• Open source is too far, but as part of a shutdown of a game and it’s servers there should be a year long period where the publisher is required to release the game without DRM, including the server software, to all customers.

      I could see it going through Steam, you get a message “Delistment notification: The Crew is being delisted, get your permanent copy now!”

      •  Baku   ( @Baku@aussie.zone ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        I think the company should also be required to clearly state the amount of time they’ll keep supporting the game and will operate the servers for. If they decide to shut them down early, everybody should be given the choice to either receive a full refund or the non DRMd version of the game + the server software like you suggested.

        In general I think all paid games should be required to clearly state the amount of time they’ll keep providing feature updates for, as well as support for new hardware, major bug fixes, and minor bug fixes. Although games that aren’t online and just reach EoL are still playable for quite some time, eventually there’ll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing. That might not happen for 50 years, at which point you probably don’t care, but still. I’d give more leniency to indie Devs and games made as passion projects, though.

        Although obvious once you think about it, I don’t think most people realise or even think of the fact they will eventually not be able to play the game they’re buying. And these mega companies need to stop making games they dump 6 months after launch.

        • I get what you mean but that is not feasable, however, if we look back at the old multiplayer experience like in Unreal Tournament 2004, the company runs a master server, and the community runs the game servers.

          The master server just lists the game servers and allows for a server browser. That is WAY less resource intensive and can be run almost indeffinately.

          The master server for UT2004 ran continously for almost 20 years, and when Epic announce it was shutting down, a fan server was created and after a quick edit of the config file you can play UT2004 multiplayer exactly like it was in the past.

          So let’s go back to that model of multiplayer, it requires a bit of skill to set up your own server securely, but you’ll have way more choice and less commitment of resources from the publisher making it available for longer at less cost.

        •  uis   ( @uis@lemm.ee ) 
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          eventually there’ll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing.

          I still can play Unreal from 1998 on modern Linux. Faust bless Torvalds and his “never break userspace”.

  •  trevor   ( @trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    65
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Here’s a neat tip:

    You can go to most publisher or developer pages on Steam and “ignore” them to prevent Steam from ever showing you their slop again.

    Example:

    1. Go to: https://store.steampowered.com/developer/Ubisoft
    2. Click the “Settings” cog.
    3. “Ignore this creator”

    You can do the same with EA, 2K, etc. Don’t even give these parasites microseconds of your time when they release their next slop title.

  • Ubisoft has done a fantastic job of convincing me to never buy a Ubisoft game ever again.

    Not sure that’s how a company is supposed to work, but they sure seem to think so.

  • Fully agree with it, but they’re still extremely popular, and people will gladly keep handing over their money.

    For me, I say “Ok” to them wanting us to get used to not owning our content - followed with “Then I’ll pay rental prices. Which means I’m not buying at $60+ dollars, if all I get to do is rent it then I’ll pay <$15 going forward.”

  • I purchased Rayman Legends on a big Steam sale because it is a great game and I wanted to play it again. I installed it. I hit play. It tried to install the Ubisoft launcher. I uninstalled it and refunded.

    Fuck off, Ubisoft.

      • One exception is CD Project Red.U can buy cyberpunk through their store on gog.com and u will exactly owning it since u will able to download executable installer and game will have no DRM.Pay once own forever,same for witcher 3 and other games which they distribute on gog.com

          • The launch was terrible, but there are some things that keep them apart from the rest of terrible launches.

            Cyberpunk 2077 was a really ambitious game, with a lot of new mechanics and incredible graphics. Beasts like that are really difficult to optimize for a large range of computers with different specs, so at first it ran poorly on some.

            The most notably buggy release was the PS4 one. And rightfully so. They were trying to run a truly next gen game on a console which was more than a decade old. They not only had to optimize the game, but they basically made a completely different game, with different assets and engines, which was really difficult to do. Still, it was too much for the console, especially old PS4s that were full of dust or had old fans and were overheating.

            Another important fact is that users were also pressuring CDPR into releasing Cyberpunk 2077. It was delayed at least once (maybe twice, I don’t remember), and people wanted to play the game. They probably had to choose between delaying it another time or releasing it without polishing it that much.

            I believe it was Cyberpunk 2077 that started the trend of “release now fix later” games. However, I don’t think they really did it on purpose. The game was too ambitious for its own good, and having to develop, optimize and test two basically different versions of it was too big of a task for a studio that in today’s terms wasn’t even that big. The rest of the AAA producers just realized that CDPR still won loads of money at launch, and decided to release incomplete games on purpose, after seeing that CDPR could make profits that way.

            But must importantly, CDPR did an amazing job at fixing the game, unlike many other studios releasing broken AAAs. They optimized the code, fixed most of the bugs, improved the AI massively and made the game really stable, to the point where I’ve seen it running at 40 FPS on 10+ year old overheating laptops. Even though it took a while, they still delivered the game they promised to their buyers.

            •  LinyosT   ( @LinyosT@sopuli.xyz ) 
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Cyberpunk 2077 was a really ambitious game, with a lot of new mechanics and incredible graphics. Beasts like that are really difficult to optimize for a large range of computers with different specs, so at first it ran poorly on some.

              What about all the other “Ambitious games” that we’ve had over the years that come out just fine? A game being ambitious does not excuse a company releasing the game in what is blatantly an unfinished state. This isn’t the case of a game having a few performance hiccups here and there but rather egregious bugs and severe performance issues across the board. This is stuff that is all over youtube, reddit, twitter and so on. It’s pretty well documented how bad the game was.

              The most notably buggy release was the PS4 one. And rightfully so. They were trying to run a truly next gen game on a console which was more than a decade old. They not only had to optimize the game, but they basically made a completely different game, with different assets and engines, which was really difficult to do. Still, it was too much for the console, especially old PS4s that were full of dust or had old fans and were overheating.

              Again, this really isn’t an excuse. They had the power the can the next gen versions of the game if it was so difficult to pull off. They also had the power to delay the game in order to make sure that it was ready for launch. They could have done so many things such that the last gen versions of the day would either never see the light of day or be ready for launch. CDPR are a big enough studio to pull something like this off. They’re not a small indie studio.

              Another important fact is that users were also pressuring CDPR into releasing Cyberpunk 2077. It was delayed at least once (maybe twice, I don’t remember), and people wanted to play the game. They probably had to choose between delaying it another time or releasing it without polishing it that much.

              Yes, there may have been pressure. But no, the consumer base does not have anywhere near enough power over corporations like you’re trying to imply. Games aren’t just released early because “Oh no the consumers are getting angy”. Though once again this was their fault due to them giving the consumer a completely unrealistic initial release date that they obviously could not hit, considering the absolute state of the game at launch.

              The most likely explanation is that they were simply trying to get the game out as soon as possible to cash in and they absolutely did not want to miss a major sales period such as Christmas. They were simply trying to drop a minimal viable product with plans to fix it later. Turns out they dropped a less than minimally viable product in their rush to make some dosh. Knowingly too if you look into the allegations that I’ll link later.

              I believe it was Cyberpunk 2077 that started the trend of “release now fix later” games.

              No. “Release broken fix later” has been a thing for maybe the last decade. Do people not remember shitshows like AC:Unity? Cyberpunk is most definitely not the first game to be “Release broken, fix later”.

              However, I don’t think they really did it on purpose.

              I don’t think it was dropped broken on purpose. But I do think it was an attempt to drop the usual bare minimum product. Just so happens that they miscalculated and dropped something less than minimal. It’s still gross incompetence and shows the consumer they’re more than willing to drop something bare minimum with the promise of fixing it later. Rather than dropping a complete game.

              The game was too ambitious for its own good, and having to develop, optimize and test two basically different versions of it was too big of a task for a studio that in today’s terms wasn’t even that big.

              Again, not an excuse. They’re a massive studio, big enough to have people that know how to plan a project like this, people that understand their limitations and what is or isn’t achievable. It’s standard project planning practice.

              But even then there are allegations that people in the company were aware that the game was not ready to launch.

              https://www.gamesradar.com/new-report-suggests-cdpr-staff-knew-cyberpunk-2077-wasnt-ready-for-release/

              And yet they still dropped the game.

              There is no excuse for the launch of CP2077.

              The rest of the AAA producers just realized that CDPR still won loads of money at launch, and decided to release incomplete games on purpose, after seeing that CDPR could make profits that way.

              The industry learned this about a decade ago. We’ve been plagued by half baked launched for so long at this point that you don’t have to go far to find out about it.

              But must importantly, CDPR did an amazing job at fixing the game, unlike many other studios releasing broken AAAs.

              In this case I think it’s less fixing the game and more finishing the development of the game, all things considered. The thing they should have done before releasing the game as if it was a finished product when, in fact, it clearly wasn’t.

              There’s fixing a game and there’s what CDPR had to do to CP2077.

              Yes, a lot of companies don’t fix their games. But at the same time most of these companies don’t release their games in such a state that they start getting into legal trouble over the launch of their game.

              https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/01/investors-settle-cyberpunk-2077-lawsuit-with-developer-for-1-85-million/

              https://www.nme.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-investigated-polish-consumer-protection-agency-2855205

              Cyberpunk was such a massive disaster that they didn’t really have much choice other than to finish working on their game. To repair the massive hit to their PR as well as other issues such as the class action and the whole debacle with Sony kicking the game of the PS Store.

              Even though it took a while, they still delivered the game they promised to their buyers.

              Yes, it’s good that they stuck with the game and did more than the bare minimum to bring it to a better state. But it’s not exactly something to praise them over. It took them ~2 years to bring the game to a state that it should have been in at launch. Instead of launching the game in a finished state, they knowingly dropped the game in an unfinished state. They also put out a review embargo preventing reviewers from informing the consumer about said issues, they actively worked to mislead the consumer about the state of their game.

              What CDPR did is absolutely not excusable under any circumstances.

              Their next projects should absolutely be scrutinised until they prove that they have learned from their mistakes.

            • I would argue No Man’s Sky started the trend of “release now fix later” but I suppose they are not a big AAA studio. I suppose CDPR wasn’t really considered as AAA until the release of Witcher 3.

  • It’s sad how consumers have zero rights when it comes to digital content. Companies can retroactively make changes, removing content legitimately bought by consumers with no repercussions. I get “not owning” but for a company to collect money for services provided and not actually provide those services will never not astound me.

  •  hardy   ( @Hardy@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    19
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I wish people were THAT passionate about REAL life/world problems/ injustices and make fun of the real people in power, who allow Ubisoft to do such things

  • Meanwhile someone somewhere is having issues with steam taking too much profit. Do note that even if a game is DELISTED from steam, you still can download the game on steam. Of course it is a different story with license revocation and that is a whole different can of worms. I don’t even know if steam allows the publisher to revoke a license for a game that the player already paid for just because the game is not supported anymore (a different case with breaking ToS/EULA).

  • Thats exactly why i only buy from gog now, and steam only when it comes to multiplayer games.

    I bought mass effect collection on the ea store 'cause it have 45% discount when it came out, only for me to find out a year later a silent notification about a game which has being revoked from my library. Reason? Ur guess is as good as mine. Tried to contact ea support, the answer? take it or lose all ur other games too (bf1, bf5 worse purchase ever, and plants vs zombies because they gift it to me). So i told them to go f themselfs and now i can’t play neither mass effect nor bf1.

    So yeah, fuck that shit about they “lending” us a license, its either mine or it belongs to those who navigate the sea.

  • Ubisoft has been trash for a long time now. It’s a shame that they control some good IP, but the company’s too far gone to ever be trustworthy. Save your time and money and just play something else imo.