• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

'Stop Killing Games' movement gains momentum: California Assembly passes game protection bill

TheUnicornGuy said:
What's to stop a company releasing an online only game but packaging it as a "subscription of indeterminate length but of least 60 days" then shutting it down 18 months later and saying "you paid for a sub, you got a sub"?
Click to expand...
Technically they'd have to advertise it exactly as such. Instead of a "purchase" button they'd have to use a "60 day subscription" button
 
KenaiPhoenix said:
I agree with you

I have been saying stuff like this since this whole thing started. But, you know, it is the popular thing rn, 'Pirate software le bad', and all that shit.

I hope this doesnt happen, but experience usually told us that when you get the goverment involved then things usually start to sucks. Anyone that graps how politics actually works can see how this can back fire cataclysmally, and people that support this just dont know politics actually works and the dangers of making regulations an 'election winner' strategy.

I hope this doesnt bite us in the ass... but it is unlikely.

What them to stop killing games? Stop paying for digital licenses and digital shit on shop that can be closes when the published feels like it. You will see how they will just 180 all their commercial plans.
Click to expand...
Problem with this logic is that the government has already been long involved in this. The main tool for preserving games are cracking and emulation, but companies kept overreaching using copyright laws to put a stop to these, claiming stuff like how cracking their copy protections infringes on their terms of use, or using legal threats against emulators of both consoles and online servers, fully taking advantage of the fact they were being developed by people who could not afford extended legal battles. What alternative is there other than leveling the playing field wherever we can?
 
Last edited:
Walliwallipaloo said:
Ooh, I almost gave a response until I read that part. There it is.

This is just communist vs. (presumed) conservative, isn't it? If that's the case, bro, there ain't no point talking. You're not seeing past what you want to see. And obviously anything I say is just going to come out the way you want to hear it.

You got it quite wrong, by the way. I'm just about as apolitical as it gets. Don't ask me about it. :-D

I will say this, though, in response: this is not a "fine print" surprise. It's obvious to anyone with a functioning frontal lobe that a game that requires connection to a server isn't going to last forever. Put that right on the box if you have to, if that solves it. And if you buy into that, that's your problem.

As far as cosmetic items go, see above.



It's kinda dragging us all down, sadly. A lot of games made now aren't for gamers. They're glorified slot machines for weirdo salarymen.

I'm not sure what to do about that, other than to push for much harder gatekeeping. The last thing we need is freaking Californian laws. Then again, I never would have known not to eat the box my lawnmower came in if not for the law that required them to print that the box is bad for you if eaten... so, I should be grateful as I technically owe California my life.
Click to expand...

Having a distaste for governments doing their job and attempt to fix problems is very clearly a right leaning take on it. Which is why people are tagging as such.

I mean nobody's perfect, but things like the clean air act have saved Americans hundred billion+ in healthcare costs and the accumulated economic effects of it are in the trillions.

Putting hard limits on lead have had unmeasurable positive effects on society by being the single most effective measure in reducing crimes and specially violent crimes. Not to mention making society better by making increasing the collective iq and again, lessen healthcare costs since lead absorption is very bad for your heart.

You either are on the hippy-anarchist spectrum or on the conservative spectrum to be against government going their job.
 
Last edited:
TheUnicornGuy said:
What's to stop a company releasing an online only game but packaging it as a "subscription of indeterminate length but of least 60 days" then shutting it down 18 months later and saying "you paid for a sub, you got a sub"?
Click to expand...

I mean, right now they can shut down games at any point (even a day after you bought them from the store).

Message like that on the box/game info on PSN page would be much better thing that what we have now.
 
So many companies and whole industries profiting off of legal loopholes or straight up missing legislation like parasites to the detriment of the public. It's about time politicans do their god damn job.
 
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has recently voiced opposition to the push for expanded game preservation, arguing that opening server code or online features of discontinued games could lead to security and intellectual property issues.
Click to expand...
Oh go screw off.

- sincerely, a games preservation activist (and unashamed GOG shill)
 
Bitmap Frogs said:
Having a distaste for governments doing their job and attempt to fix problems is very clearly a right leaning take on it. Which is why people are tagging as such.

I mean nobody's perfect, but things like the clean air act have saved Americans hundred billion+ in healthcare costs and the accumulated economic effects of it are in the trillions.

Putting hard limits on lead have had unmeasurable positive effects on society by being the single most effective measure in reducing crimes and specially violent crimes. Not to mention making society better by making increasing the collective iq and again, lessen healthcare costs since lead absorption is very bad for your heart.

You either are on the hippy-anarchist spectrum or on the conservative spectrum to be against government going their job.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm so glad the government banned asbestos, too. That stuff is basically just poison in material form. Phew, right?
Oh, the government mandated its use in the first place? Oops.
The US government forced everyone to use asbestos, basically due to a mix of incompetence and corruption, and screwed up the lives of thousands of people, while simultaneously creating a problem that still remains to be solved. But nobody's perfect. LOL

I mean, I could go on a huge tangent here, but I won't, because that's technically politics. And I don't particularly feel like it, anyway. Suffice it to say, I feel one should ask, just what is the government's "job," anyway? What does the government think its job is supposed to be?

I've spoken my piece on this topic, anyway. Parting shot:

You either are on the hippy-anarchist spectrum or on the conservative spectrum to be against government going their job.
Click to expand...

The Office Lol GIF
 
Walliwallipaloo said:
Yeah, I'm so glad the government banned asbestos, too. That stuff is basically just poison in material form. Phew, right?
Oh, the government mandated its use in the first place? Oops.
The US government forced everyone to use asbestos, basically due to a mix of incompetence and corruption, and screwed up the lives of thousands of people, while simultaneously creating a problem that still remains to be solved. But nobody's perfect. LOL

I mean, I could go on a huge tangent here, but I won't, because that's technically politics. And I don't particularly feel like it, anyway. Suffice it to say, I feel one should ask, just what is the government's "job," anyway? What does the government think its job is supposed to be?

I've spoken my piece on this topic, anyway. Parting shot:
Click to expand...

You know the industry suppressed information about that risk no?

Anyways we getting into politics.
 
Generic said:
When a lot of gaming companies start taking away their games from California, other states will realize a bill like this is pointless.

These kind of laws are made by people who don't understand how videogames work.
Click to expand...
Does that include game development? Because that's a win-win, IMO.
 
Don Carlo said:
Watch publishers suddenly discover creative new ways to label games as 'services' and dodge the spirit of the law.
Click to expand...
i mean they're free to do so. Put up a 'rent this game for 60 days, $70' instead of a 'purchase'. If players still get those games even when put it like that they'd be deserving it at that point.
 
Guilty_AI said:
Problem with this logic is that the government has already been long involved in this. The main tool for preserving games are cracking and emulation, but companies kept overreaching using copyright laws to put a stop to these, claiming stuff like how cracking their copy protections infringes on their terms of use, or using legal threats against emulators of both consoles and online servers, fully taking advantage of the fact they were being developed by people who could not afford extended legal battles. What alternative is there other than leveling the playing field wherever we can?
Click to expand...

You being dishonest by saying that copyright is the same as regulating.

What this initiative is trying to do it to get the government involve in what can be done and how. This is unprecedented. Yes they asked to label the game on rating, yes they just enforce copyright (something that happens universally: food, movies, or pharmaceutical stuff. You can patent so many things). They are asking to get into the kitchen.
 
MiguelItUp said:
Not sure how or why anyone would try to spin this as a bad thing. Such a movement shouldn't have had to exist in the first place, but it does, and for good reason.
Click to expand...
Because 'people' like Walliwallipaloo are disgusting, subhuman bootlickers who spend their free time defending their lizard overlords.

If there's one thing that would actually make the gaming industry better, it would be retards like that fucking off and never coming back.
 
Last edited:
KenaiPhoenix said:
You being dishonest by saying that copyright is the same as regulating.

What this initiative is trying to do it to get the government involve in what can be done and how. This is unprecedented. Yes they asked to label the game on rating, yes they just enforce copyright (something that happens universally: food, movies, or pharmaceutical stuff. You can patent so many things). They are asking to get into the kitchen.
Click to expand...
Oh, so government interference is perfectly ok when its about copyright, is what you're saying?

Because yes, it is interference all the same. If a game is supposedly violating some copyright they will get involved in case someone brings it to court, and impose fines or force the game to be removed. Isn't that exactly what nintendo is trying to do with Palworld? All because it threatens their monopoly on the genre?
 
Last edited:
HallowedFeast said:
Because 'people' like Walliwallipaloo are disgusting, subhuman bootlickers who spend their free time defending their lizard overlords.

If there's one thing that would actually make the gaming industry better, it would be retards like that fucking off and never coming back.
Click to expand...
And here I was trying to be polite and hold my tongue.

Good thing I didn't come on here earlier today when I found out I have a pretty deep fracture in my foot.
I'm feeling better enough now to be far more polite than I would have been. To that end,
mister rogers middle finger GIF
 
Walliwallipaloo said:
And here I was trying to be polite and hold my tongue.

Good thing I didn't come on here earlier today when I found out I have a pretty deep fracture in my foot.
I'm feeling better enough now to be far more polite than I would have been. To that end,
mister rogers middle finger GIF
Click to expand...
Good. Hope the damage is irreversible and you lose your foot, you scum-sucking sack of shit.

Corporate lizards such as yourself deserve much worse.
 
Walliwallipaloo said:
And here I was trying to be polite and hold my tongue.

Good thing I didn't come on here earlier today when I found out I have a pretty deep fracture in my foot.
I'm feeling better enough now to be far more polite than I would have been. To that end,
mister rogers middle finger GIF
Click to expand...
Don't worry, I'm sure you've licked enough corporate feet for them to be willing to give you one of their spares.
 
Walliwallipaloo said:
And here I was trying to be polite and hold my tongue.

Good thing I didn't come on here earlier today when I found out I have a pretty deep fracture in my foot.
I'm feeling better enough now to be far more polite than I would have been. To that end,
mister rogers middle finger GIF
Click to expand...

HallowedFeast said:
Good. Hope the damage is irreversible and you lose your foot, you scum-sucking sack of shit.

Corporate lizards such as yourself deserve much worse.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Guilty_AI said:
Oh, so government interference is perfectly ok when its about copyright, is what you're saying?

Because yes, it is interference all the same. If a game is supposedly violating some copyright they will get involved in case someone brings it to court, and impose fines or force the game to be removed. Isn't that exactly what nintendo is trying to do with Palworld? All because it threatens their monopoly on the genre?
Click to expand...

Stop trying to play dumb, respecting copyright is not the same as regulation, and I told you on the post:
KenaiPhoenix said:
You being dishonest by saying that copyright is the same as regulating.
Click to expand...

Copyright is nor regulation and to keep fair play for everyone. Imagine if there where no copyrights, then anyone could just use the 'Palworld' trademark and Steam would be filled with scams that cant be sued. What Nintendo did is other thing and it is to abuse fair right by patenting the most ridiculous gameplay elements.

And just like I told you, this happens on video games, books, paintings, etc. One of the most basic elements of fair market. If copyrights didnt exists there will be people that will just wait for someone to create something (again, anything: videogames, movies, etc) and just steal it and print it to sell it without having to invest anything, and leaving the creator broke. And this is not a 'slippery slope', this actually happens a lot in countries like India, where factories are waiting for someone to create something and then just copy all research and keep the profits.

A totally different thing is to ask the goverment to start putting laws inside the kitchen: Now products need to adjust to whatever people that are not in the industry decide that must be done. And once the goverment is inside the kitchen there is no way to kick them out. What if the next election winning regulation is to regulate violence in video games? What if now the problem is the stories told inside the games, they are creating 'new fascists'! We must review and approve them? We already started with something.

And again, regulations (not just enforcing general rights, like trademarks) are a pain in the ass. Recently Type-C was celebrated my everyone as a win! But for people that uses data transfers it has become a nightmare and it totally killed any innovation in the market. But dont take my word, here is a guy that works with huge amounts of data and explain its problems:

 
KenaiPhoenix said:
Stop trying to play dumb, respecting copyright is not the same as regulation, and I told you on the post:


Copyright is nor regulation and to keep fair play for everyone. Imagine if there where no copyrights, then anyone could just use the 'Palworld' trademark and Steam would be filled with scams that cant be sued. What Nintendo did is other thing and it is to abuse fair right by patenting the most ridiculous gameplay elements.

And just like I told you, this happens on video games, books, paintings, etc. One of the most basic elements of fair market. If copyrights didnt exists there will be people that will just wait for someone to create something (again, anything: videogames, movies, etc) and just steal it and print it to sell it without having to invest anything, and leaving the creator broke. And this is not a 'slippery slope', this actually happens a lot in countries like India, where factories are waiting for someone to create something and then just copy all research and keep the profits.

A totally different thing is to ask the goverment to start putting laws inside the kitchen: Now products need to adjust to whatever people that are not in the industry decide that must be done. And once the goverment is inside the kitchen there is no way to kick them out. What if the next election winning regulation is to regulate violence in video games? What if now the problem is the stories told inside the games, they are creating 'new fascists'! We must review and approve them? We already started with something.

And again, regulations (not just enforcing general rights, like trademarks) are a pain in the ass. Recently Type-C was celebrated my everyone as a win! But for people that uses data transfers it has become a nightmare and it totally killed any innovation in the market. But dont take my word, here is a guy that works with huge amounts of data and explain its problems:

Click to expand...

Yes, you are describing market regulation by the government. You believe it's bad that anyone, under natural market conditions, can just freely copy ideas and imagery, so you are asking the government to get in the kitchen and intervine using laws to enforce certain market rules by estabilishing what creators can and can't do, under the threat of penalties for non-compliance, something you describe as more favorable. That is very much regulation.

And you're free to believe that is a good thing, but don't be a hypocrate by suddenly turning and saying any form of regulation is bad when you clearly support a much more intrusive and pervasive form of regulation.
 
Last edited:
If i buy a game i want to own it.

If a developer prefers to rent their game and not make it available otherwise, they should clearly specify they are renting it so i can easily avoid it.
 
nkarafo said:
If i buy a game i want to own it.

If a developer prefers to rent their game and not make it available otherwise, they should clearly specify they are renting it so i can easily avoid it.
Click to expand...

With most digital stores - they actually label stuff as "buy" and get away with it, and they can easily remove your games or ban your account (for whatever reason) - they don't have to compensate you anything when they do that.

GOG is the only example of digital store where you actually OWN your games (other example is piracy).
 
Last edited:
Walliwallipaloo said:
Sure, you're absolutely right. This law, as it is right now, probably (and I say probably, because who has the time to read the fine print?) doesn't affect indie devs in any way.

But there's this little thing called precedent. This can and will be used as a springboard, an established platform, to further litigate against and control the industry. The government is only good at making problems, not solving them.

"Hey, indie developer, I'm with the Department of Service Sustainability. Where's your end-of-life plan form 55-B?"

"I... uh... I'm not making a live service game. I'm really just kind of new at this. I just wanted to make a Mega-Man like, so... I mean..."

"I don't know what that is, but any commercial electronic entertainment product needs a 55-B filled out detailing your tiered end-of-service strategy."

"There's... no service. I mean, it's a single-player offline game. I - "

"I don't know or care what that means. You're making a videogame, right? And you're trying to sell it online, for profit?"

"Y... er... Yes, I guess."

"That means it's an online service. So where's your 55-B?"

"Okay. What do I have to do to get this form?"

"That's your responsibility. Make sure you have a $500 application fee ready when you arrive at the nearest office."

"God. Which is where? Oh c'mon, that's 50 miles away!"

"That's your responsibility. Oh, and there's a $500 notice fee. Make sure you have that, too."

Yeah, no. Screw Ross for trying to involve the government in this shit. He's just trying to be a celebrity, and in 10 years' time, if there even is a games industry left, we'll all suffer for it.
Never give the government a back-door into your hobbies and interests. All they care about is MONEY (how to milk it from you) and CONTROL.
Click to expand...

I like how you are trying to paint this very convoluted and wasteful fictional worst case unrealistic process, yet it still pales in comparison to what you need to do to actually set up a company and go into development.
You don't just go into Steam, shit out an exe and you are an indie game developer. You need to do a lot unless you want to be raped by the IRS, in comparison to what you have to do to establish a startup company or an LLC to handle revenue/taxes, driving 50 miles and paying 1k$ is child's play.
 
Zannegan said:
And he liked his own post as his Alt. Lol.
Click to expand...
Am I hallucinating or did it used to be that you could like your own posts on here?

That's a feature whose time to come back is now here. I mean don't get me wrong, I like plenty of other people's post. There's a lot of good ones out there...

But mine are fucking better, and I should be allowed to congratulate myself. Like Barry Horowitz.

barry-horowitz-tap-back.gif
 
So companies will be a lot slower to announce gaas if they have to keep them alive perpetually.

Think of that racing game Sony announced when PS5 was coming out and flopped. It was a GAAS and recently shut down. It would have to be open forever.

Makes gaas go away by introducing risks.

I'll allow it.
 
Last edited:
Zacfoldor said:
So companies will be a lot slower to announce gaas if they have to keep them alive perpetually.

Think of that racing game Sony announced when PS5 was coming out and flopped. It was a GAAS and recently shut down. It would have to be open forever.

Makes gaas go away by introducing risks.

I'll allow it.
Click to expand...
They could technically still make GAAS, its only that they'd either have to come with a end of life plan like an offline mode or be subscrition based.
 
Last edited:
Walliwallipaloo said:
Sure, you're absolutely right. This law, as it is right now, probably (and I say probably, because who has the time to read the fine print?) doesn't affect indie devs in any way.

But there's this little thing called precedent. This can and will be used as a springboard, an established platform, to further litigate against and control the industry. The government is only good at making problems, not solving them.

"Hey, indie developer, I'm with the Department of Service Sustainability. Where's your end-of-life plan form 55-B?"

"I... uh... I'm not making a live service game. I'm really just kind of new at this. I just wanted to make a Mega-Man like, so... I mean..."

"I don't know what that is, but any commercial electronic entertainment product needs a 55-B filled out detailing your tiered end-of-service strategy."

"There's... no service. I mean, it's a single-player offline game. I - "

"I don't know or care what that means. You're making a videogame, right? And you're trying to sell it online, for profit?"

"Y... er... Yes, I guess."

"That means it's an online service. So where's your 55-B?"

"Okay. What do I have to do to get this form?"

"That's your responsibility. Make sure you have a $500 application fee ready when you arrive at the nearest office."

"God. Which is where? Oh c'mon, that's 50 miles away!"

"That's your responsibility. Oh, and there's a $500 notice fee. Make sure you have that, too."

Yeah, no. Screw Ross for trying to involve the government in this shit. He's just trying to be a celebrity, and in 10 years' time, if there even is a games industry left, we'll all suffer for it.
Never give the government a back-door into your hobbies and interests. All they care about is MONEY (how to milk it from you) and CONTROL.
Click to expand...
"it excludes games provided via subscription services, free-to-play games, and games that are inherently playable offline indefinitely"
 
SomeGit said:
I like how you are trying to paint this very convoluted and wasteful fictional worst case unrealistic process, yet it still pales in comparison to what you need to do to actually set up a company and go into development.
You don't just go into Steam, shit out an exe and you are an indie game developer. You need to do a lot unless you want to be raped by the IRS, in comparison to what you have to do to establish a startup company or an LLC to handle revenue/taxes, driving 50 miles and paying 1k$ is child's play.
Click to expand...
Let's pretend I didn't already know that.

Why make it harder?

(+ the IRS thing already kind of goes along with my argument.)

"it excludes games provided via subscription services, free-to-play games, and games that are inherently playable offline indefinitely"
Click to expand...

Cool. But I already said the real danger of this law is how it can and will be used as precedent - specifically that it will springboard more and more focused and intensive regulation of the industry, for the almost central purpose of generating revenue for the government.

Plus, I just really don't like California.
 
Last edited:
Walliwallipaloo said:
Let's pretend I didn't already know that.

Why make it harder?

(+ the IRS thing already kind of goes along with my argument.)
Click to expand...
Because you are making a big deal of something, that even your worst case unreallistic scenario is at most 1 day of work.
Again, compared to what you have to do now, it's not even a blocker and it won't happen anyway.
 
Last edited:
SomeGit said:
Because you are making a big deal of something, that even your worst case unreallistic scenario is at most 1 day of work.
Again, compared to what you have to do now, it's not even a blocker and it won't happen anyway.
Click to expand...
"Unrealistic." That's funny. See above: "just because you haven't been burned yet."

Aside from that, this smacks of "Thank you, sir, may I have another." What's another burden? My response to you is, at what point do you think the burdens stop piling up? What sort of insipid argument is that? "Oh, the government makes things hard already. What's so wrong about them making it even harder?"

This is how you litigate things out of existence, when you otherwise have no legal basis to do so. You make things so costly or difficult to do that, eventually, that thing is really just not worth the time, or is simply too risky. It's effective. It works.
 
Walliwallipaloo said:
"Unrealistic." That's funny. See above: "just because you haven't been burned yet."

Aside from that, this smacks of "Thank you, sir, may I have another." What's another burden? My response to you is, at what point do you think the burdens stop piling up? What sort of insipid argument is that? "Oh, the government makes things hard already. What's so wrong about them making it even harder?"

This is how you litigate things out of existence, when you otherwise have no legal basis to do so. You make things so costly or difficult to do that, eventually, that thing is really just not worth the time, or is simply too risky. It's effective. It works.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you wont' convince with a slippery slope falacy.
Oh it's not the bill, it's what may come after!!!!! And trying to call me a bootlicker wont' work either.

Yeah, yeah, I'm sure the world is going to fall for this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Stop Killing Games is discussed in UK Parliament
28
761
CuNi replied
Do indie/retro games need a Dogme movement?
8
354
Guilty_AI replied
Sennheiser Momentum 4 for PS5 gaming ?
2
56
5K
Arioco replied
Stop Killing Games has Reached 1,000,000 Signatures.
News  2 3 4 5 6
290
6K
Bojji replied
Ubisoft’s CEO fights back against Stop Killing Games initiative
46
2K
kpopSuperstar replied
Top Bottom