a /b/ tier moron to homosexualtext
homosexual continues to be a no fun allowed b***h
Let the Fr*nch fall.
Who cares, frick ubisoft till they die.
Good
To be clear, what this guy wants isn't companies being forced to keep GAAS/Live Service games up beyond the point of financial viability, what he wants is a ruling prohibiting game companies from going after modders for the sole purpose of hoarding IP rights they have no intention of ever using again.
There's precedent for this, too: the Homecoming private server for City of Heroes recently got Nexon's approval to continue running because even Nexon admitted they were never going to do anything with CoH and there was no more money to be made in it, and they didn't feel like throwing thousands of dollars in legal fees into a money pit to shut the server down.
Bait post, but here is the exact part where he addresses this "criticism" for those who are uninformed: https://youtu.be/DAD5iMe0Xj4?t=2172
For single player games there shouldn't even be servers that need to be shutdown. For multiplayer games, either they are designed for freely hostable servers from the beginning or at the end of life they should release the server software or patch the game so it doesn't need servers.
Why are people so anti-semitic?
What's funny is that EA actually handled this kind of situation better.
When their online-only dodgeball game Knockout City got shut down they released a new free version where people could either play locally via LAN or host their own servers.
This is exactly the approach Ross wants to be entrenched into French and Australian law.
That shit was based, I think it should become the legal standard to allow for custom servers
sounds like a loophole for free to play games to just slide through, since you don't buy them.
but you buy cosmetics and stuff and then you cant use them anymore, hope they get included in this too
that's more like buying dlc than buying the game it's for. generally it's required to own the basegame, but not all places will stop you from buying it without having it, rendering your purchase wasteful.
of course I didn't watch the video.
If you watched his original video he covers this. He explicitly excludes subscription based and free to play games because they are not legally "goods" that you buy. The Crew is legally a "good" because you buy it with a one time purchase. https://youtu.be/tUAX0gnZ3Nw?t=487
why is this entire thread just a bunch of falseflagging bait?
That's just Ganker for you.
sadly true
I'll take it, it still spreads awareness for the issue.
Just force devs to release a final update that makes the game playable without online services?
this is the best thread on Ganker, the hundreds of layers of irony on every post is sending me
It's brilliant.
I don't actually inherently hate live service games. I mean, I like MMOs conceptually, and I like stuff like Helldivers and Splatoon where the gameplay is framed as being in a persistent world with new stuff happening in it.
But even if you have a game like that, it should have an offline mode, or some kind of plan for when you end support. There should be some way to play some kind of version of the game even if it's not wholly complete.
>If he wins, a lot of us game developers are going to be screwed
Good.
You're a larper but I still hope you end up dying cold and alone on a street corner somewhere filled with nothing but HIV and regret.
come up with a solution you greedy frick.
>Please stop his lawsuit if you care about the game industry
Here's the thing, chuddy. I don't. The game industry is a fricking mess and a half. It's a quagmire of corporate greed and ideological stupidity.
This entire fricking thread man, I can't tell who is serious and who isn't anymore. Frick me.
Why would I root for a corporation like Ubisoft and not a disgruntled gamer? You're a game dev. I'm not. I don't care about you. I want good games and the fallback from this lawsuit could force companies to stop some of their bullshit practices.
Middle finger.
>developers either have to not make multiplayer, or try their best to keep it good and fun
slight stiffness in my pants
THINK OF ALL THE PAJEET CODE MONKEYS AND DIVERSITY HIRE WORKLOAD!
GAMERS DABBING IN THE HOUSE TONIGHT
>UBISOFT CAN'T SHELVE THEIR GAME
LITTLE DEVIES LOSE THEIR MINDS
>THEY HAVE TO NOW MAKE A GOOD GAME