Quoting: Purple Library GuyBoarding sports? Arrr, matey! Like "Deck rush" and "advanced cutlass brandishing"?

"Three-peg-legged race", "Timber Shivering", "Hookball" and "Jolly Rogering". No wait, scratch the last one. But you could quite easily think up a bunch of silly events for a pirate themed "sports" game à la Blood 'n Guts [External Link] on the C64. (But maybe leave out the cat throwing...)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain Man

Quoting: Kimyrielle

Quoting: Mountain ManWhat they're demanding is simply not realistic and will most likely encourage developers and publishers out of the European market, or perhaps release special "EU Exclusive" titles that are basically crippled out of the box.

As I said, the power already rests in the hands of the consumers. If you don't like that a game could be "remotely disabled" (talk about a straw man!), then don't buy it. It's as simple as that. No heavy-handed government involvement necessary.

It might not go anywhere, but not for the reason you stated. I frankly don't understand which part of "release the server software and/or remove the DRM when you're commercially done with a game" isn't 'realistic'. Of course it is, and it would cost studios near nothing to publish the required components when they stop monetizing a game.

The reason why it won't happen is more like because governments don't care enough, or don't want to interfere with the Holy Free Market, and not because it couldn't be done.

As noted, it simply may not be legally possible for a company to essentially release a game for free when it contains proprietary and copyrighted content. It's not as simple as some people would like it to be.

You keep ignoring the fact that this isn't what the initiative is about. Nobody is being told to release their games for free. Even "essentially".

They've already sold that content to their customers. The game should be left in a (reasonably) playable state for those existing customers unless there's a very good reason not to.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManWhat they're demanding is simply not realistic and will most likely encourage developers and publishers out of the European market, or perhaps release special "EU Exclusive" titles that are basically crippled out of the box.

I suppose it might happen some day. Although if a dev/publisher does something like that, I bet they'll lose way more than just EU customers due to the backlash. The gamble seems worth it to me. You might sympathise with corporations over gamers, but it's not European gamers versus the rest, as evidenced by the comments here alone.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManI am familiar with this initiative and its pipe dream goals of essentially strong arming game developers into releasing their products for free after there is no longer a viable market for them

Doesn't seem like you are familiar with it, seeing as it doesn't try to force anyone to release anything for free. At least read the three paragraph quote in the article before you build up any more straw men.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManTo be frank, if the government takes up this cause and passes legislation saying that companies must make their games available to consumers in perpetuity, then I can see a lot of developers and publishers deciding that the EU market isn't worth the trouble.

Easy to see you didn't read the initiative. Or even the article. And that you're not European. You just want to knee-jerk about regulation being bad.

Businesses will not simply give up a big chunk of their customer base just because they don't get to make up the rules as they go. They keep threatening to, but they just don't. They're not in it for the ideology after all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KimyrielleLegally, I can't see initiatives like this going anywhere. Our society seems to ban undesirable business practices only when people start dying, and otherwise let "the market" sort it out. In other words, do nothing and let businesses screw their customers for fun and profit.

This particular initiative might not go anywhere, but the EU doesn't always bend over for corporate interests. Some pro-consumer regulations do get enacted. Your defeatism is not entirely warranted. And this is an official EU Citizen's Initiative, not a petition, despite Liam's choice of words in the title. If it gathers enough votes, it'll end up as a legislative proposal.

I signed, obviously.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPBut "Linux is for everyone" does not imply that, at all, it implies that everyone can just use it and will be perfectly fine with it, that it will be the right choice/tool for them, that it was designed to be the right choice/tool for everyone - that simply isn't the case.

Thanks for trying to explain my own words to me, but you're wrong. When I said "Linux is for everyone", I meant simply that there's no specific group of users that is allowed to use Linux, while some others do not qualify. And looking at the efforts by various distros to cater to an ever growing audience, with accessibility features, localization support, usability design, compatibility features etc. you don't have a leg to stand on even by your definition.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPUsing Linux requires a little bit more of technical inclination than, say Windows or Mac.

I disagree. Otherwise my elderly relatives wouldn't have been happily using Linux on their home computers for years, or would at least need frequent assistance, while in actual fact they've needed a lot less after the transition away from Windows.

Obviously there are use cases where Linux users aren't well served right now, but that's not because there's a deliberate plan on the Linux development side to exclude them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPDo you think medicine would get better if only more people were allowed to be doctors regardless of qualification? Police? Diplomacy? Law? Teaching?

I find it very funny that you think a Linux gaming community like this is comparable to doctors or teachers. That's like comparing people building sand castles to life guards. They're both groups that exist, but only one of them needs qualifications.

Even if someone builds sloppy castles and doesn't listen to advice from more experienced builders, it's all good as long as they're having fun, seeing as that's the only purpose of the activity. The only one in that community who needs to be shut out is the one sabotaging everyone else's fun.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI would just be lying to them and in contrast to others throwing toxically positive platitudes ala "Linux is for everyone" in their face, that would make me feel bad.

Linux is literally for everyone. Just look at the license(s). There are no artificial barriers for entry, and it's not up to you to come up with them. Not that there's any reason to do so, even if you disagree without providing any rational reasoning to support that position. Maybe it's just a general conservative mindset and resistance to change?

And everyone obviously benefits from using free and open source software, especially something as polished as Linux. It's good for their privacy and increasingly for their convenience as well. Not to mention the health of the ecosystem. I personally might not benefit from the composition of the community changing, seeing as I've already been happy with the state of Linux for more than half my (longer than I'd like to admit at this point) life, but that's irrelevant.

You go ahead and tilt at windmills all you want. There's lots of communities built around Linux, and some of them are more amenable to your point of view. This one specifically prohibits gatekeeping in the site rules, and that has in my view been beneficial to its health and growth.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPYou can still be welcoming, those are not mutually exclusive, but you have to have standards of who you do and who you do not want as a new part of the community. I don't think there is an alternative - only each person's standards will be different here.

Trying to manage access to something you have no means (or right) to control is futile and counterproductive.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Linuxerlast time iwas here i was told that linux is not for me and shuld go bakc to windows too

Sadly, gatekeepers tend to pop up in every community.

Linux is for everyone, and we were all newbies once.

View this comment - View article - View full comments