• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    156
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The Crew’s servers, scheduled for Sunday March 31, represents a “gray area” in videogame consumer law that he would like to challenge.

    I think the argument to make is that The Crew was sold under a perpetual license, not a subscription, so we were being sold a good, not a service

    the seller rendered the game unusable and deprived it of all value after the point of sale.

    Goddam right, that’s not a grey area IMO, that shit ought to be illegal. Maybe there should be a term, like let’s say 90 years maybe?

    • Dran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My personal favorite is the “companies are obligated to support it forever, or open source the server software hosted by a third party, hosting paid for up front for at least a year.”

      They get to keep my money forever don’t they?

    • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or, maybe don’t force online requirement, and allow p2p. Or, better yet, open source the server now that it’s shut down and release a patch to specify where to connect.

  • leave_it_blank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 year ago

    I got the game for free, and I’ve been playing it since every three months for a few days, just driving around. I bought the sequel, but it sucked.

    I never used the multiplayer component, I treated it like a single player game. And now it’s going to vanish? This whole world? They can’t be serious. This isn’t a multiplayer only title, it’s single player with an optional mp stacked upon it. At least put an offline patch out… Assholes!

    But that’s the crux with only buying licenses. Or games with always online requirements. I hope fans find a way to crack the online code!!

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, no one is arguing games shouldn’t have online, just that they continue to work after the devs are done with them, have an End of Life plan like the late Avengers game, or the gacha Megaman X Dive that got an offline version sold on steam and consoles.

  • Artyom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m all for improving consumer rights in the videogame industry, but I’m more than a little amazed anyone’s willing to put up a fight for The Crew of all things.

    • frunch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      Seems more to do with the way things line up–it’s a perfect example of a physical and digital game getting permanently shut down without any sort of refund or compensation to the buyers of the game. It sounds like it’s about setting precedent so people will have a better idea of how this kinda stuff is going to work in the future.

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      He just likes driving around and nothing more, it’s his podcast/tourism game, but also the perfect one since it happened after he started this fight for preservation and it’s not sold as service but as a product, unlike MMOs.

  • Lunch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t forget we have to get comfortable not owning our games guys… This is Ubisoft showing us how that works…

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This would be a huge precedent for video-game preservation. IANAL but this would mean one of these two:

    • service cannot be shut down without release of server source code
    • whole game need to be reclassified as software service

    Seems like the latter would be an easy loophole tbh.

    • nature_man@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also NAL, but it seems like they aren’t arguing for server functionality but rather just the ability to play offline at all, which opens up the third option of requiring games to be patched to remove sever requirements if being shut down, in any case this will be a fascinating case to follow, and I hope they go through with the lawsuit.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        True though that’s a bit of a potato/potatoh probpem as the easiest way to patch-in offline would be to run server locally rather than have 2 different architectures of offline and online plays. That’s already how many games work today actually - singleplayer is just a server with only you on it.

  • ohlaph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    That aldo happened to Bomberman. To play locally, it needs to connect to a server. The servers are no longer active, and as a result, the game isn’t playable.

  • Wodge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is all well and good, but what of all those MMORPGs that got shut down?

    The Crew is a bizarre game to do this kinda treatment for, since the sequel is very similar to the first, less terrible crime syndicate story, more planes and other nonsense. It’s also pretty middling, car handling is really weird, and the lack of rear view mirrors looks pretty weird nowadays.

    I’m guessing it’s car licensing that’s causing the shutdown. It’s what happened to Forza Horizon 1 and 2. If that is the case, this game isn’t going to get open sourced ever. Also: why didn’t this guy go after Microsoft to make them playable again?

    • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s because MMOs were sold as subscriptions (most of the time) so they’re legally covered in being allowed to end their service. The crew however was sold as a full game with no subscription. They didn’t make it clear that the game could cease to exist even though you paid for it outright.

      Sadly, I feel like a lawsuit line this won’t have the benefit we’re all hoping for (open sourcing on closure of services) but will instead just make all subsequent games free-to-play, which would make them more exempt to the same scrutiny. And we’re already seemingly heading that way too, warts and all.

      • Wodge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For the last few years, most MMOs have been, or become, Free to Play, with (a lot of) microtransactions. The only subscription MMOs I can think of off the top of my head are FFXIV, WoW and Eve. Then you have the buy to play, with no sub (or optional sub, but not required to play), games like New World and Elder Scrolls Online. Making the vast majority F2P.

        All of those games can become EOL and be removed from sale for any number of reasons, and they’ll have the same terms in the EULA that the crew would have. There is literally nothing different legally between The Crew and something like Elyon. Both were paid for up front, no subscription with some optional microtransactions.

        Since legallly there is nothing different between all these live service games, it makes this youtubers campaign all the more odd. Car Licensing is notoriously well enforced, so why is this guy, a Half Life youtuber of all things, thinking he can go after Ubisoft on this when it’s pretty obvious that it’s the license agreements that are the likely cause of the shutdown.

        • yamanii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Since it’s free they were never sold to you as product, their asses are covered on this one, you can make an arguement for Elder Scrolls Online, Black Desert Online (I bought this one, I have the receipt to prove it) and Guild Wars 2 since they use the b2p model with an optional subscription. Car licensing can only prevent ubisoft to sell the game, it’s not required for them to shut it down and render your copy unusable.

        • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s all about how they’re sold and marketed rather than what’s in a EULA. They can’t be used the same way as a contract upon purchase and have been shown just as such in law cases in the past. FFXIV, WOW and Eve have always been sold under the pretence you need to keep paying to keep playing.

    • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Horizon can be played offline. When Microsoft bites the dust, I can still pop in a Forza horizon 2 DVD into my 360 and play it.

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You just made it look even worse for Ubisoft since the first 3 Horizon games work offline and everyone that bought them can still play it just fine, you just can’t buy them right now.

  • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not sure why he’s being recognized by a Half-Life series of his. I discovered and watched him for his deep dives of old crappy PC games.