6 ms·

> many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only be

by gryn 1y ago

> many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only because the devs thought it would give them more control. seems like 'video games europe' is gearing up to lobby/influence the lawmakers to distort this initiative. the bare minimum would be to ban these kind of things from describing themselves as products instead of a service in their marketing. no "Buy" or "Purchase", instead "Rent" or "Lease" possibly with a stated minimum guaranteed time online / expiration date. EDIT: reminder, if you're from the EU and over the age of 18 it's still a good idea to sign the petition even though it passed the threshold since there could be invalid signatures (bots, underage people, etc ...) if the valid signatures are below the threshold after the verification is done this petition will get dropped.

PaulKeeble 1y ago
The game that kicked this particular petition off was The Crew, a game that you could happily play single player which Ubisoft made always online purely for DRM reasons its a prime example of the abuse of power that legislators should be doing something ab0out.
- robertlagrant 1y ago
  This isn't exactly an abuse of power - you can just not buy it. UbiSoft has transformed itself into a terrible, bloated company and it probably die soon, but the better way to do this is to have industry standards similar to PEGI that describe the game's future support, not to hit them with EU-specific regulations.
  - blargey 1y ago
    "Let the problem fester until the negative externalities build up so much it overcomes the coordination problem and companies are subject to the same coercion (but through 'market forces' so it's good), one day, eventually, maybe" isn't a meaningful argument against legislation.
    - soulofmischief 1y ago
      Excellent summary of our current pseudocapitalist hellscape. How do we stop this ride when even the meta is a coordination problem.
      - redeeman 1y ago
        and yet it would be solved overnight if the consumers just stopped buying what they evidently dislike so much
        badsectoracula 1y ago
        The problem is that these consumers realize they'd dislike some things of a product long after buying it (and often it isn't the entire product that is a problem, so someone might still dislike a lot some aspect of a product while liking another aspect of it). And others may not even realize the negative issues at all but still they create network effects that drag other consumers along the ride anyway, regardless of if they like it or not.
  - m463 1y ago
    Arguments like this are not very powerful. It seems like "abstinence is a birth control method" that said, more occurrences of this situation might make your argument more powerful over time.
    - pjerem 1y ago
      That’s the American/capitalist thinking : the market should sort itself out against bad actors.
      - wkat4242 1y ago
        Yeah and it doesn't work because the market isn't really free. Becoming a AAA game publisher requires so much money that has so many strings attached that there is no concept of a real free market. Personally I don't believe a real free market can exist anyway. There always has to be a balance between socialism and capitalism. All the big publishers are bound by these strings such as the wish for more recurring revenue. Hence the microtransactions and online models. You can't really avoid those.
        pjerem 1y ago
        > Personally I don't believe a real free market can exist anyway. There always has to be a balance between socialism and capitalism. I 100% share this but I can’t understand how even the most capitalist (ideologically) person in the world would not want to create rules to at least avoid actors to become too big. Monopolies are a bug of the capitalism and they break it from the inside. When monopolies aren’t kept at bay, you aren’t even in capitalism anymore.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > I 100% share this but I can’t understand how even the most capitalist (ideologically) person in the world would not want to create rules to at least avoid actors to become too big. This is definitely true. I don't know if this is true, but my instinct is that it's much harder to create a monopoly if you don't have a government willing to write rules to enforce your existing advantages.
  - Hamuko 1y ago
    >you can just not buy it Did Ubisoft clearly advertise the fact that the game would stop functioning entirely in the future when it was selling it?
    - robertlagrant 1y ago
      Hence: > the better way to do this is to have industry standards similar to PEGI that describe the game's future support, not to hit them with EU-specific regulations.
      - antonkochubey 1y ago
        Coincidentally EU regulations are quite good at creating new industry standards
  - wkat4242 1y ago
    > This isn't exactly an abuse of power - you can just not buy it. This is the EU. We don't believe the market fixes everything. As an EU citizen I really applaud the restrictions on bad business practices of tech companies. A lot of those are US-based but they'll have to play by our rules if they want to operate here.
ykonstant 1y ago
OK, I signed it. hopefully I entered the correct postal code for my address; I always have to look up the code online.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Levitating 1y ago
>> many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only > that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only because the devs thought it would give them more control. I think the criticism isn't centered around single player games at all, but rather MMORPGs and the likes.
maccard 1y ago
> that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only because the devs thought it would give them more control. That’s asking developers to make different games. That’s not the same thing as “stop shitting down games like the crew”
m463 1y ago
> The bare minimum would be to ban these kind of things from describing themselves as products instead of a service. I don't know if amazon kindle books "you are getting a license" wording has affected anything. But what if you can't call them "games" anymore? Call it "time-limited entertainment"?

by gryn 1y ago

PaulKeeble 1y ago

The game that kicked this particular petition off was The Crew, a game that you could happily play single player which Ubisoft made always online purely for DRM reasons its a prime example of the abuse of power that legislators should be doing something ab0out.

robertlagrant 1y ago
This isn't exactly an abuse of power - you can just not buy it. UbiSoft has transformed itself into a terrible, bloated company and it probably die soon, but the better way to do this is to have industry standards similar to PEGI that describe the game's future support, not to hit them with EU-specific regulations.
- blargey 1y ago
  "Let the problem fester until the negative externalities build up so much it overcomes the coordination problem and companies are subject to the same coercion (but through 'market forces' so it's good), one day, eventually, maybe" isn't a meaningful argument against legislation.
  - soulofmischief 1y ago
    Excellent summary of our current pseudocapitalist hellscape. How do we stop this ride when even the meta is a coordination problem.
    - redeeman 1y ago
      and yet it would be solved overnight if the consumers just stopped buying what they evidently dislike so much
      - badsectoracula 1y ago
        The problem is that these consumers realize they'd dislike some things of a product long after buying it (and often it isn't the entire product that is a problem, so someone might still dislike a lot some aspect of a product while liking another aspect of it). And others may not even realize the negative issues at all but still they create network effects that drag other consumers along the ride anyway, regardless of if they like it or not.
- m463 1y ago
  Arguments like this are not very powerful. It seems like "abstinence is a birth control method" that said, more occurrences of this situation might make your argument more powerful over time.
  - pjerem 1y ago
    That’s the American/capitalist thinking : the market should sort itself out against bad actors.
    - wkat4242 1y ago
      Yeah and it doesn't work because the market isn't really free. Becoming a AAA game publisher requires so much money that has so many strings attached that there is no concept of a real free market. Personally I don't believe a real free market can exist anyway. There always has to be a balance between socialism and capitalism. All the big publishers are bound by these strings such as the wish for more recurring revenue. Hence the microtransactions and online models. You can't really avoid those.
      - pjerem 1y ago
        > Personally I don't believe a real free market can exist anyway. There always has to be a balance between socialism and capitalism. I 100% share this but I can’t understand how even the most capitalist (ideologically) person in the world would not want to create rules to at least avoid actors to become too big. Monopolies are a bug of the capitalism and they break it from the inside. When monopolies aren’t kept at bay, you aren’t even in capitalism anymore.
        robertlagrant 1y ago
        > I 100% share this but I can’t understand how even the most capitalist (ideologically) person in the world would not want to create rules to at least avoid actors to become too big. This is definitely true. I don't know if this is true, but my instinct is that it's much harder to create a monopoly if you don't have a government willing to write rules to enforce your existing advantages.
- Hamuko 1y ago
  >you can just not buy it Did Ubisoft clearly advertise the fact that the game would stop functioning entirely in the future when it was selling it?
  - robertlagrant 1y ago
    Hence: > the better way to do this is to have industry standards similar to PEGI that describe the game's future support, not to hit them with EU-specific regulations.
    - antonkochubey 1y ago
      Coincidentally EU regulations are quite good at creating new industry standards
- wkat4242 1y ago
  > This isn't exactly an abuse of power - you can just not buy it. This is the EU. We don't believe the market fixes everything. As an EU citizen I really applaud the restrictions on bad business practices of tech companies. A lot of those are US-based but they'll have to play by our rules if they want to operate here.

ykonstant 1y ago

OK, I signed it. hopefully I entered the correct postal code for my address; I always have to look up the code online.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Levitating 1y ago

>> many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only > that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only because the devs thought it would give them more control. I think the criticism isn't centered around single player games at all, but rather MMORPGs and the likes.

maccard 1y ago

> that's kinda the point, many users don't like having their single player game be online only because the devs thought it would give them more control. That’s asking developers to make different games. That’s not the same thing as “stop shitting down games like the crew”

m463 1y ago

> The bare minimum would be to ban these kind of things from describing themselves as products instead of a service. I don't know if amazon kindle books "you are getting a license" wording has affected anything. But what if you can't call them "games" anymore? Call it "time-limited entertainment"?