UK Gamers, This Government Petition Concerns You.

[deMangler]

There is a UK government petition to clarify when, legally, a developer can no longer support a game.

Of course games can become unplayable for all sorts of reasons, hardware and OS obsolescence for example are not the developers fault. There are lots of cases where this may apply though. Specifically it is important to make sure that consumers are clearly informed that a game that requires on-line connectivity to function can become unplayable at any time with no refund.



A PCGamer article clarifying this is here:

https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry ... -software/


The petition for the government to consider this is here.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/659071/

[Czert]

im no sure i follow. when player play any online game it was/is normaly understood that developer can shut down his game servers at any time he likes, while usualy developer give advance time warning that game servers will stop working and game will no longer be playable/avaivable.

off-line games are not subject o this, so if player want to have his game indefinetely (as long as his hw is working) then go for these games.

[deMangler]

im no sure i follow. when player play any online game it was/is normaly understood that developer can shut down his game servers at any time he likes, while usualy developer give advance time warning that game servers will stop working and game will no longer be playable/avaivable.

off-line games are not subject o this, so if player want to have his game indefinetely (as long as his hw is working) then go for these games.

This is about non-subscription or non licence games that when you buy them you own them. It is about clearly informing the consumer what they are buying at point of sale. There are loopholes in UK law for software that is becoming an issue for buying games. Single-player games are an example, although there are many multi-player without a centralised server as well
The point is at the moment software providers do not (in the UK) have to state clearly that the product you have bought can be rendered unusable at any time. For example an online DRM no longer functioning. This is out of step with other UK consumer law and most people in the UK would incorrectly assume they have this consumer protection.
The UK has a strong tradition of consumer rights so this is an exception to the way consumer law currently works in the UK. UK consumers are assuming they will be able to own and play a game they bought for life, when this is not the case sometimes and the product does not have clear information about this.

The UK has a system where if enough people care about something it is raised in parliament. This is pointing out that it is on the way to being considered for those who might be interested.

I think the linked article explains it but in any case it is really only about UK law, other countries have their own thing going on probably.

[ernieschwitz]

Tell me how it is relevant to me, a Non-UK citizen?

[deMangler]

Tell me how it is relevant to me, a Non-UK citizen?

It may not be.
I suppose it depends if your country has a similar issue.
Someone on another forum where I also posted about the UK issue told me that there was a similar thing going on in Australia, and pointed me to this site:

https://www.stopkillinggames.com/

There is a page there about different countries:

https://www.stopkillinggames.com/countries

But I didn't know about that when I posted originally, I just heard about the UK problem and a potential to fix it, and google seemed to indicate there was not a lot of awareness so...

[gamer78]

'The point is at the moment software providers do not (in the UK) have to state clearly that the product you have bought can be rendered unusable at any time'

Fallout mini series from game resulted Fallout 4 game popularity to have an next gen update. Broke all mods. Bethesda bad decision after Starfield. But I'm not sure how laws can decide companies decisions or how can one decide unusuble product.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

I pay $95 to fill my truck, probably 5 times month.
Groceries & food probably $1000/month
Paid $25 for my last game

Glad to hear Sherlock, Charles, Megan, Tony Blair, Wimbledon, British Open PGA tournament are on the case.

[Czert]

im no sure i follow. when player play any online game it was/is normaly understood that developer can shut down his game servers at any time he likes, while usualy developer give advance time warning that game servers will stop working and game will no longer be playable/avaivable.

off-line games are not subject o this, so if player want to have his game indefinetely (as long as his hw is working) then go for these games.

This is about non-subscription or non licence games that when you buy them you own them. It is about clearly informing the consumer what they are buying at point of sale. There are loopholes in UK law for software that is becoming an issue for buying games. Single-player games are an example, although there are many multi-player without a centralised server as well
The point is at the moment software providers do not (in the UK) have to state clearly that the product you have bought can be rendered unusable at any time. For example an online DRM no longer functioning. This is out of step with other UK consumer law and most people in the UK would incorrectly assume they have this consumer protection.
The UK has a strong tradition of consumer rights so this is an exception to the way consumer law currently works in the UK. UK consumers are assuming they will be able to own and play a game they bought for life, when this is not the case sometimes and the product does not have clear information about this.

The UK has a system where if enough people care about something it is raised in parliament. This is pointing out that it is on the way to being considered for those who might be interested.

I think the linked article explains it but in any case it is really only about UK law, other countries have their own thing going on probably.

well, if you buy single player game which needs to be online to be running (without subscription), then it is common sense that you are a mercy of developer/publisher who will run servers to be able to play that game.
but need to say, this type of game is extremly rare (at least i know of). single player games i play (and know) dont need to be on-line at all (unless special cases like diablo 4 which have multiplayer too), and if they have multiplayer mode, then it is disabled when you are off-line. and you can play off-line these games safely.
for decentralized server games, my understanding is that everyone can setup his own servers to run that game.
common sense says that if you need anything to be on-line to be working (be it game, app for phone, programs, tv...etc) then once that on-line function stop working, then you are doomed (it will no longer work).
AFAIK here is no law on whole planet which is enforcing guaranteed time for on-line services to work. and forcing guaranteed time for it to work will only increase cost of services (games).
just look at green deal , it is forced and main effect for consumers are ever increasing and record high prices of electricity.

and if that petition will have any effect, expect that result will be when you buy that game, it will be "his game need on-line to function, and this game service is not guaranteed to be here forever" or something about these lines.