The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games

What people said

boltzmann-brain · 2024-09 · Recommendation

The [recent CA legislation]( [LINK] ) brought back the topic of Stop Killing Games which is an ongoing campaign to pass laws similar to the CA ban and much more. If you want a very short exposition of what Stop Killing Games is, here's a ~1 minute video: [LINK] Ross Scott is best known for his youtube series "Freeman's Mind" where he plays Half-Life and narrates what Gordon Freeman must be thinking, with a lot of deeply philosophical considerations. It's a staple of YouTube. He's also been running a series called "Dead Game News" and that's how Stop Killing Games was born. The other organizer, Damian, is a real-deal neckbeard dev and has pretty much done it all from BASIC on 8-bit micros to theorem provers and from video games to cryptography audits. Here's the original intro to Stop Killing Games by Ross: [VIDEO] And here's a subsequent FAQ: [LINK] [Related discussion]( [LINK] ) P.S. had to edit the title a tiny bit as it was a few chars over limit.

Read the original HN comment ↗

worble · 2024-08 · Recommendation

For extra context, you can watch Ross Scott's videos about his campaign to stop games being killed. Original video with all the different avenues he's trying: [VIDEO] The one specifically about this initiative: [LINK] He's done smaller update videos on how it's been progressing on his channel if you want additional info.

Read the original HN comment ↗

sph · 2024-04 · Recommendation

This is a campaign to stop game publishers from turning off and rendering their games-as-a-service which people might have paid for completely inaccessible. The goal is to contact as many consumer agencies worldwide until we have some solid legislation that forces game companies to patch or release their backend, so that paying users can keep playing the game indefinitely after the publishers decide to pull the plug. Games-as-a-service are an increasingly common practice that puts an expiration date to games that are sold at full price, and many users are totally unaware that after a few years the game they have paid for is basically worthless. There is no technological reason this is the case, but pure greed by publishers. Many of today's GaaS are single-player games that have no business at all being online-only. A studio might choose this publishing strategy to extract as much money from consumers, to milk the playerbase with a monthly subscription and killing games when a sequel is announced. There is no law today stopping companies from doing so. We can play games from the 1970s, we can play multiplayer games from the 1990s but many others not even a decade old now are lost forevermore. This is unacceptable. --- Companion video by the author, Ross Scott: "The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games" - [VIDEO] --- EDIT: it is quite disheartening to see software engineers in this forum defending the practice and saying it is impossible to patch an online-

Read the original HN comment ↗