this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025

251 points (97.4% liked)

Games

39021 readers

735 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

!gaming@Lemmy.world: Our sister community, focused on PC and console gaming. Meme are allowed.
!photomode@feddit.uk: For all your screenshots needs, to share your love for games graphics.
!vgmusic@lemmy.world: A community to share your love for video games music

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

!JeuxVideo@jlai.lu: French

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Dremor@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Dremor@jlai.lu

modfxomt@lemmy.world

251

Stop Killing Games Petition to UK Relaunched (petition.parliament.uk)

submitted 4 months ago by Essence_of_Meh@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The original petition failed due to two issues:

UK government misinterpreted what the petition is about and didn't really answered to what was being asked
early general elections canceled all ongoing petitions at the time

This attempt has a new, reworded petition to, hopefully, make it simple and clear enough to avoid any additional problems.

There are two thresholds for UK petitions:

10 000 signatures: official government response
100 000 signatures: petition will be considered for debate in Parliament

Here is a video from Ross Scott (the main organizer of the Stop Killing Games initiative) about this update.

all 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 47 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Can't wait for PirateGames to shit on this one too and be a great big Blizzard shill again.

[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 30 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Dude you don't get it, the AAA devs will literally go bankrupt if they have to waste a fraction of their profits to do the bare minimum!!! Why won't anyone think of the children?????

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's the funny thing about all of this it wouldn't cost the company a single penny. All they'd have to do is open source their code that's it.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

That too would have costs associated with it. Nothing is free when you do it at work, but it's reasonable to impose those kinds of costs to ensure the products they make meet a base standard.

[–] LambdaRX@sh.itjust.works 43 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you haven't, You can also vote on european one, it has 40% of required signatures.

[–] Aielman15@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I wish some big-name YT/Twitch personality helped raise awareness for the petition. It's ending in a few months and if nothing changes, I don't see it reaching the required signatures in time.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Does Ross/Accursed Farms, the person who started this movement, not count?

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 months ago

It's good, he's the originator, but the reach in Europe is not that great and there have only been a few multilingual channels that have picked it up.

[+] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca -17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It's not going to get the signatures because the average person does not care about this. I play a lot of games and even I don't care. If you don't like the game, don't buy it. Why does there need to be regulation to stop me from buying it too?

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Interesting how condifently you are talking about the subject even though your comment makes it obvious you have no idea what the petition is about.

[+] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca -9 points 4 months ago (6 children)

The government should update consumer law to prohibit publishers from disabling video games (and related game assets / features) they have already sold without recourse for customers to retain or repair them.

If a company says they're going to disable a video game a year after I purchase it and I won't be able to retain or repair it and I agree to those terms, can I still buy it?

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Not sure what you mean. Companies dont tell you beforehand that they are going to shut games down. They usually dont even know they will, so I dont see how your example holds up here. Maybe you could explain.

This is about companies shutting down games after some time making them unplayable, even for people who already purchased them. Its like if Samsung would remotely lock your TV making you unable to turn it on again because they stopped "supporting" it.

There is simply no way to justify it. Its a symptom of greed, they dont want you to own a product that doesnt generate them revenue anymore.

[–] nogooduser@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Its like if Samsung would remotely lock your TV making you unable to turn it on again because they stopped “supporting” it.

Didn’t Sonos do that with old speakers? I don’t think that it went down well.

[+] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca -9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Companies dont tell you beforehand that they are going to shut games down. They usually dont even know they will, so I dont see how your example holds up here. Maybe you could explain.

But what if they did? Some places have already put laws requiring sellers to inform purchasers if they are selling a licence instead of ownership. If the terms were clear at the point of sale, and I agree to the terms, what's the issue? You're allowed to think it's a bad deal, but why does that mean I'm not allowed to accept it?

Its like if Samsung would remotely lock your TV making you unable to turn it on again because they stopped "supporting" it.

Right. If they explained that at point of sale they would be doing that, and I was alright with it, what's the problem? I understand you wouldn't accept that deal. That's fine. You wouldn't buy that TV. I don't see why I must be prevented from buying it too.

[–] tomi000@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Sure you could require them to inform the user. It would still require a change in law. I would personally stand against it because what you propose is the bare minimum needed to maintain legal status while maximising corporate comfort and minimizing user experience. It would be a law purely made to help companies exploit users.

Companies shouldnt be allowed to take completely absurd counterproductive (in the greater sense) measures just for the 0.01$ higher profit. If companies would behave like people in maintaining a healthy relationship with the law, this wouldnt be a problem. Fact is, many companies do everything in their power to get as close to the fine line separating immoral from illegal as possible to maximize profit (also more often than not straight illegal but hard to prove).

You know about squatters rights? Its the same phenomenon, except imagine 10% of the population doing it. Im pretty sure the law would change in a heartbeat. Companies have no moral compass, no shame or sense of dignity, thats why they need especially strict and explicit laws keeping them in check.

Also, to your last point: You would not be prevented from buying it. You would simply buy it under user friendly conditions. Noone would stop you from just not playing the game after a year if thats what youre concerned about. I dont see why it would have to be shut down for that.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The goal is not to prevent you from agreeing to bad terms, it's to prevent the companies from imposing those bad terms on people.

Would you rather buy a game that you know is going to die in a year, or the same game but that can be played for as long as you want?

Would you rather companies keep making games with a short expiration date, or games that people can keep playing if they so choose?

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Would you rather buy a game that you know is going to die in a year, or the same game but that can be played for as long as you want?

I would rather I get to make that choice instead of it being imposed onto me. You can make your choice. I can make mine.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 3 points 4 months ago

Currently, they don't even give you that choice. They're the ones making that decision. Sure, you can buy it, but you don't get to decide if you want to play their game longer than they want you to.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 4 months ago

No company ever sells games with the disclaimer that they might stop supporting those games at some arbitrary point in the future they sell the games with the understanding that you are purchasing a product that you will own after you give the company the required amount of money.

They are not selling you a limited term license, they are selling you a product. They should not be allowed to then change their minds after the fact without compensating the customer.

[–] CrackedLinuxISO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

Yes. Such a transaction would be legally classified as a service: You pay publisher a one-time fee for access to the right to play their game over a known period of time.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Depends on the territory. The argument is that the practice as it stands now is against current consumer laws in places like the UK. Functionally, even if they were forced to provide this disclaimer, it would still lead to the current state of things being less lucrative and would discourage the practice anyway, which I would still call some kind of a win.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 4 months ago

Even if you just looked at the screenshot it's pretty clear that's not what the petition is about. Could you go away and do literally one seconds worth of research, and then come back and explain why you made such a brainless comment.

[–] addie@feddit.uk 10 points 4 months ago

Identity is a many-layered thing, and I'd never describe myself as British unless very specifically prompted to do so, but I can at least sign that. 5,071 let's go!

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

One of the big problems about the original petition was that it had a focus on gaming. But this is a problem in the entire software industry, and as much as gaming is probably the more serious concern for the majority of people, it is considered by the government to be somewhat unimportant. Corporate software though has a more mature image, and so is more likely to be considered.

Any software that is sold by a company should be open sourced if the company chooses to end support. Either because the company goes out of business or because they just decide it's no longer profitable to continue updating the software, and yes, this does include older versions of iOS.

A rising tide and all that.

[–] Essence_of_Meh@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

These petitions are limited in scope for a reason - this is a small initiative and the goal is to focus on one part of the market which started the whole thing (the initiative, not the software killing issue), as well as to limit the number of big companies that could be affected (the potential opposition).

Sure, ideally this would expand on all software but you have to start somewhere, especially when you're just a bunch of randos with little knowledge about law and no funds to turn it into a serious lobbying movement - one that could both get the political attention and was able to defend its stance from corporations.

[–] punseye@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I just want Blur to be revived. I know modded online servers exist for PC, but it would great to have it on consoles and play 4P splitscreen

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It failed because it was USA, you might have better luck in EU

[–] Essence_of_Meh@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

I don't think there were much if any attempts to make a petition in the US. If I recall correctly, Ross spoke with a lawyer who told him the chances for a positive outcome are close to null which is why he decided to focus on other markets - mainly: Australia, Brazil, Canada, EU, France and UK.

The failed petition mentioned was in UK, just like this one, but was canceled due to early elections. EU petition is still going, with a little bit over 6 months left, while Australian and Canadian ones closed last year. There was also a push to contact the local consumer protection agencies in Australia, France and Germany since they seem to have the tools to look into the issue as well.

[–] Nilz@sopuli.xyz 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I know UK left the EU, but I wasn't aware they had joined USA.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 4 months ago

God, what an awful thought

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

There's actually some truth to that, believe it or not