• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 hours ago

    There are, it may surprise you to learn, different types of game that have online connectivity for different reasons. And the appropriate EOL response may differ across those games.

    “Live-service” games where the main gameplay is singleplayer but an online connection is required so they can enforce achievements and upgrades (…and “anti-piracy” bs) may be best served by simply removing the online component so it can all be done locally.

    Online competitive games can be switched to a direct connection mode.

    MMOs and other games with large numbers of users and a persistent online server can be run on fan-operated servers, so long as (a) the server binary is made available, and (b) the client is modified to allow changing settings to choose a server to connect to (it could be something as simple as a command-line flag with no UI if the devs are being really cheap).

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You guys…

      I picked an actual “online only” example for a reason. Yet everyone is jumping around talking about other things.

      Turning a battle royal into a lan only game sounds like the solution I was expecting in my replies. And then yeah, you can even route that over the internet.

      But that’s not changing the design, really. It’s providing the infrastructure needed to run it, even if it’s lan only, and would need more to run it over the internet.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        But that’s not changing the design, really

        Depends on what one means by “change the design”. It doesn’t make a fundamental change to the deeper architecture of the game, no. But it does require some relatively superficial changes, which are themselves a design problem of sorts.