6 ms·

Original notice from the government: https://web.archive.org/web/20210830120201/http://www.nppa.gov.cn/nppa/contents/279/98792.shtml https://web.archive.org/web

by lnyng 5y ago

Original notice from the government: https://web.archive.org/web/20210830120201/http://www.nppa.gov.cn/nppa/contents/279/98792.shtml https://web.archive.org/web/20210830120201/http://www.nppa.g... Google translation of the first entry: > Strictly limit the time for providing online game services to minors. Since the implementation of this notice, all online game companies can only provide minors with one-hour online game services from 20 to 21:00 on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and legal holidays. At other times, it is not allowed to provide online game services to minors in any form.

mlillie 5y ago
Is the original article not a major journalistic misstep then? Nowhere does it clarify that this only applies to online gaming.
- lnyng 5y ago
  I wonder if the journey article author didn’t think online game differs much with general games.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  Yes, it's a very major mistake.
- moulei 5y ago
  I found some government documents to support my view that all games available on the Internet are "online games" in the eyes of the Chinese government http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2010-06/22/content_1633935.htm http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2010-06/22/content_1633935.htm translated form deepl: "The online game referred to in this method refers to the software program and information data composition, through the Internet, mobile communication networks and other information networks to provide game products and services. Online game online operation refers to the business behavior of providing game products and services to the public through information networks using user systems or fee-based systems. Online game virtual currency refers to the virtual exchange tool issued by online game operation unit and purchased directly or indirectly by online game users using legal tender in a certain proportion, existing outside the game program, stored in the server in the form of electromagnetic records and expressed in specific digital units."
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    Well no, that doesn't follow such an interpretation. You only provide a single player offline game once. And you don't provide any service over information networks outside of the download and updates.
hjek 5y ago
So it's not just 3 hours per week, it's three specific hours a week, but also only for online games services. It's interesting that the law covers the service, not the client. Now, I wonder what qualifies as an online game service. If I play correspondence chess over email, would the email host be running an online game service? If someone modifies the Battle of Wesnoth network code to run over IRC messages, would the IRC host be running an online game service? (What about decentralized network game protocols?) Lots of legal grey areas to explore, like with Phil Zimmerman putting the PGP code in bookform. I'm sure you could find a way to game online without relying on an online game service.
- lnyng 5y ago
  I believe this all comes down to enforcement, which is grey in the first place. It also matters if the game got (maliciously) reported to enforcement agents.
- sushid 5y ago
  This is a such a classic HN comment: 1. Law does x 2. HN commenter: what about x+y? what about x-1? The answer to your decentralized chess is that no one would care if it broke the rules or not unless millions of people were hopelessly addicted to it and it warranted a second look. Your average Zoomer is not interested in decentralized chess or any other gaming service that requires only an intermittent internet connection. I can see local network mobile MOBAs becoming a thing but I'm sure workarounds like that would be eventually squashed as well.
  - eunos 5y ago
    Yes the target should violations occur is game company. Not the parents, or youths.
  - hjek 5y ago
    > This is a such a classic HN comment: Thanks! > The answer to your decentralized chess is that no one would care if it broke the rules or not unless millions of people were hopelessly addicted to it and it warranted a second look. Ok, so you'd have a online gaming vacuum for all <18 gamer kids of China. Don't you think someone would make a game or two run over IRC (or SMTP some other protocol) if it meant capturing that entire market? Then it would be millions; and then perhaps authorities would care, and then perhaps herpaps an IRC server could* be "an online gaming platform", which would be interesting and peculiar legally, is what I'm saying. (What really distinguishes / categorizes something as a game network protocol as distinct from written human language, legally..?)
lostmsu 5y ago
This will not work well for people with multiple kids. Also, imagine influx of games for services to handle.
- kaibee 5y ago
  > This will not work well for people with multiple kids. Ah, fortunately they planned for that way ahead of time.
  - teitoklien 5y ago
    Damn
TooKool4This 5y ago
I wonder if this will encourage a renaissance in China of LAN play, more P2P protocols for online gaming, and informal game servers run by people you know (rather than the game publisher). Sounds like it could be kinda fun (nostalgia for me)
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
  Yes, I believe playing games with people in the same physical space is fundamentally different than sitting in a room by yourself playing with people online. I look back fondly upon the times in my childhood where we rigged up LAN parties, played console games on a couch or sitting on the carpet, or Pokemon on our Gameboys together roaming around the outdoors. I don't look back very fondly upon the days when I grinded playing online PC games in a room alone, even though I had a headset and a chat box - that feels more like wasted time. It's purely personal of course, and I know people who feel differently, but if gaming takes a step back toward anchoring itself in the physical realm, I'm all for it. The arcade heydays of the 80s sound awesome.

by lnyng 5y ago

mlillie 5y ago

Is the original article not a major journalistic misstep then? Nowhere does it clarify that this only applies to online gaming.

lnyng 5y ago
I wonder if the journey article author didn’t think online game differs much with general games.
sudosysgen 5y ago
Yes, it's a very major mistake.
moulei 5y ago
I found some government documents to support my view that all games available on the Internet are "online games" in the eyes of the Chinese government http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2010-06/22/content_1633935.htm http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2010-06/22/content_1633935.htm translated form deepl: "The online game referred to in this method refers to the software program and information data composition, through the Internet, mobile communication networks and other information networks to provide game products and services. Online game online operation refers to the business behavior of providing game products and services to the public through information networks using user systems or fee-based systems. Online game virtual currency refers to the virtual exchange tool issued by online game operation unit and purchased directly or indirectly by online game users using legal tender in a certain proportion, existing outside the game program, stored in the server in the form of electromagnetic records and expressed in specific digital units."
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  Well no, that doesn't follow such an interpretation. You only provide a single player offline game once. And you don't provide any service over information networks outside of the download and updates.

hjek 5y ago

So it's not just 3 hours per week, it's three specific hours a week, but also only for online games services. It's interesting that the law covers the service, not the client. Now, I wonder what qualifies as an online game service. If I play correspondence chess over email, would the email host be running an online game service? If someone modifies the Battle of Wesnoth network code to run over IRC messages, would the IRC host be running an online game service? (What about decentralized network game protocols?) Lots of legal grey areas to explore, like with Phil Zimmerman putting the PGP code in bookform. I'm sure you could find a way to game online without relying on an online game service.

lnyng 5y ago
I believe this all comes down to enforcement, which is grey in the first place. It also matters if the game got (maliciously) reported to enforcement agents.
sushid 5y ago
This is a such a classic HN comment: 1. Law does x 2. HN commenter: what about x+y? what about x-1? The answer to your decentralized chess is that no one would care if it broke the rules or not unless millions of people were hopelessly addicted to it and it warranted a second look. Your average Zoomer is not interested in decentralized chess or any other gaming service that requires only an intermittent internet connection. I can see local network mobile MOBAs becoming a thing but I'm sure workarounds like that would be eventually squashed as well.
- eunos 5y ago
  Yes the target should violations occur is game company. Not the parents, or youths.
- hjek 5y ago
  > This is a such a classic HN comment: Thanks! > The answer to your decentralized chess is that no one would care if it broke the rules or not unless millions of people were hopelessly addicted to it and it warranted a second look. Ok, so you'd have a online gaming vacuum for all <18 gamer kids of China. Don't you think someone would make a game or two run over IRC (or SMTP some other protocol) if it meant capturing that entire market? Then it would be millions; and then perhaps authorities would care, and then perhaps herpaps an IRC server could* be "an online gaming platform", which would be interesting and peculiar legally, is what I'm saying. (What really distinguishes / categorizes something as a game network protocol as distinct from written human language, legally..?)

lostmsu 5y ago

This will not work well for people with multiple kids. Also, imagine influx of games for services to handle.

kaibee 5y ago
> This will not work well for people with multiple kids. Ah, fortunately they planned for that way ahead of time.
- teitoklien 5y ago
  Damn

TooKool4This 5y ago

I wonder if this will encourage a renaissance in China of LAN play, more P2P protocols for online gaming, and informal game servers run by people you know (rather than the game publisher). Sounds like it could be kinda fun (nostalgia for me)

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
Yes, I believe playing games with people in the same physical space is fundamentally different than sitting in a room by yourself playing with people online. I look back fondly upon the times in my childhood where we rigged up LAN parties, played console games on a couch or sitting on the carpet, or Pokemon on our Gameboys together roaming around the outdoors. I don't look back very fondly upon the days when I grinded playing online PC games in a room alone, even though I had a headset and a chat box - that feels more like wasted time. It's purely personal of course, and I know people who feel differently, but if gaming takes a step back toward anchoring itself in the physical realm, I'm all for it. The arcade heydays of the 80s sound awesome.