Everyone just loves untested forced updates. /s

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    So at what point (in your opinion) does it become okay to discontinue a paid game? Are they supposed to still be running servers for games from 1997, so the 2 people who still remember it can occasionally log into the dead matchmaking service for nostalgia? Obviously this is a ridiculous example, but if your answer isn’t “Yes, they should”, then that means there’s a point somewhere between that and now when it’s okay to shut down the service, so where is that line?

    • Hot Saucerman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They could have just left it in people’s libraries with the option of people using community servers, something that a lot of gaming companies have traditionally done. They give the server software to the players, who then spin up community servers and keep the game going. There was literally nothing stopping them from just leaving a game that no longer functions in the Steam library.

      You can still buy Titanfall on Steam and have it in your library and last I checked, multiplayer for that game hasn’t worked in years. EA isn’t pulling it from people’s libraries because of that.

      • sane@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is literally what they’ve done. The default is CS2, but you can select a beta version in steam which enables CS:GO again. Matchmaking servers are all migrated to CS2, ofcourse, but community servers still work.

        The reason they replaced CS:GO with CS2 instead of creating a seperate game is to not split the playerbase. Back when CS:Source released, the playerbase was essentially split in half, with many choosing to remain on CS 1.6, and it took a lot of effort to make CS:GO the standard.

      • UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gamers: everybody expect steam is terrible

        Steam: does the same shitty practices as the other companies gamers were complaining about

        Gamers: no this is actually a good thing

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re not going to maintain two separate codebases just so people can have community servers. That’s ridiculous.

    • Maven (famous)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Companies don’t need to run servers for old games nobody plays but it is a crime against art and the people who worked on and enjoyed any of that material. All of the wonderful content made specifically for these games is just dead now while the company could’ve just released a way to self host the game. There is NO reason any game ever should die and any excuse otherwise is just feeding into the pockets of companies that want to kill history.