• I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 months ago

    I wish more people would buy stuff on GOG, although some games there still have some sort of DRM, Kalypso published games come to mind.

    Still, way, way better in terms of ownership than what other platforms offer.

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I thought they had on several occasions dropped games from the store because they had DRM. Which DRM titles does GOG still have?

      Last game I paid good money for was on GOG. Everything added to my steam account in the last few years has either been part of a humble bundle or a freebie from somewhere.

  • NuraShiny [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I can’t wait for Ubisoft to die. Out of the big ones, they seem the most likely to eat shit in the near-ish future.

  • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    6 months ago

    Fully agree with it, but they’re still extremely popular, and people will gladly keep handing over their money.

    For me, I say “Ok” to them wanting us to get used to not owning our content - followed with “Then I’ll pay rental prices. Which means I’m not buying at $60+ dollars, if all I get to do is rent it then I’ll pay <$15 going forward.”

  • Technus@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    114
    ·
    6 months ago

    Ubisoft has done a fantastic job of convincing me to never buy a Ubisoft game ever again.

    Not sure that’s how a company is supposed to work, but they sure seem to think so.

    • Feydaikin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well, they aren’t alone. Blizzard and Activision is on my blacklist. As well as pretty much any studio own by Microsoft at this point… Oh, and Sony! Can’t forget about them.

      The list is long.

  • kinkles@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    Is there a source for Ubisoft wondering why they are a hated company or did you just make that up

  • northendtrooper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    164
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    IMO once you delist a game and shut down servers where people cannot play anymore then it should become open source and not protected IP.

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Full refunds would be reasonable, if they wanted to protect their IP

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Open source is too far, but as part of a shutdown of a game and it’s servers there should be a year long period where the publisher is required to release the game without DRM, including the server software, to all customers.

      I could see it going through Steam, you get a message “Delistment notification: The Crew is being delisted, get your permanent copy now!”

      • Baku@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        I think the company should also be required to clearly state the amount of time they’ll keep supporting the game and will operate the servers for. If they decide to shut them down early, everybody should be given the choice to either receive a full refund or the non DRMd version of the game + the server software like you suggested.

        In general I think all paid games should be required to clearly state the amount of time they’ll keep providing feature updates for, as well as support for new hardware, major bug fixes, and minor bug fixes. Although games that aren’t online and just reach EoL are still playable for quite some time, eventually there’ll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing. That might not happen for 50 years, at which point you probably don’t care, but still. I’d give more leniency to indie Devs and games made as passion projects, though.

        Although obvious once you think about it, I don’t think most people realise or even think of the fact they will eventually not be able to play the game they’re buying. And these mega companies need to stop making games they dump 6 months after launch.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          I get what you mean but that is not feasable, however, if we look back at the old multiplayer experience like in Unreal Tournament 2004, the company runs a master server, and the community runs the game servers.

          The master server just lists the game servers and allows for a server browser. That is WAY less resource intensive and can be run almost indeffinately.

          The master server for UT2004 ran continously for almost 20 years, and when Epic announce it was shutting down, a fan server was created and after a quick edit of the config file you can play UT2004 multiplayer exactly like it was in the past.

          So let’s go back to that model of multiplayer, it requires a bit of skill to set up your own server securely, but you’ll have way more choice and less commitment of resources from the publisher making it available for longer at less cost.

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          eventually there’ll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing.

          I still can play Unreal from 1998 on modern Linux. Faust bless Torvalds and his “never break userspace”.

      • Klear@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        6 months ago

        Worse solution, but I would accept if publishers were forced to clearly display the exact date when the game will stop functioning at the point of purchase and all advertising materials.

        • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          I see what you’re getting at but this would be difficult for a publisher to stick with in the event the game does horribly. Requiring them to keep their word to the date advertised would end up with them only guaranteeing a week, or send ramifications through all industries requiring truth in advertising.

          A middle ground would be simply to legislate that when games require online connectivity for any reason, the appropriate software is released to allow a locally run server to enable online function at the time the company decides to decommission their servers. Then require them to hold these files in an accessible manner for at least as long as the servers had been active for.

          That would be difficult in the event the company goes out of business, but I’m sure this would be a difficult thing to explain to most politicians so maybe not so simple after all.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            If they can’t keep their committed date (or fold entirely), then the source goes open. If every copy happens to get deleted during the bankruptcy, treat it as criminal fraud by the top levels of the company and go after everyone that could have decided to improve backups and other IT methods of avoiding that but didn’t. That’s assuming it was accidental, higher penalties if it can be proven to be deliberate.

            • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              In an ideal world, the penalties you describe are suitable. Though, gaming industry aside, for the executive level of most any corporation, being a scapegoat and handed a golden parachute is the worst case scenario for them leaving. In many cases floating across the street right into another executive position.

              Jail time isn’t a likely outcome. It just isn’t the world we live in, unfortunately.

              • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yeah golden parachutes are such a joke in this society that likes to pretend to be a meritocracy.

                Though on that note, I’d love to see a law that limits golden parachutes to the lowest paid position in the company. Hell, I’d be ok with that being scaled to full time. Not because disgraced executives deserve even that much but because it would give some incentive to increase pay rates across the company. I’ve also long thought that executive compensation should also be limited by some multiple of the lowest pay. And yeah, I’d include stock options and grants in that (for both employee and executive compensation).

                • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Agreed. The whole idea of these huge payouts could be eliminated and replaced with what exists for everyone else - severance pay. Calculated off a regulated minimum formula, based primarily on how long the person served the company.

                  I also agree with you that the top and bottom salaries should have a correlation. The C suite making the salary of a shelf stocker in one day should not happen. I think I could accept that the top gets somewhere around 10 or 20 times higher salary. Even 100x would be an improvement to the way it is now.

                  Like you point out, between stock options and whatever else, an executive salary could be a few hundred thousand, even if their total compensation is tens of millions. In fantasy land it would be nice if, once a company grows to a certain point, say a billion dollars in value, if it were required to convert to an employee owned cooperative entity.

                  It’s a shame things are the way they are. Maybe one day we won’t have politicians that can be bought. That’s a different discussion altogether.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’s better than what Bungie did with Destiny 2… just gutted 1/2 the content from the game, including all the story missions and the first several paid expansions.

    They wanted to attract new players with a smaller download size, but the new players come in and go “WTF is going on?”

    • TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s the most baffling MMO decision I’ve seen, tbh. WoW has plenty of issues but at least they aren’t just deleting the continent of Northrend to save on install space or anything

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        6 months ago

        Bungie’s problem is they don’t really want to make a story based looter shooter, they want a free to play PvP gacha engine.

        • LordGimp@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 months ago

          I would’ve been fine with that if that’s how they launched it. It wasn’t. I stopped when they sunset a bunch of shit the first time in the first game. I figured the second would be more of the same, but sunsetting entire DLCs is nuts.

    • bassomitron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Whoa, wtf? How did I miss that drama, haha holy shit. I definitely remember downloading it a few years ago and being aghast at its absurd size (think it was around 120GB? which nowadays that’s pretty par for the course because fuck optimization). But gutting half your content just to save space… have they not heard of compression? Like what the hell were they thinking haha

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        6 months ago

        They didn’t just remove story missions and quests and things, they removed entire PLANETS from the game. It was crazy!

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    i hate them because they remove anything that makes their games unique and make all their games have the same features until they’re all completely interchangable gray sludge.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      The depressing thing is that this grey sludge is exactly what most people want. It’s the same for any form of entertainment. Pandering to the lowest common denominator is what’s most profitable.

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, the problem is that game publishers are trying to reach the broadest audience possible, which means niche games with unique features and gameplay are dying out. Why bother spending millions of dollars on developing a unique game which might not sell well, when you can churn out another open world lite-RPG with grassy stealth spots and counter/parry based combat which you know will sell well.

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah Baldur’s gate 3 and hell divers are both doing terribly

          Minecraft is pretty unique, or was until its imitators appeared and is the most popular game (or is it second to Tetris?)

  • Glide@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    6 months ago

    I purchased Rayman Legends on a big Steam sale because it is a great game and I wanted to play it again. I installed it. I hit play. It tried to install the Ubisoft launcher. I uninstalled it and refunded.

    Fuck off, Ubisoft.

  • TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 months ago

    The really awful part is that there’s not really any regulation that can stop this. If you ban taking away games people bought then they’ll just switch to a subscription which is even worse