Saw people talking in comments at several places now, expressing animosity towards them to say the least, always presented as something that everyone seems to know about.
Many people have a misunderstanding of what the Stop Killing Games movement is about. It’s about trying to get governments to pass a law that requires game developers to have a plan in place for when they shut down the servers of online games. In the current gaming landscape, games can be taken offline at any moment for any reason. And when that happens, you’re shit out of luck. The Stop Killing Games movement believes that if/when this happens, the publisher needs to have a plan in place to ensure that those games can continue to be played. This can take on many forms: modifying the game to not require an online connection, or releasing the server binaries so that players can host their own custom servers, or something of that nature. Worst comes worst, if none of this is possible, then the movement demands that it’s made clear in the game’s advertisement that you could lose game functionality when the servers shut down. Essentially, the laws surrounding game licenses are vague, and the movement wants a clarification on what buyers are entitled to when they buy a game.
The primary reason why many people have a misunderstanding of the movement is because a large YouTuber named PirateSoftware made 2 videos where he outright lied about what the movement was about and trashed it. He also made multiple statements on his streams where he purportedly “disproved” the movement, where he continued to lie about the movement and trashed it. His videos and statements were the most commonly viewed coverage on the movement, and this disinformation supposedly severely hampered the momentum of the movement, such that even now, many people still believe that the movement is about forcing publishers to keep their servers online indefinitely (it’s not).
PirateSoftware was a former developer at Blizzard and was making an online game at the time, so some people speculate that the reason he lied about the movement was because he had a vested interest in keeping the current vagueness of the laws. As more and more people attempted to call him out on his disinformation, he doubled down and refused to admit that he gave any sort of incorrect information, even when the information is provably incorrect.
Apparently, PirateSoftware has a history of this sort of behavior and has gotten himself into some previous scandals due to his seeming inability to admit that he was wrong at all. This has led otherwise minor, forgettable mistakes to balloon into giant controversies.
Taken together with this recent controversy with Stop Killing Games, his reputation has taken a significant nosedive and many people now believe that he’s a narcissist who is willing to take down the movement for the sole purpose that he wants to be seen as the smartest guy in the room.
From an interview on HealthyGamerGG with Thor. I think he actually has inability to admit to any wrongdoing. He always needs to be right and will double down. He displays very narcissistic behaviour that keeps fueling the fire of hate.
Small note: For the end of life. They don’t have to release all server binaries. Just the API documentation and some binaries (without the libraries that they can’t share) would be more than enough. (Basically extremely minimal additional work for the developer)
Alternatively, there should be visible disclaimer next to the price (We promise the game is playable until xxx). So the consumer would be informed that what they are “buying” is temporary.
Leaving this here for other people who maybe could get a bad impression about putting extra work for developers that could discriminate against indies.
Thank you for the answer! I just came back home to all the answers, yours strikes me as the best summary of the situation. I had signed the petition myself a while ago, but after that, never looked into further coverage, so all this whizzed right past me. Seems like, no matter if he genuinely misunderstood it or maliciously misrepresented it - he handled the situation pretty horribly overall. Explains the hate I have been seeing.
What did you really expect him to do, dude? He had no mana. What was he supposed to do?
*casts spell on the boss that the boss is immune to
Runs away
I have no mana
*casts a shield spell that helps nobody, not even himself, because he ran away"
People with planet-sized egos really need to stick to DPS roles.
For anyone who didn’t know, Thor’s (the guy himself who is behind PirateSoftware) claim to fame is that his dad worked at Blizzard.
His dad is also the real world inspiration behind the South Park WoW guy:
To loosely quote Thor
“No that character wasn’t inspired by my dad. That is my dad. Like that’s his apartment.”
Edit: source
is there confirmation on this? given how much Pirat has been caught lying is rather hear it from someone else.
South Park WoW guy got laid at least once. I guess there’s hope for everyone.
Corporate propagandists have infiltrated so much of the discourse it’s almost impossible to make any positive change. Eat the rich.
He’s a youtuber who is a known game dev.
And he’s pointed out the obvious issue that you can’t just demand companies keep servers up and running, if you legally mandate servers can’t be turned off then companies would stop releasing online games because that’s stupid.
It often costs millions of dollars a year to keep servers up and running. If they are causing the company to lose money, then yeah obviously they’re gonna turn em off.
Only naive, entitled gamers would demand such a wild thing. It’s not going to get past any courts
Thankyou for giving a perfect example as to why we hate pirate software. Because of his bullshit, this is what you think the Stop Killing Games movement is about.
Maybe try to not get your opinions on such things from narcissistic youtubers.
It skirts around the issue in its wording, but the proposal in actual real life practice is, indeed, effectively demanding this.
The proposal doesn’t actually supply any specific solutions to the problem, it’s just stomping its feet and throwing a tantrum about the problem, but literally doesn’t actually give a real solution.
“Waaah, I don’t like it when they do x”
“Okay well, what alternative do you propose?”
“I dunno, I just don’t want them to do that cuz I don’t like it”
Sorry mate but you have to actually genuinely be able to describe a practical solution to the problem if you wanna make any headway. Otherwise it’s just gonna get tossed out as pointless.
Or…
If you indeed try and push something like this through, game devs will just go “okay fuck it, you don’t get anything at all then because you demanded something functionally impossible from us, byeeeee” and congrats now you killed your local game dev industry, good job :)
That’s kind of the biggest problem with this whole ordeal. The people who are talking about it aren’t capable of reading the petition, the petition isn’t asking for that. Same problem we have with near every controversy.
Only naive, entitled gamers would demand such a wild thing. It’s not going to get past any courts
Which is why the SKG campaign is specifically not demanding that. Pirate Software has misrepresented the stance of the SKG campaign consistently in his videos. Seriously.
I read the proposal.
As a software developer, yes you are 100% asking that, up to the limit of “within feasability”
And guess what, 100% of the time the answer will just be “no, its not feasible, fuck off” by every publisher ever, so its a total waste of time.
There’s no feasible/safe/secure way to hand off your entire application stack for people to run locally, you just have to get over it. The publisher isn’t going to give you any kind of access to even an old copy of their auth servers, and basically every “phone home” video game ever uses an auth server, so you are already dead on arrival with this sort of requirement.
There’s no way to decouple off from the auth server when the entire online functionality is deep rooted in the concept of you having an account to auth with.
I’m a software developer too, funny that.
I have also read the proposal. They ask that if it is not feasible, that publishers put an expiration date on their products, to clarify that the “game purchase” is actually the purchase of a limited-time license that is not guaranteed to continue working. The current practices are deceptive.
So firstly, that’s extremely easy to achieve, no more onerous than a decent warranty (or even a disclaimer that there is no warranty and it’s never guaranteed to work), but also, there are third party hosting companies that game publishers could hand off hosting duties to without open-sourcing, creating a final “single player only” patch, or otherwise creating a gentler off-ramp to allow the community to continue to maintain games on their own dime.
Lol, maybe learn about the movement, dork. This is absolutely not what’s being demanded.
I am very aware of it, and I’ve read the proposal.
This is absolutely not what’s being demanded.
It is 100% what is being demanded, the proposal says:
This practice deprives European citizens of their property by making it so that they lose access to their product an indeterminate/arbitrary amount of time after the point of sale. We wish to see this remedied, at the core of this Initiative.
The ONLY way to do this is everything aformentioned. It’s indirect in how it’s asking for it, but in real life practice the only way the proposal actually gets what it wants, is by either:
A: Demanding (foolishly) that the game devs keep the servers up and running (not happening, get over it)
B: Demanding (even more foolishly) that the game devs release a copy of all the necessary backend technology for self hosting, which you can’t demand because it’s proprietary and some of it may still be in use, so it’s a security and business risk to expose that sort of stuff, so no business will ever be able to feasibly do that.
Sorry but no, it’s a foolish demand.
Oh, you’re a complete idiot. That explains a lot…
He’s a game developer and Twitch streamer (game dev and playing) who’s become very popular in the last few years.
The latest pile-on against him is due to him having some reservations about the wording and intent of the petition/movement and, because we’re currently in a era where False Dichotomy is king: anything other than 100% unquestioning support is treated as 100% unequivocal opposition, and vice versa. 😒
My understanding is that he thinks it’s a good idea in principle (as do I), but games are no longer simply compiled with only the occasional update or patch, but multi-server online complex systems with a lot of moving parts. Of you’re going to legislate immortality on games, then you’re going to need to make your argument for it clear and robust, who has responsibility for what, how deprecating technology is handled, and so on.
Hmm, I would like to add on a couple of points to you reply (against your reply, now that I reread it):
- I feel that he really was 100 percent in opposition against the movement, no?
- About the movement, the creator of the movement also agrees that the movement can most probably not be applied to current games today, as it can be unfeasible for the exact same points you say, he wants it to be applied to future games being developed, by having the end of life of games be considered right from the beginning of games.
- Moreover, about the legislative part of it, doesn’t a petition not need to deal with the exact legal wording? I belived petitions to be more like “hey, this is what the idea is, and this many people support it”. More like a letter to like actual law makers that this is a problem, and we need laws regarding this problem. Then the clear and robust arguments for each of the (very valid, of course!) problems and caveats you mention will need to be clearly articulated by them.
The latest pile-on against him is due to him having some reservations about the wording and intent of the petition/movement and, because we’re currently in a era where False Dichotomy is king: anything other than 100% unquestioning support is treated as 100% unequivocal opposition, and vice versa. 😒
His video’s thumbnail is literally him throwing the petition into a dumpster. If we were not meant to see him as 100% in opposition, that’s kind of on him TBH. He certainly communicates that way.
Of you’re going to legislate immortality on games, then you’re going to need to make your argument for it clear and robust, who has responsibility for what, how deprecating technology is handled, and so on.
Missing the point, as it’s not a piece of legislation, it’s a petition. Nobody expects it to be turned directly into law, but for the successful petition to start a process between various interest groups ultimately resulting in a law that’s a compromise. Of course, if you tell people not to sign the petition, that process will never start in the first place.
The Stop Killing games campaign is an EU petition to prevent game developers from making games that people bought unplayable, for example by turning off the servers of always-online games.
Pirate Software is a youtuber and game developer who made several videos criticizing the campaign. He thinks it’s unreasonable to expect game developers to do this and also asserts that people who purchase games don’t own them. His videos supposedly had a measurable negative impact on the petition, which at this point looks like it might fail. Combined with the fact that he often acted quite rude and arrogant towards supporters of the campaign, he is now quite unpopular among them.
Beyond rude and arrogant IMO. He misunderstood and misrepresented the SKG campaign and, when called out on this, refused to engage or discuss it further.
