Dead Game News: Ubisoft / Game Journalism Zeitgeist or Something

[daisekihan]

On 7/18/2022 at 6:49 AM, Ross Scott said:

I'm pretty sure I covered this is in the DGN Lawbreakers episode, but this is an easy one to address. 

 

First off, depending on the game we're talking about, there's no "paying" for servers other than the cost of running a computer.  If you're trying to run an arena shooter with 10 people, one system can handle that easily.  Now if we're talking replicating an MMO, yeah, some costs can emerge, but don't assume you have to fork over a bunch of money just to run a multiplayer game.  In the 90s / early 00s it was as simple as "host game" right in the game menu.  If it's a planned group, the servers don't have to be running 24/7 either.

 

Okay, I thought there was more involved in it. Excuse my ignorance!

[Steve the Pocket]

Ross, I appreciate you calling out the fuck-you-got-mine attitude that a lot of pirates have when it comes to these things. Anyone who has a fuck-you-got-mine attitude about anything, frankly, can go burn in hell. Maybe the real reason the world is in such a mess is because the only people who care and have the resources to do anything about problems would rather spend those resources on solutions that only help themselves.

[Steve the Pocket]

Also, wow, that iPad commercial. Really inspires confidence in Mac customers that the people making their computers envision a future where no one even knows what one is.

[Blizzaga]

On 7/18/2022 at 1:58 AM, daisekihan said:

I'm not saying I agree but if this scenario happened, "but maybe in a couple years when a new game in that series is announced people will go back to the older ones", the companies would argue, "If such a demand appeared we would reopen the servers."

This sort of thing did kind of happen. The PSN stores for the Vita and the PS3 were going to be removed but enough people complained and they are delaying the shutdown. Nintendo also did this with the 3DS except they didn't care and are shutting it down. Not perfectly analogous but similar. If this Ubisoft game death is anything to go by, future incidents may be more popular and companies making that claim that they will put the DLC or multiplayer functionality back in if there is enough demand might get shot down by users. However, it still is the best PR move no matter what to allow users to host their own servers if they want to. Not just PR, but it is the best for the people that bought the game and doesn't break the trust between the user and the publisher. Ross's third point was essentially what I was saying. If people choose to stop playing it, they are absolutely allowed to do that but they should always have the ability to come back to it if/when they want to.

For some extra information, running servers is quite easy and the cost for an individual is not very much since a game server can be hosted remotely on a droplet for not very much per month or hosted locally. A more intensive server might make you more likely to either get a dedicated computer for it or get a droplet, but the cost is still not very much at all and another dedicated computer can also be used for other things. It seems really complicated but in a lot of instances, it really isn't. Which also makes the idea of shutting down servers odd since I know it isn't costly at all. I assume they do it to make users buy the next game to keep playing online since I can't think of any other reason why they would bother. With the PS3 store, it makes less sense since the server is doing even less because file hosting files that have been there for years takes next to nothing.

[Im_CIA]

On 7/18/2022 at 5:40 PM, Steve the Pocket said:

Ross, I appreciate you calling out the fuck-you-got-mine attitude that a lot of pirates have when it comes to these things. Anyone who has a fuck-you-got-mine attitude about anything, frankly, can go burn in hell. .