alt Hacker Newsas a game dev myself, agreed.
I’m guessing nobody here has ever actually tried to make games, let alone multiplayer ones. It’s not “oh just make it better” we’re usually already stretching the limits of what’s possible financially and time wise to get a working (fun) product.
You can add burdens all you want, but that means the games get simpler.. because they can’t be made cheaper (price sensitive customers) and time is finite in that context. something has to give.
Replies
A game that can no longer be played at all is very simple but also not very fun.
> I’m guessing nobody here has ever actually tried to make games, let alone multiplayer ones.
One possibility is to charge for online play on the "official" server. This can be done regardless of the availability of source code.
Another possibility is to release the source code when the game reaches its end of life.
As not a game dev myself, may I ask for clarification? How does ‘Stop Killing Games’ legislation kill any sort of multiplayer games specifically? Aren’t there already games which don’t have the problem the movement is trying to solve? Wouldn’t it only require action from you if you were trying to kill multiplayer in the first place? I feel like I may have misunderstood your point or am just lacking a lot of important insight.