Stop killing games: Call to action for all owners of The Crew and everyone else. Use politics to end predatory practices. Possible to SET A PRECEDENT for OWNING rather than LICENSING #GoodOldDays

[Cashaddi]

DISCLAIMER:

 

This is not (just) about The Crew - this is about gaming as a whole - an attempt to create a legal precedent that might either 

1.) force publishers to be more transparent

2.) and/or force them to change and abandon "licensing" games instead of OWNING them

3.) and/or force them to include an option when a game that's online-only ends its support

- to allow offline play

- allow player run servers.

 

This is nothing new. This is the way things have been until maybe 2005 and later. And gaming may reach this point again in the future. 

 

This action is a small step toward more customer rights in the future. This may not be feasible in the US, but it seems not unlikely to succeed in the EU. 

Australia forced Steam to offer refunds, now Steam offers refunds everywhere.

If this succeeds in the EU and elsewhere, it might benefit gamera all over the world. 

 

This is NOT about trophies.

This is NOT about forcing publishers to maintain support indefinitely.

This may NOT change anything for current games. 

It MAY help the future though.

 

Please do not engage in bad faith arguments if you have not understood and read the terms this is arguing for.

 

If you are uncertain whether you are for this or against this - ask yourself this: would you rather OWN games again, or are you fine with LICENSING and being at the mercy of a publisher?

 

I was forced to add this disclaimer because of bad faith arguments engaging straw mans, poor attention spans, defeatist attitudes and ignorance.

 

 

Are you annoyed that The Crew (or any other game...) has been shut down? Do something about it! (And maybe the future will be better!)

Stopkillinggames.com

 

(The Crew is just the impetus for regulation of predatory practices and more consumer rights. As Ubisoft is a French company, the odds might be in our favor due to French and EU regulations. The video basically explains it all, but the FAQ also has everything you need to know.)

Edited April 5 by Cashaddi

[diskdocx]

The Crew is a decade old game. Sucks that online has ended, but this type of initiative is NOT going to generate a favourable consumer outcome.

 

If the legal challenge were somehow successful, what you'll likely achieve is even more restrictive licensing agreements. You already don't own the game, merely a license to use the software. Licenses for use aren't granted in perpetuity, so the only outcome that something like this is likely to achieve is to for companies to go to monthly licensing subscriptions.

 

Move on, the game is dead.

[BloodyRutz]

Do people really expect these companies to run the servers for decades just because a few people still want to play the game or some guy just remembered that they need to have 100% for a game they didn't bother to play for over a decade? Seriously...

 

Edit: I tried to watch the video, but 19 seconds of that guy was my limit.

 

Edited April 4 by BloodyRutz

[MonaSaxPayne]

4 minutes ago, diskdocx said:

The Crew is a decade old game. Move on, the game is dead.

Some ppl never hold themselves accountable for buying a game and not playing it for years

 

 

[DynoDux]

1 minute ago, BloodyRutz said:

Do people really expect these companies to run the servers for decades just because a few people still want to play the game or some guy just remembered that they need to have 100% for a game they didn't bother to play for over a decade? Seriously...

 

No, I don't think so.

 

What people want is...

 

i) 100% transparency from the company before deciding to purchase a game (e.g. servers will close in 2024 rendering the game completely unplayable).

ii) If servers close, a final patch/update should be added that allows players to continue playing offline.

 

Video game preservation is important to a lot of people.

[x49ersblitzkreig]

There was an offline mode in the files for TC1 that was found recently but it was encrypted to all hell so hackers can't get it to work at all. So there was going to be an offline mode but they scrapped it for whatever reason.

[MarcusPunisher]

15 minutes ago, BloodyRutz said:

Do people really expect these companies to run the servers for decades just because a few people still want to play the game or some guy just remembered that they need to have 100% for a game they didn't bother to play for over a decade? Seriously...

 

Edit: I tried to watch the video, but 19 seconds of that guy was my limit.

 

People who paid for these games also don't expect the game to be gone forever. Besides, there are other options to run this game via host and by the players, but Ubisoft it has to be approved.

Also, judging by your low attention spam, it makes sense why you lasted only 19 seconds and this guy is perhaps way to smart for you.

 

20 minutes ago, diskdocx said:

Move on, the game is dead.

 

You movie. We don't need people like you who don't contribute anything to this issue. 

1 hour ago, Cashaddi said:

Are you annoyed that The Crew has been shut down? Do something about it! 

Stopkillinggames.com

 

(The Crew is just the impetus for regulation of predatory practices and more consumer rights. As Ubisoft is a French company, the odds might be in our favor due to French and EU regulations. The video basically explains it all, but the FAQ also has everything you need to know.)

 

This is much larger than Crew, but it's a great opportunity, since it is based by the company located in France. If there is a chance we can do something or even win, it sets up a great precedent where gamers don't have to be F over and have better chance to preserve old games. 

18 minutes ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

Some ppl never hold themselves accountable for buying a game and not playing it for years

 

 

Only over million active users. 🙄

[DaivRules]

From the site:

 

Spoiler

This site is dedicated to real-world action on ending the practice of publishers destroying videogames they have sold to customers. 

 

An increasing number of videogames are sold as goods, but designed to be completely unplayable for everyone as soon as support ends. The legality of this practice is untested worldwide, and many governments do not have clear laws regarding these actions. It is our goal to have authorities examine this behavior and hopefully end it, as it is an assault on both consumer rights and preservation of media. We are pursuing this in two ways:

Action on "The Crew"

The videogame "The Crew", published by Ubisoft, was recently destroyed for all players and had a playerbase of at least 12 million people. Due to the game's size and France's strong consumer protection laws, this represents one of the best opportunities to hold a publisher accountable for this action. If we are successful in charges being pressed against Ubisoft, this can have a ripple effect on the videogames industry to prevent publishers from destroying more games.

Government Petitioning

Official government petitions have been introduced to prohibit the practice of intentionally rendering commercial videogames inoperable when support ends. Currently, petitions for the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have been launched and will soon be open for signing. Plans are also underway for the European Union, but will unfortunately be delayed due to processing times. Further government petitions may be started later with enough assistance.

FAQ:

 

Spoiler

What we are asking for is that they implement an end-of-life plan to modify or patch the game so that it can run on customer systems with no further support from the company being necessary. 

They want enforce by law devs to implement self-hosted servers for any and all online components (just patch it in when they announce a shut down - it’s so simple and so easy according to them!) and also enforce by law the online portion of games to populate with bots so games can continue, even if just one player plays for any period of time. 
 

Can’t say I agree with this approach/demand. I agree with requiring reasonable amounts of time for a server/online component shutdown (6 months minimum), but forcing it to be accessible by forcing developers to retrofit self-hosted server functionality, when the game has probably gone dirt cheap and likely only has trophy boosters after years of being inactive, or people paid more but sat on it, seeing it has online components when they purchased it but waiting significant amounts of time before trying, doesn’t seem like the appropriate reaction. 
 

Law has a concept called Standing that someone has to establish in order for their grievances to be considered. I just don’t see this case having the standing for these demands. 
 

[LukeTheGooner]

embarrassing post, move on and go and touch grass

[Helyx]

Another one of these, eh? #StopWastingYourTime

[Jinkelz]

19 minutes ago, DynoDux said:

What people want is...

 

i) 100% transparency from the company before deciding to purchase a game (e.g. servers will close in 2024 rendering the game completely unplayable).

ii) If servers close, a final patch/update should be added that allows players to continue playing offline.

1. is hard to deliver when the game is running for as long as the company is considering it profitable and then when it isnt they switch it of.

2. why would that be necessary? To satisfy a loud minority alone investing development time to make a game from server based to P2P and go bughunting again because it needs to be somewhat stable to avoid legal action for not being technically sufficient for the post-close-gaming world...

 

Online games need to have a reasonable end of life, so the companies can continue producing new stuff.

[GothGirlMaxine]

I do not have the mental energy to type anything meaningful here. I just cannot comprehend why this post exists. 

[ShadyWARcotix]

I've unlocked the platinum  few months ago so I'm not mad about the shutdown.

 

Jokes aside. You know, nothing lasts forever, accept and move on. I mean I hate always online games too or a shutdown here and there but we can't change it, lige goes on so just play and enjoy video games??

 

btw one thing which is more important. We need a new survey for the BO2 Big League Trophy. #Completionist

[D-E-U-S-X]

To preserve the gaming experience, Ubisoft could have made the game run offline, but that would have cost money.

Instead, there will be people who buy the game second hand and unknowingly end up with just plastic waste.

[Ghost-Zeus514]

*Sigh*

[ZOLANTON]

18 minutes ago, BloodyRutz said:

Do people really expect these companies to run the servers for decades just because a few people still want to play the game or some guy just remembered that they need to have 100% for a game they didn't bother to play for over a decade? Seriously...

 

Edit: I tried to watch the video, but 19 seconds of that guy was my limit.

 

 

I wanted to properly watch the entire video before I commented on the topic, but this right here (and sadly many more replies so far) is the attitude that unfortunately most gamers have, which the companies see and do whatever they want.

 

It's not about the trophies and it's not about this or that game that is 5, 10 or 20 years old. It's the fact that as a consumer you buy a game, a product and you have some rights about said product. It's like buying a book. Can you imagine that after 6 years of a purchase, the company would come to you and cut parts of the book or even the entire book (like the online-only games)?

 

From the few minutes I have watched so far, I think he is clear enough. The companies should say that XX part of a game (or the entire game) will not be available at a future time in a very transparent manner.

 

The gaming industry is slowly making some moves towards taking parts of the product they sell to you, while keeping your money. Some games do not have a physical release, I think Alan Wake 2 is a good example. If the PS Store goes down in a year, how will you be able to access your purchase? Soon it will be rent-to-play and not buy, own and play whenever you want.

 

Don't look at this trophy-wise and for this specific game only (Crew). I want to watch the rest of this video and read what the website is about though, before having a clear image about it.

[KingGuy420]

It's better to have loved and lost, than never loved at all.

 

Don't be mad that it's over, be happy that it happened.

 

Some food for thought. Usually these things are said about significant others, but I guess some people need to hear it about video games now... that's where we're at...

Edited April 4 by KingGuy420

[Buff_Cupcake]

Game preservation is an important topic for sure, gaming has one of the most butchered and disposable histories in terms of cataloging and recording vs almost every other entertainment medium. So I don't necessarily disagree with the intent behind the post and the video.

 

But it's pretty clear this post specifically, is less about that and more about being salty that The Crew has gone away.

[shipper321]

The posts here are not only uninformed and pessimistic, but downright bizarre and defeatist, too.

 

1 hour ago, diskdocx said:

The Crew is a decade old game. Sucks that online has ended, but this type of initiative is NOT going to generate a favourable consumer outcome.

 

If the legal challenge were somehow successful, what you'll likely achieve is even more restrictive licensing agreements. You already don't own the game, merely a license to use the software. Licenses for use aren't granted in perpetuity, so the only outcome that something like this is likely to achieve is to for companies to go to monthly licensing subscriptions.

 

Move on, the game is dead.

In the United States, yes. The whole point of this campaign is to attempt this in a country that does not have such restrictive laws. If you watched the video and checked out the site, you'd know that the two countries that have the best chance are Germany and France, with both having strong consumer protection laws in these countries, and Ubisoft (and Ivory Tower) being French companies. What this will achieve is largely irrelevant, the idea behind it is to eliminate this whole grey area that currently exists. Ross has stated before that if he loses, he wants to lose hard.

 

56 minutes ago, BloodyRutz said:

Do people really expect these companies to run the servers for decades just because a few people still want to play the game or some guy just remembered that they need to have 100% for a game they didn't bother to play for over a decade? Seriously...

 

Edit: I tried to watch the video, but 19 seconds of that guy was my limit.

 

This has nothing to do with trophies, GT Sport was patched to be playable offline and still had unobtainables in the end. Your zoomer attention span and smugness says it all, really. On the site itself it even mentions that they DO NOT want companies to run game servers forever, they merely want a plan in place to ensure that the game is playable when the developer or publisher ends support for their game servers.

32 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

From the site:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

This site is dedicated to real-world action on ending the practice of publishers destroying videogames they have sold to customers. 

 

An increasing number of videogames are sold as goods, but designed to be completely unplayable for everyone as soon as support ends. The legality of this practice is untested worldwide, and many governments do not have clear laws regarding these actions. It is our goal to have authorities examine this behavior and hopefully end it, as it is an assault on both consumer rights and preservation of media. We are pursuing this in two ways:

Action on "The Crew"

The videogame "The Crew", published by Ubisoft, was recently destroyed for all players and had a playerbase of at least 12 million people. Due to the game's size and France's strong consumer protection laws, this represents one of the best opportunities to hold a publisher accountable for this action. If we are successful in charges being pressed against Ubisoft, this can have a ripple effect on the videogames industry to prevent publishers from destroying more games.

Government Petitioning

Official government petitions have been introduced to prohibit the practice of intentionally rendering commercial videogames inoperable when support ends. Currently, petitions for the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have been launched and will soon be open for signing. Plans are also underway for the European Union, but will unfortunately be delayed due to processing times. Further government petitions may be started later with enough assistance.

FAQ:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

What we are asking for is that they implement an end-of-life plan to modify or patch the game so that it can run on customer systems with no further support from the company being necessary. 

They want enforce by law devs to implement self-hosted servers for any and all online components (just patch it in when they announce a shut down - it’s so simple and so easy according to them!) and also enforce by law the online portion of games to populate with bots so games can continue, even if just one player plays for any period of time. 
 

Can’t say I agree with this approach/demand. I agree with requiring reasonable amounts of time for a server/online component shutdown (6 months minimum), but forcing it to be accessible by forcing developers to retrofit self-hosted server functionality, when the game has probably gone dirt cheap and likely only has trophy boosters after years of being inactive, or people paid more but sat on it, seeing it has online components when they purchased it but waiting significant amounts of time before trying, doesn’t seem like the appropriate reaction. 
 

Law has a concept called Standing that someone has to establish in order for their grievances to be considered. I just don’t see this case having the standing for these demands. 
 

Considering that The Crew 1 has an offline mode in its debug menu - yeah, it would be easy to implement. It's already there. Little to no work would need to be done to get this particular game playable offline.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/

 

31 minutes ago, GoonerLukeThe said:

embarrassing post, move on and go and touch grass

 

26 minutes ago, Xyleh said:

Another one of these, eh? #StopWastingYourTime

Is this Reddit? "Yikers, sweaty, go touch grass, there's more important things going on in the world!"

You can have concerns about multiple topics and events. This is one of them. And even then, the sentiment of places like Reddit is far, far positive than this site, possibly because this actually has backing and research, and owners of The Crew who are passionate enough to want to see this game and future games preserved. This might not fully preserve The Crew 1, but if these demands are implemented, it could possibly preserve The Crew 2 and Motorfest (which are shit but that's besides the point.)

 

I get why there's been defeatism and pessimism in the past since up until now nothing has actually been done about this. In the video, one EU representative states that (according to Ross) this type of thing hasn't been to court, or brought forth in front of the EU body, at all. No one's tried. But when someone actually tries and has put in months of research to figure out some sort of attack, a lot of you are like "yeah nah, lol".

 

Tells me all I need to know, really.

 

Edit: Oh and OP didn't really provide much information. If you posted all the relevant information about this initiative, we wouldn't have had snarky Reddit-esque comments fishing for heckin' karma.

Edited April 4 by shipper321

[Kittens Are Awesome]

It's pretty simple. You don't like the practice, don't support it. You wallet speaks volumes. I'm not a fan of relying on my already shit government to be trustworthy enough to not slip in a "...also allow us to nuke brown people..." into a bill that would fix this.

[VigilantCrow]

Servers have been going offline since the 90s, in terms of gaming. Anyone alive today has seen it happen across the industry. 

People know the practice and choose to still buy the game. Whining about it afterwards is nothing more than a cry for attention.

 

If a grown man is going to whine for 30 minutes on the internet, maybe it's time for a new hobby.

[shadaik]

You buy an online game,  you buy into that risk knowingly. The game stopped being sold months before the shutdown, so I doubt you have any chance of being taken seriously. This is way more than not only  many other server shutdowns (we could talk about Mirror's Edge Catalyst still  being sold  AFTER the servers for online features went down), but also more than most other services shutting down in any area. There's  no way this can be considered predatory practices.

And I don't think any court will rule otherwise unless you get one that have no idea what they're judging on. Which, admittedly, does happen.

 

Ultimately, you're being Karens.

[OmegaRejectz]

1 minute ago, VigilantCrow said:

Servers have been going offline since the 90s, in terms of gaming. Anyone alive today has seen it happen across the industry. 

So because that’s the way it was & is that’s the way it should always be?

[Paleblood]

Threads like these are always a dumpster fire. On the one hand you have the preservationists, on the other the realists.

 

Both parties have legit arguments - but since everyone here is human, no one is happy.

 

The actual solution should be a law that enforces the availability of old games. If say, a publisher just sits on an IP and does nothing with it, does not re-release anything, no remasters, nothing - but still goes around nuking EVERYONE that dares to do something with said IP, even if it is just a drawn picture of the protagonist... *coughnintendocough*

 

There should be a law that if the system the game was released on is discontinued, all games from that system should become public domain for emulator use. I seriously don't get why this isn't a thing. It's not like companies make money from stuff they don't sell anymore anyway...

 

 

[VigilantCrow]

Just now, OmegaRejectz said:

So because that’s the way it was & is that’s the way it should always be?

Doesn't matter if I think something should be happening  or not be, the reality is that this is industry standard.

Again if people don't like it, find a new hobby.