As the title suggests, over the last couple of days there’s been an influx of doomer comments over the SKG petition. While it’s fine to disagree, I’m finding it suspicious that there weren’t comments like this posted a week or 2 ago
Welcome to the age of bots.
Enjoy your perpetual unavoidable and even undetectable bias and opinion influencing astroturfing.
Paid for by whoever doesn’t want the things that you want, to influence the people around you to bite at each other’s throats and work against their own interests.
This is one of the biggest reasons Reddit has turned to shit.
Well certain EU politicians support SKG, so yeah it’s making a lot of corpos uncomfy
No, there was definitely some criticism before. Prior to this month, it wouldn’t be unusual to hear people complain about how it would destroy the live service market and was therefore Bad Actually for games and game preservation
The topic getting much more mainstream just brought all those people with.
so far the only legit critique I’ve seen is the uncertainty of what this will mean to indie devs - will they be forced to sign with publishers who can assist with compliance etc., what will compliance actually look like to small shops, etc.
I will say this: the vast majority of game devs feel the same way and want to be able to play the games we paid for as well. there’s just a bit of fear of the unknown for small devs.
There are a handful of concerns from insiders are that somewhat valid, more or less things to be careful about when trying to sort out how to make this fair and reasonable to both sides.
You can ponder how long from shutdown of an online server until the companies IP is no longer worth anything because they have to give up keys to playing it without subs. Same goes for anti-piracy. If A goes under and is bought up by B, how long is that timer before the assets aren’t worth anything anymore.
But all those concepts get thrown the hell out the window when CEOS stick their fingers in their ears and start stamping their feet and shouting “nothing is written in stone” “at some point the service may be discontinued” “Nothing is eternal” when in fact all those problems can be solved. Fucking tone-deaf asshats. Costs you money, sorry nothing is eternal. Costs them money, ohhh noooo can’t do that it might cost money.
When you launch a title with online requirements, you have to escrow or insure the servers for X months and escrow code. When you sell or fold, you then have X months to work out a new buyer or maintainer. At the end of X months. you either keep the game online through other means (sales) or provide server binaries, serverless binaries, or details/code to keep the game running indefinitely.
The implication that “games as a service” is somehow a positive for game preservation is its own kind of illiteracy.
It makes sense if you are completely consumer-brained and only see it as “companies will make less (live service) games if they are forced to support them/let them be community supported”
Isn’t that a win win tho? Less live service games?
The industry is already horrible to work in.
No, remember, it only makes sense if you are consumer-brained
Less live service games = less consooming. Some people literally don’t care about things that are in their best interest, they will happily pay $120 for a game that has pay2win microtransactions and requires a monthly subscription and will also shutdown after 18 months, as long as there is a new one to buy after it.
Well with the support that’s come from mainstream gaming influencers, I hope the opinion has swayed in the opposite direction.
I haven’t seen anyone here against it.
Ross got hit with some anonymous legal complaint so I wouldn’t be surprised with astroturfing.
I’m also an American so I can’t help.
deleted by creator
If he helps bump the gaming industry in a better/healthier direction, he deserves 6 figures imo
I have posts being critical of it from over a year ago. I’d assume most people who have criticism don’t leave a comment because it’ll get you massively downvoted and your inbox will be flooded with angry replies.
I have posts being critical of it from over a year ago.
Not on this account…
Maybe an issue with federation? Heres the link https://lemmy.ca/comment/10932620
Your apparent argument is based off (wilful?) ignorance as to which publishers other than Ubisoft take part in this sort of practice and suggesting a boycott, which fixes nothing…
I can’t see comments there, but I can see there are 16 comments. So yeah, probably.
To be fair, I only checked your posts, not your comments
What are the criticisms? Genuinely curious, have no idea what problems anyone might have with it, other than some quotes from the Ubisoft exec trying to act like implementing user run servers is borderline impossible
I don’t understand why there’s such a hyperfocus on petitions. The only thing being attempted is signing petitions in various countries. Every country has declined to do anything and the last hope is the EU parliament which is being treated like some all or nothing final bet. Why just petitions?
Why not directly put pressure on some of the worst offenders like Ubisoft? Lots of people are saying they’re not buying another Ubisoft game again. Cool! Start an official boycott. People who cant sign the EU petition can sign a boycott promise. It wouldn’t be binding or anything but it could create more solidarity around not purchasing their next big release. Companies care about their bottom line.
You know the hate campaign against piratesoftware? Why not do that to the official Ubisoft account instead? They’re the company that is actually causing the problem. You might not like piratesoftware but he’s not the enemy. He hasn’t killed any of his own games. He didn’t make the decision to shut down the Crew. The offical Ubisoft account shouldn’t get to post a single thing without pressure from the movement. Critical memes should be made about the company and shared on social media. The CEO shouldn’t get to speak to an audience without being booed. Companies cave to negative PR all the time.
These things can be done in addition to the petitions. Personally, I don’t think any petitions are going to bring about the change people are looking for. Governments rarely listen to them and the EU isn’t much better. There are just 10 citizens initiatives that have passed and all their responses have been pretty lack luster. Even if the EU enacts the exact laws people are hoping for, what about everywhere else? The idea seems to be that other countries will get trickle down consumer protections. Americans are pushing Europeans to petition the EU parliament to make law changes hoping it will cause American companies to change how they sell products to Americans. It’s just such an odd strategy to me. Again, it can be done, but there’s no reason more direct action can’t be taken in tandem with the petition.
I get lots of downvotes and angry replies for this take which I’m not sure why. I can only assume people don’t like hearing that petitions are largely useless.
Even if mostly useless, not doing anything is even more useless. At least that petition shows support for changes, which may influence some executive to rethink what they think is acceptable from their userbase.
not doing anything is even more useless.
I agree. I also think if you’re not European, you’ve not done anything. There wasn’t even a petition made in the US so Americans haven’t done a single thing, yet are the most vocal about it. That’s the part that confuses me.
It wouldn’t work in the US because the movement doesn’t have lobbyists, and even if it did they would be massively outspent.
Yes, that’s why I didn’t suggest Americans start a petition. A boycott and/or social media campaign is something Americans could do rather than just hope and wait for Europeans to fix everything.
A social media campaign by an American is exactly what SKG is…
The EU initiative was chosen specifically because it actually has a chance to get traction there, and the market is large enough that it can’t just be ignored by publishers.
“Thoughts and prayers!” 😏
People don’t have problems with SKG. They have problems with reading and/or comprehending its goals.
In my experience about half the posts about it (since the start) have some dummy saying it’s unreasonable for devs to support games forever.
Maybe he meant me? (Thank god karma doesn’t exist here)
I just wrote a comment on how it’s interesting from a philosophical angle that we’re willing to petition the preservation of our distractions but not the thing we need ever more distraction from.
Don’t bother with downvoting, your brothers and sisters already nailed me to the cross, covered me in tar and dragged me through 30km of molten lava.
I haven’t changed my mind.
Not a single person I know has significantly changed their behaviour due to the climate emergency. Imagine if we had this kind of rallying support to put an end to fossil fuels tomorrow.
But that doesn’t directly benefit anyone
deleted by creator
See that sounds like a good counter argument on the surface but it is very flawed.
By just blaming big corporations and pointing the finger, your missing two important factors:
- The big corporations do what they do because of consumers like you and me.
- by shifting responsibility and effectively saying it’s okay to pass the buck, you’re telling people it’s okay to not have this front and center every day.
As much as I like blaming big corporations, we got here (and every point in human history before us) because of what the masses did or neglected to do.
So as inconvenient as it must be, until we pop out of this us vs them, the corporation expected lifespans can be centuries, human’s are finite, and if you keep that whataboutism alive, will get a lot shorter soon.
deleted by creator
The big corporations do what they do because of consumers like you and me
Which is why they run a non stop barrage of advertisemenr campaigns to brainwash the consumer into…
Oh. Wait. No.
That would mean the corporations basically tell the consumers what to do, and they basically listen.
Well, dang, thank god it’s not like they bankroll politicians to the point of individual citizen campaign donors being largely of no effectiveness whatsoever in the vast majority of…
Wait, whats that Jamie?
That is how shit works…?
takes long toke
Fuck.
It’s interesting, but it’s also completely unrelated aside from a larger discussion about what people can spend their time and energy on? The obvious answer is “people can care about more than one thing” and the secondary response is about how this initiative is easy to participate in compared to limiting climate change. If you could just sign an online petition to limit the effects of climate change I am quite certain it would get just as much or more support… so false equivalency/over exaggeration of what “this kind of rallying support” is. And yeah, limiting climate change directly benefits a lot of people. I would love it if the treasured forests near my home weren’t burning to ash more and more every year, disappearing all the places I loved to go.
I think suspicious is the wrong word. Suspicious seems to suggest doubt or a lack of certainty, but the criticism is pretty predictable. Industry forces could afford to ignore it when it looked impossible to get the signatures, but now that the signatures are in the bag they’re having to take a different tactic.
SOME of the criticism is certainly genuine and exactly what it appears to be at face value, but it was inevitable that those doubts would be artificially boosted now.
I mean I was critical of it well before it hit 1.4M signatures. As it ramps up in articles about it, I’d assume an increase in negative sentiment in addition to the positive side. Its not a perfect thing and has different viewpoints, so it makes sense.
And what is your argument against the petition? All it says is that developers need to leave their game in some playable state for those who laid for it, with several options offered as examples
Because as you already stated, that’s all it says. There is a lot of open interpretation to what that means and not all of it refers to big publishers/devs like EA.
For example, indie games like Objects in Space. It was Early Access and ran into technical issues which led to funding issues as they could only work so long on it. Its broken essentially. But it doesn’t matter if the project was beyond their scope of skill or they ran out of money, they would be forced to pay to fix it. This means (and for other indie devs) if not certain their project will succeed, having to block sales in EU. Its potentially the most damaging not to the Ubisoft’s and EA’s, but to the Flat Earth Games, Bugbytes, ColePowered Games, etc. Its asking new indie developers to take on optional risk by releasing in the EU. Remember no where in the petition does it mention live service games. Only just games.
Additionally, the points brought up in the petition needed to be bullet proof. The moment that petition started to get close to 1M, you know publishers started turning gears to block future legislation. The committee of petitions will verify the petition and then refer it for fact finding. The points needed to be concise for the purpose of the fact finding committee. And they needed to be geared towards the EU acting which around a dozen times now have stated that while concerns are valid, it is up to the member nations to propose legislation on this (which is who the major publishers are reported to have approached - not some EU committee).
I’m still salty about EA’s Darkspore (which I might add doesn’t mention on the case that internet access is required to play - which I did not have back in the day), but this petition just feels like minimal impact. I would just like to remind people that advocating SKG may feel good but that rarely equates to doing good.
NOTE: I’ll probably be downvoted to hell on it, but I imagine that is all that will happen. There really is no solid argument against what I’ve said.
For example, indie games like Objects in Space. It was Early Access and ran into technical issues which led to funding issues as they could only work so long on it. Its broken essentially. But it doesn’t matter if the project was beyond their scope of skill or they ran out of money, they would be forced to pay to fix it.
First off, that studio will not be forced to go back and fix their game. Western democratic governments, including the EU, works on the basis that ex post facto laws are invalid. The game is already dead and abandoned from your telling, so there would be no expectation to revive it.
The true solution for studios making new games in the future is to implement exit strategies for multiplayer implementation early on in development. And for single player games, much of that exit strategy is to not require login servers after the game is abandoned.
And to address your specific example, there is one option that is extremely cheap and easy to implement that will certainly pass requirements: release the sorce code. If a EA game is truly so bungled that it’s better off abandoned, studios and publishers will always have the option to fully abandon it.
The moment that petition started to get close to 1M, you know publishers started turning gears to block future legislation.
You’re forgetting this is the EU, it’s significantly less susceptible to industry lobbying than the US. If it wasn’t the GDPR wouldn’t exist and Apple would still be using their proprietary chargers on all new iPhones.
The points needed to be concise for the purpose of the fact finding committee.
Have you not read the petition? I doubt it could be anymore concise in its language while still being possible to pass. You can’t specify exact implementations for games post-abandonment because any single solution will not work for every game.
There really is no solid argument against what I’ve said.
That is a claim befitting an egotistical fool. But at least now you can’t complain that nobody has addressed your concerns, as you claimed in your first comment.
Have you not read the petition? I doubt it could be anymore concise in its language while still being possible to pass.
Require video games sold to remain in a working state when support ends. Require no connections to the publisher after support ends. Not interfere with any business practices while a game is still being supported.That’s it… 3 sentences is not concise. You want to base multi-national law off of 3 sentences. Maybe you should think that through a bit more. If the time can’t be spent to actualy write out constructive goals or at least milestones (which is supposed to help dictate multi-national law) then maybe it should wait shouldn’t it until you can.
You’re forgetting this is the EU, it’s significantly less susceptible to industry lobbying than the US
The VGE (the lobbying group you’re talking about) helped to write the consumer protection, digital content licensing, and age ratings for the EU. They already helped create your laws so that’s not really true is it.
There really is no solid argument against what I’ve said.
Sorry, it still stands.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concise
Concise:
marked by brevity of expression or statement : free from all elaboration and superfluous detail
Aka, “short”.
The petition absolutely is ‘concise’. You just have no idea what that word means.
Using fancy words in an argument only works if you actually know what those words mean.
Not only that, a long petition containing lots of details has its own drawbacks. For one, fewer people will read it and/or understand it, which will make it easier for detractors to confuse the general public with misinformation.
Concise is synonymous with “to the point”. In other words, you don’t have to have lots of words, but they do have to be on target which your 3 sentences are not. So, no, it was correct word use on my part. The fact that you can’t argue the VGE’s involvement or anything other than a word’s definition really doesn’t make you look like you have a strong case here lol. Again, it seems like you have strong feelings, but that doesn’t win court cases. Sorry, not sorry.
The fact that you can’t argue the VGE’s involvement or anything other than a word’s definition really doesn’t make you look like you have a strong case here lol.
So you’re just ignoring all the other points I made earlier? On top of refusing to acknowledge that you don’t know what words you’re using?
Concise is synonymous with “to the point”.
No. The word you are looking for is “succinct”. You’re doubling down harder than PirateGames at this point, and with you including some egotistical snark at the end of every comment and claiming that you can’t possibly be wrong just further demonstrates that you’re a walking example of Dunning-Krüger syndrome with entitlement issues.
Get over yourself. Instead of petulantly whining about a petition on the internet, go and do something actually productive with your life.
I saw it posted on here much before it reached the threshold. I think that before then it was really just a few people running with it, now that it has gotten momentum, more people are sharing and we run in similar circles so it can appear to be overwhelming.
This
So much internet space wasted for mundane thing,
Is This petition even automatic to get to the board of European Commission or European leaders?
If not, then it’s waste of time,
Also I have zero knowledge about European Legislation, to be honest so I maybe in wrong
Pretty sure:
-
Yes, this is a legit thing the EU cares about. However that’s also why I’ve always wondered why they’re soliciting signatures outside the EU…
-
Didn’t it come out that the people who pushed payroll processors to force studios to censor, have been found out to be a bunch of far right religious extremists who definitely aren’t going to stop here.
2: Yes. https://youtu.be/DEflTJjtn5w
There is also a UK petition, which has itself cleared the required threshold. Are those the out-of-EU signatures you mean?
It’s possible there’s multiple out there
I just at one point also wondered what the point of a petition was because I’m a jaded American
-
There’s always been criticism but until now it’s been low level insiders and nobodies like pirate software. And the reasons the publishers and big names that would be affected did SKGs didn’t say or do anything until now because they didn’t want to give it any oxygen. They were smart enough to ignore it because they knew if they said anything it’d rile up a shift storm. Which is exactly what Pirate Software did so he’s probably got a lot of people on both sides pissed at him for being too narcissistic to shut up and let the movement die.
Now that it has enough signatures to be taken seriously you’re going to see the fire hoses open up and a lot of misinformation spread about how the movement would make the gaming industry unviable for the current model. Now is the point where if you are an EU citizen that you write and call your representatives who would consider this issue and help write the law if it did pass on how important it would be to you personally to not allow game companies to revoke your ability to utilize a game you paid for.
pissed at him for being too narcissistic to shut up and let the movement die.
You’ve got a typo there. What you meant to write was “pissed at him for struggling with managing the symptoms from his narcissistic personality disorder diagnosis too much to shut up and let the movement die.”
Does he actually have a diagnosis or are you making that up or assuming things?
He probably doesn’t, and Rakonat shouldn’t have assumed
While I am against using illnesses as slurs, I am 99% sure Elon Musk has NPD even if was never officially diagnosed, which he would avoid for obvious reasons. So I wouldnt count this instance as using an illness as a slur.
If he does have NPD, then we’re back to the issue that the general population needs to start referring to mental disorders with respectful and empathetic language, because this creates a culture of tolerance that will be visible to other people with the disorder.
You know hes using a figure of speech right? Are you protesting the usage of narcissism as an unofficial negative descriptor?
Yes. Just like “retard” and “gay”.
Excuse the ignorance, what’s the difference?
Putting the focus on the personal struggle of managing the symptoms is more empathetic, and using the full name of the diagnosis instead of contracted nouns helps avoid using slurs and/or dehumanising the patent.
Oh go Piss off, Elon
You’re saying Elon Musk is an ally to disabled people?? Are you part of the Nazi cult?
Narcissists are literally destroying our planet and our way of life, but let’s make sure we don’t offend anyone when we mention them.
Your comment has a typo. You meant to write “human beings who developed narcissistic personality disorder due to childhood trauma and now struggle with identity and empathy to the detriment of their own wellbeing as described in the DSM 5 are literally destroying our planet and our way of life”
I cant tell what youre doing
Assuming good intentions from others, fully aware that doing so turns their messages into nonsense.
Your username has a typo
Fucking lmao
and using the full name of the diagnosis instead of contracted nouns helps avoid using slurs and/or dehumanising the patent.
You’ve got a typo there. Unless you can prove that said person was indeed diagnosed with such disability by an appropriate medical authority, let’s not use such term that could either be considered defamation, or at least medical disinformation. (/i)
People say what they intend to say, not what you wish them to. If you believe they are incorrect, no need to be pedantic about it. Just argue why, you’d find out people are way more open to arguments when they do not feel like you are condidering them as idiots.
I don’t think he has NPD at all, I think Rakonat is mistaken to randomly accuse him of mental illness just because they don’t like him.
You know that someone can act like something without being that thing right? You can say someone is narcissistic without them being an actual narcissist.
Like me saying that you’re stupid shouldn’t imply that you’ve had a traumatic brain injury or were born without a frontal lobe.
That’s a false equivalence. “Stupid” isn’t the same as any of the words in the diagnosis “mental retardation” (recently updated to intellectual disability). Your example would work better if you did it like this:
Like me saying that you’re retarded shouldn’t imply that you have mental retardation.
There, that’s a much closer analogy. Do you still stand by your point if we use a proper equivalence?
Are you trying to roleplay as your username?
Lemmy is way too small and insignificant for Industry Plants to be posting on here about SKG, if that is what you are implying.
Lol you are funny. Propaganda doesn’t come here!
Industry shills will show up on a obscure message board that only a handful of people have ever seen. They are everywhere, they are here.
It’s so stupid to think that small message boards are spared; small boards are where they infest with the most enthusiasm; you infiltrate a hundred small boards, one grows into the mainstream and now you have a socmed in your control.
Not only that, you then link to that enthousiastic small board on the big one, as “unbiased source”
People have opinions. No everyone disagreeing with one opinion or other is a paid actor.
I’m all for SKG. I signed it. And I haven’t actually seen much criticism at all here. But if someone were to disagree I won’t automatically think it’s a paid actor, probably just a person with an opinion.
deleted by creator
The smaller a community is, the more influence you have. Propaganda here is much more effective than on Reddit
Are people criticizing it? There is a certain critical mass that when something becomes popular enough a subset of the population will automatically oppose it.
There’s also a threshold where Industry Groups will start astroturfing. Especially when it comes to worker’s rights or consumer’s rights.
It seems like it’s a bit too late now to start astroturfing this though
It’s a fine line because if you do it too early you’ll just add more attention to it. They probably predicted it would stall out.
One year ago, right at the beginning of the petition, PirateSoftware came out misreading the initiative by suggesting the idea the petition was about forcing indie developer to host their server, at their expense, forever and other stupid idea on this line. A fabricated these narrative to act as the typical popular youtubers that say endlessly: “this is st0pid, they are st0pid”. The fabricated narrative confused other popular YouTubers with mixed feelings; and there was very little support. This assured PirateSoftware the first place on the youtube rankings when you search for “stop killing games”, plus had lot of kids brainwashed into thinking " this is st0pid". This kind of criticism never went away completely, the were partially silenced by the very recent roaring as people understood correctly what it was actually about. As SKG keep hitting its milestone the angered roar did lowered, so now you can ear again the “this is st0pid” team
Removed by mod
I mean, if you wanna KYS because people called you shitty for saying you’re going to do a shitty thing. Then maybe…
The same way I can say I want to spray pepper spray on your private parts
That’s assault, dumbass. Swearing is fine; threatening someone is a crime. And because you specifically mention their privates, that makes it sexual assault.
For the sake of semantics, there is a difference between saying “I want to” and “I will” when it comes to threatening, and it’s on par with how saying “in my opinion” can save you from liability due to slander.
“I want to” isn’t a threat in the eyes of the law. Well, American law anyway.
That’s not a-salt, that’s a-pepper!
Because it’s about to affect big money so they sic their bots on it to shape public opinion and stomp it, like everything else.
The bot farms and clout grasping social climbers don’t care about things until they reqch a certain size.
