If a multiplayer-only game turns down official servers, and you can’t self-host within the game, they should owe players a separate server binary they can run, or a partial refund for breaking the game. It should not be hard, especially if it’s a known constraint when they develop the game.
The one MMO I’ve meaningfully played, RuneScape, has open source replicas of its server from different points in time, that the community has made. I’m not gonna pretend it’s zero work, but a developer with the source code absolutely could do these things. It also doesn’t need to be perfectly compatible with the original one, you can replace a complex DB backend with something standard and less performant. Only runs on Linux, or MS Server 2k8? The community of people who care will figure it out.
Maybe a source code release would be preferable in this kind of option. EA just did this with a few Command and Conquer games.
Source Code release could be complicated, especially for games that aren’t 30 years old because the devs don’t start over from scratch every time so there would still be an enormous amount of proprietary code in it.
Itd be cool (and as impractical as it is, I believe all code should be open sources) but not really feasible
Yeah that’s basically why I didn’t pull it out as an option in the first place, it’s not always practical. A lot of your proprietary code is going to be external dependencies linked/built against, or your own IP reused from the last project. But not all of it, and I can definitely see that smaller chunk causing a lot of problems.
You need a team that does a lot of dependency management and similar things well while building it, that don’t actually help them get the game out faster, to keep the problem manageable. Or a team who specialize in open sourcing games like this, which could become a thing if this was more commonplace.
No it isn’t this is a crazy ignorant comment that just hand waves the problem I presented away because it’s not convenient enough for your stance.
If you’re going to comment don’t comment in bad faith, that’s not the kind of discussions we need on lemmy.
The problem begets the solution. And damn near every modern MMO has a significant set of challenges that they have built technological solutions for which drive more complicated infrastructure.
it’s a bit of a straw man from your side to act like the discussion is about multiplayer when we are discussing about single player campaign based RPGs or about multiplayer when the company deliberately shuts it down in favour of a new version that just milks players for more money; or about toasters that definitely don’t need internet connection to function.
it’s a bit of a straw man from your side to act like the discussion is about multiplayer
The top of this thread:
If a multiplayer-only game turns down official servers, and you can’t self-host within the game, they should owe players a separate server binary they can run, or a partial refund for breaking the game. It should not be hard, especially if it’s a known constraint when they develop the game.
If a multiplayer-only game turns down official servers, and you can’t self-host within the game, they should owe players a separate server binary they can run, or a partial refund for breaking the game. It should not be hard, especially if it’s a known constraint when they develop the game.
How TF you expect that to work with MMO style games that may have significantly complex server infrastructure & deployment environments?
The one MMO I’ve meaningfully played, RuneScape, has open source replicas of its server from different points in time, that the community has made. I’m not gonna pretend it’s zero work, but a developer with the source code absolutely could do these things. It also doesn’t need to be perfectly compatible with the original one, you can replace a complex DB backend with something standard and less performant. Only runs on Linux, or MS Server 2k8? The community of people who care will figure it out.
Maybe a source code release would be preferable in this kind of option. EA just did this with a few Command and Conquer games.
Source Code release could be complicated, especially for games that aren’t 30 years old because the devs don’t start over from scratch every time so there would still be an enormous amount of proprietary code in it.
Itd be cool (and as impractical as it is, I believe all code should be open sources) but not really feasible
Yeah that’s basically why I didn’t pull it out as an option in the first place, it’s not always practical. A lot of your proprietary code is going to be external dependencies linked/built against, or your own IP reused from the last project. But not all of it, and I can definitely see that smaller chunk causing a lot of problems.
You need a team that does a lot of dependency management and similar things well while building it, that don’t actually help them get the game out faster, to keep the problem manageable. Or a team who specialize in open sourcing games like this, which could become a thing if this was more commonplace.
that’s the company’s problem. They made it too complicated.
No it isn’t this is a crazy ignorant comment that just hand waves the problem I presented away because it’s not convenient enough for your stance.
If you’re going to comment don’t comment in bad faith, that’s not the kind of discussions we need on lemmy.
The problem begets the solution. And damn near every modern MMO has a significant set of challenges that they have built technological solutions for which drive more complicated infrastructure.
it’s a bit of a straw man from your side to act like the discussion is about multiplayer when we are discussing about single player campaign based RPGs or about multiplayer when the company deliberately shuts it down in favour of a new version that just milks players for more money; or about toasters that definitely don’t need internet connection to function.
The top of this thread:
Emphasis mine.
We used to be able to do multiplayer only without the need for official servers.