this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2025
925 points (99.4% liked)

Games

40377 readers
2156 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The page seems to be not working at the moment but keep on signing https://eci.ec.europa.eu/045/public/#/screen/home

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 31 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think the commission will take action in some form. The worst case scenario in my mind is that they will only require clear labelling. Similar to what they did with smart phones recently. While this not exactly what I am hoping for, having "This game will at least be playable until XXXX" on the package or store page would still be a massive improvement over the status quo.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I dont understand how such a broad requirement would work. They just have to pick some arbitrary date, and then after that they can continue as things currently are? Can you give an example of a game where this type of labelling would have helped?

[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

'The Crew' by Ubisoft was sold for several months before they decided to shut it down. This would have at least forced them to communicate that before taking peoples money. I am also pretty sure that publishers don't want to put this information on the package because it could seriously hurt sales. So the effect of this labelling requirement might be that publishers build the game in a way that enables self-hosting.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If you are saying they knew it was closing and they sold it for months anyways, that sounds like fraud. Has there been proof ubisoft decided to do this anyways?

[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yes, I think calling it fraud is a fair conclusion, but what do you mean with "they knew it was closing"? This decision is completely in the hands of Ubisoft. Something doesn't stop being fraud just because someone only decides to defraud you 2 months after they sold you something.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

For all we know when the decision to pull the game was formalized, they pulled it that day. It depends what they did after they decided the game was being pulled. Did they leave it up for a few months to get some stuff in order beforehand, but kept selling it? I'd have a tough time accepting a reasoning from Ubisoft for that.

Thats why I asked for any sort of comment or reporting on it.

[–] Kelly@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

On December 14, 2023, Ubisoft delisted The Crew and its expansions from digital platforms, suspended sales of microtransactions, and announced that the game's servers would be shut down on March 31, 2024, citing "upcoming server infrastructure and licensing constraints".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crew_%28video_game%29

People who paid around us$40 for the game on December 13 were being sold a lemon.

Given that it was released in 2014 it seems likely that their licenses were given a 10 year duration and they always intended to shutdown in 2024 at the latest (of course if its user base failed to reach critical mass they could have pulled the plug earlier).

Does selling a game in 2023 when you plan to kill it in 2024 legally qualify as fraud?

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Thats not what I'm asking. You just have me evidence that they didnt sell it as soon as an EOL date was announced. Are you saying they should have stopped selling it before they publicly announce the EOL? Should they have announced and removed it as soon as the board meeting ended? How much earlier would that be in this case?

[–] Kelly@programming.dev 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Should they have announced and removed it as soon as the board meeting ended? How much earlier would that be in this case?

My unsubstantiated theory is the the licences they signed for all the vehicles and real world content had a 10 year lifetime.

Usually those contracts would just require that they stop selling the game, but they may have included something about the servers in the contract too.

Either way they new something was going to change in 2024 and realistically they knew which of these possibilities were viable:

  • sign new deals with all licensors and continue business as usual
  • sign new deals with cooperative licensors and modify the game to remove the others
  • remove the game from sale and keep the servers running for current customers
  • remove the game from sale and kill the servers - tell people to buy the sequal

I'd they waited until December of 2023 to have that meeting then that feels negligent.

If they had that meeting earlier and continued to sell the game (until ≈100 days to EOL) without warning customers that feels fraudulent.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I think its a bit ridiculous that you think you have enough information to say they should have acted sooner.

Its also ridiculous that your arguments rely on what feels wrong.

The game was 10 years old and people are salty it went EOL. How have this many people not played an online service game before to realize that 10 years is a fantastic run, and nothing lasts forever. Move onto a new game or help build one, this effort to make games live forever is absurd, entitled, and shortsighted.

[–] Kelly@programming.dev 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I'm using the word "feel" because I'm not qualified to provide a legal opinion.

It lasting 10 years doesn't mean much to the people who were sold the game in the last 6 months without any warning they were buying into the final hours.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

They weren't aware they were buying a 10 year old online game? This isn't new either, many MMOs have dead periods after their final patch and before a new expansion. The crew didnt even die, they made the crew 2, which apparently was awful or else people wouldnt have complained.

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yes if we would have known that Concord only lasted two weeks then those that bought the battle pass wouldn't have bought them. Know eol timing help consumers.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

They didnt know it would only last two weeks. They probably knew it was a possibility but I doubt they planned for it.

This is what I mean though, if concord had to say the game would be live for a guaranteed amount of time, why wouldnt they just say something low like 6 months. Why wouldnt every company do that unless they knew for sure it would be successful? Its too risky to choose longer periods of time, and we just have the same situation as now.

[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Sony actually issued full refunds to all customers that bought Concord.

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The game still died. One that was in development for five years, and it lasted two weeks.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They didnt plan for it to last two weeks, the game failed. How do you expect them to guarantee a certain uptime when they have no idea if anyone will even play it.

[–] Kelly@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

Call me crazy but I expect businesses to guarantee their products.