this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
119 points (97.6% liked)
PC Gaming
14849 readers
477 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But I liked Destiny.
Good news Bungie doesn't so it's a self solving problem.
They are still running Destiny 1. So, they are better than most live service providers in one particular way. At the moment at least.
Destiny 1 came out about a decade ago.
Under the Stop Killing Games proposal, games like Destiny can still be run exactly the way they have been till now, same game, business model, everything. All they would need to do now that they are shutting down the game is to provide source code for the game backend, for the parts that they wrote themselves.
Any third party tool source code cannot be provided, and is not reasonable to ask for, so a working server can't just be spun up, but the rest of the source code will be enough for fans of the game to get a working third party server going for others that want to enjoy Destiny again.
Just publishing the source code with no further support is legit as far as SKG is concerned. That's the bare minimum required to allow people to keep playing the games they paid for. If publishers are looking at this basic request of consumer rights from people, and concluding that it's unreasonable to the level that they can no longer produce these games. Then they shouldn't be making these games.
Would an API specification be acceptable? I’m surprised they are demanding source code at all.
Any workable solution will do. The source code request is to counter the argument that adapting end of life plans are too expensive/make the product finiancially unviable. If you release the source code and leave the community to figure it out themselves, it costs you nothing.
Cool. A full specification seems fair. I wonder how much copyright would hinder their goals here for forcing the full code. And I could see companies eventually constructing licensing and other structures that basically mean every bit of the core functionally of the server is actually licensed from or provided by a vendor as a shield.
Could the code be released but encumbered by licenses or copyright? Seems like something else to navigate.
I support the idea of games not being killed. I just find the demands very surprising. And can see why this is an uphill battle.