120
Concord is going offline beginning September 6th (blog.playstation.com)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/gaming@beehaw.org
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Update: players are now throwing themselves off cliffs to grind xp for the platinum trophy https://x.com/realradec/status/1831041419756388429

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 2 years ago (4 children)

As much as I'd like to see this game preserved, I don't think the dev can be held responsible when they're refunding everyone who purchased the game.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    I am fairly, but not 100% certain, that Ross Scott's proposal currently making the rounds in the EU would say that you either have to refund a game (and all in game purchases) when it becomes totally unplayable, or you have to release some kind of way for dedicated fans to be able to least run custom servers and bypass no longer maintained, proprietary, always online verification/anti cheat schtuff.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I believe another alternative would be to make it completely clear that you’re getting a temporary license. You shouldn’t be able to try to make it look like you’re buying a game when you don’t then even own.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    No, no no, that is the current practice and origin of the entire problem.

    If you legally class a game as an ongoing service that is temporary and subject to termination, without recompense, soley by the decision of and according to the terms of the licensor, then they can legally sell you a game for $80 bucks and then shut down the next day.

    If you legally class the game as a good, well you can't sell someone a chair which then has 3 of its legs disappear or collapse (due to no fault of the owner) the next day without that being a scam of a defective product.

    ...

    If you're saying the emphasis should be on raising consumer awareness that they're buying a temporary, revocable and non refundable service...

    Who, other than children, do not know this yet?

    That would not force the industry to actually change their practices.

    It just slaps a big bold 'haha the fuck you isn't even in the fine print anymore' label on a product and makes our cyberpunk dystopia a little bit more obvious, but doesn't achieve any useful goal in terms of altering actual game design/support or consumer rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Who, other than children, do not know this yet?

    Their parents, new/casual games, charity shops that might want to resell, etc.

    It just slaps a big bold 'haha the fuck you isn't even in the fine print anymore' label on a product and makes our cyberpunk dystopia a little bit more obvious, but doesn't achieve any useful goal in terms of altering actual game design/support or consumer rights.

    True, but that would make it slightly easier for offline games, games that allow for private hosting, and games with an end of life plan that would allow it. They would be able to compete more easily if they could be easily identified. That could then incentivise companies to add end of life plans.

    A step in the right direction would be great. Even if it’s a small step.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent