Why the FUCK is it okay for companies to shut down only online games that people paid for without making it playable in...

Why the FUCK is it okay for companies to shut down only online games that people paid for without making it playable in some respect?
How is it legal at all?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw
arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/02/preservation-or-theft-historians-publishers-argue-over-dead-game-servers/
archive.is/p77Sz
youtu.be/kE__YoKNnho
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Why the FUCK is it okay for companies to ban you for saying nigger?

>do harassment

WTF WHY WAS I BANNED FOR HARASSMENT

back to

STOP

KILLING

GAMES

GAMES

what geemu was it?

Why is it acceptable for stories to have an end?

Because they say you're not buying a product, but renting a "license". Which allows them to fuck you over in even more ways.

>call someone faggot
>"oh ho ho, you violated section 2.4 part A of the license agreement!"
>DING DONG BANNU END OF RINE

>e-celebs

"games as a service"

WHY THE FUCK IS IT OK FOR GROWN ADULTS TO LISTEN TO METAL?

Sadly, no company can sustain the gaming servers for a game indefinitly. Sooner or later that MMO you loved to play so much will get shut down, and there's nothing you can do about it. That being said, the companies not allowing private servers and whatnot after the official servers get shut down is a dick move no matter how you look at it, if you have spent money on a game, and the official means to play it are removed, then they should have zero right to prevent people from making fan servers to keep the community going after its demise.

youtube.com/watch?v=9sJUDx7iEJw

>namefag
>prob listens to kpop

kys

back to resetera

Cause you agreed to the Terms of Service which includes morality clauses and non-modification/reuploading of certain/all assets by playing the game.

Why not allow third parties to host their own servers?

Why is it okay for grown men to be so autistic about a genre of music that they have to derail threads not even about it?

t. soyboy

No I only listen to traditional power funk polka

But you're not reuploading any assets. The assets are on the disc you bought. You're just creating a tertiary means with which to access those assets after the primary means has been shutdown.

Isn't somebody looking into legislation that would limit copyright in respect to abandonware?

this specific issue is in fact going to court, since it could be argued is planned obsolescence, which is absolutely illegal

yes

it's practiced everywhere though, just in more subtle ways than "fuck you you don't play anymore"

arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/02/preservation-or-theft-historians-publishers-argue-over-dead-game-servers/

>Why the FUCK is it okay for companies to shut down only online games
>online only games
>online only
>online
>only

>what are private servers
>what are games with only a token connection to the internet that only exists to fuck with people in the future

>arsgaynica
please kill yourself. archive.is/p77Sz

>this retarded user thinks gayming companies created online only games so you can tinker around with it and make private servers
son... i have bad news for you...

...

I don't care if companies kill a game if I personally don't like the game or don't even know what it is.

I'm out of the loop and I can't figure out the context from the image and the replies. What exactly happened?

the guy in the OP has been killing games for years and fled to Poland but the authorities finally caught up to him

I bet he cries about pol and DRUMPF

>mommy mommy pol pol WAAAAAAAAH!

Why are you still posting e-celeb trash?

there should absolutely be a DMCA exception for games that shut down. The server source should become open source. People have paid for that game, they shouldn't be able to just take it away.

>The server source should become open source.
This is the way to go. My friend has been running a Quake 2 server for more than 10 years out of his own pocket.

>not liking e-celeb threads

fuck off back to r*ddit

Implying you can post any song better than this.

youtu.be/kE__YoKNnho

I agree with the DMCA exception but they aren't just saying fuck you and taking it away.
Hosting servers and the bandwidth to and from those servers cost money and when it's no longer worth it financially then it makes sense to shut it off.
People should be allowed to host games on their privately owned servers though. It's a win win. The company doesn't have to pay for the infrastructure and they've sold additional licenses to their game, assuming people continue buying and playing after they've shut off servers.

I feel an almost physical need to mutilate this bugman with a blunt machete.

t. EA

fake news

>Ross
>celeb

Ross feels more like that old friend you used to discuss vidya with than a pretentious e-celeb

>WAAAAAAH SAYING NIGGER IS OK AND IF YOU DISAGREE YOU'RE A SOYBOY WAAAAAH

>People should be allowed to host games on their privately owned servers though. It's a win win. The company doesn't have to pay for the infrastructure and they've sold additional licenses to their game, assuming people continue buying and playing after they've shut off servers.

I wonder if anyone has ever even bothered to asked. Given the way the internet usually works I'd assume rather than contacting the publisher and attempting to work out some sort of server licensing deal people just whine about them not giving the shit away for free instead.

they don't want to give stuff away in case the IP i used in the future or sold

still mad after you got btfo in that thread about internet bill of rights earlier huh

IIRC that when City of Heroes was being shut down, a few rich fans offered to take over the server costs or even buy the license. NCSoft said no because they wanted to use Statesman in Master x Master

Why is this so amazing?

Go on. I must know.

How could planned obsolescence be ilegal in any way? Specialy when you're talking about a service.

What kind of barbaric fief would enforce such a stupid rule?

>How could planned obsolescence be ilegal in any way?
Because making products designed to break is unethical and allowing planned obsolescence in a corporatist economy would make you into even more of a prole slave than you are now

>Because making products designed to break is unethical

That's not what planned obsolescence is. Selling defective products IS illegal.

companies do make products designed to break though. Most modern kitchen appliances are designed to last ~7 years. That's why people looking for an appliance "for life" have to buy older ones.

Unethical does not nessecarily equate illegal, you dip. Planned obsolescence is unethical, but it is in no way illegal, which is why companies still do it, they don't care about ethics, they just care about making money in the best way that the law permits them to.

That's not the same thing as designed to break. That's mostly a result of competitive pricing. In order to keep the RRP low they cut manufacturing costs and that means lower quality components that don't last as long. You can get good shit made to last if you want, it's just going to cost you. It's why a home coffee maker is less than $100 but an industry standard one, i.e. one designed to last, will cost you thousands. Yes, in the old days shit lasted longer but it was also a lot more expensive too.

It's legal to sell equipment engineered with a MTF of 5 years.

It is illegal to sell equipment that is designed to fail at 5 years.

A cheap capacitor is legally different than a timer and a switch that fails effectively the same.

The legal problem comes from dealing with software, you are granted no rights beyond running the client. Anything else needs to be hashed out as fraud, IP or breach of contract.

how can anyone tell the difference though? All it takes is the designer picking one slightly cheaper component that just "happens" to break in 5 years

>namefag
dropped, back to /soc/

I never said it was easy to tell apart, but it's surprising how often you have to tell someone "The ethics board has some problems with sticking a time bomb in the electronics."

doesn't matter if it's a self-destructing device or just a cheap component that's known to fail around that time. Same result.

The difference is intent. A cheap component can be chosen for reasons other than sabotage, a self-destructing one typically cannot.

This is why engineers get the big bucks: If you can match all your parts to the same lifetime, you can squeeze out all the "extra" cost.

If you do the same thing by adding a controlled point of failure, then there's a pretty good case that you've conspired to destroy another's property.

"proper" planned obsolescence is the art of engineering the shit out of the product until it survives a plausible distance past warranty, then fails gracefully: We want funny noises from the motor, not exploding panels.