this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
116 points (100.0% liked)

Games

16920 readers
765 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO
116
Stop Killing Games is a new campaign to stop developers making games unplayable (www.gamingonlinux.com)
submitted 8 months ago by nanoUFO to c/games
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] restingboredface 19 points 8 months ago (3 children)

If studios want to commit to this games as a service model they need to really tighten up their language Don't "sell" games, since they can't be owned by customers. Don't promote replayability if you have no plans to make the game available indefinitely. Sell it like an experience, like going to a theme park or getting a massage, and be crystal clear about how much usage the license purchased will get players, support window, updates and patches included etc.

Studios keep wanting things both ways by saying they want to sell games but then don't let customers use them how they want after purchase, and pull the rug out as if customer should have expected it.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Exactly, and this should be the case in other industries as well. For example:

  • phones - don't lock the bootloader and don't lock to a network if I own it
  • cars - don't give me hardware that requires a software unlock if I own it
  • computers, appliances, etc - don't prevent manufacturers from selling parts to products I own (right to repair)

And so on. If you're going to sell me a product, I should be able to whatever I want with it, whenever I want, with no artificial restrictions or control by the manufacturer or rights holder. This should probably extend to DRM as well, though I'm okay with a lockout period (e.g. DRM will be removed X years after sale, or a contracted full refund).

If companies don't want to actually sell products, they should be honest and lease them.

[–] Quexotic 3 points 8 months ago

...And charge pennies on the dollar!

Or, as soon as the mfgrs stop making parts for my car, I should get a refund of a certain amount of the purchase price of the car.

When my phone goes out of support, I get a refund of %x of the cost. The mfgrs can keep the money in the mean time and earn interest.

Disincentivise planned obsolescence.

load more comments (1 replies)