this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
78 points (97.6% liked)
Games
20380 readers
1207 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Setting aside piratesoftware's concerns (that it's economically untenable to require devs to develop a form of their game's source that would be publicly releasable), I'm not clear on why games should have this requirement and no other media, particularly when games are so much more complicated.
If we can't even require physical releases of any show or movie or album, because the company still owns the copyright and might choose to profit from it in the future, how can we expect active investment in the unwinding of their copyright from devs? Seems a double standard.
Any successful first step is a first step. Hopefully this should lead to more sensible things.
Like, I don't want to be misconstrued; I want to live in a world where this stuff is possible. I guess I just feel like Stop Killing Games is shortsighted in its current form, and will get caught on some technicality like this, that will ultimately sink it.
My hope is that if it comes to failure, it will be as you say, a first step towards driving this media preservation objective, and advance the conversation.
If it passed in its current form, my fear is that it would effectively be an extra tax and burden just for choosing to make games instead of some other type of media, and I'm concerned investors would see it that way too, and move their financial support to these surer bets, ultimately harming individual game developers and lessening game releases.
It doesn't really have a "current" form.
An EU citizens initiative can really only outline what the goal is, and if passed, force the EU comission to investigate the problem to determine what an actual law could look like.
It would mostly harm always online live service models. This stuff only gets complicated if a game has micro-transactions, and therefore has to have a bunch of systems to handle payment and accounts.
If your game just does server-client/peer-to-peer multiplayer, like older games (and a lot of modern ones), there's barely any complexity to handle. Even less so if your game isn't online at all.
Basically every title on GOG would already comply with any law this might lead to. It's really not that demanding. The big publishers who nickle and dime their players are the only ones who would have a hard time. And that's a good thing.