Publishers are absolutely terrified "preserved video games would be used for recreational purposes," so the US copyright office has struck down a major effort for game preservation
Publishers are absolutely terrified "preserved video games would be used for recreational purposes," so the US copyright office has struck down a major effort for game preservation
"This fails the needs of citizens in favor of a weak sauce argument from the industry, and it's really disappointing"
A three-year fight to help support game preservation has come to a sad end today. The US copyright office has denied a request for a DMCA exemption that would allow libraries to remotely share digital access to preserved video games.
"For the past three years, the Video Game History Foundation has been supporting with the Software Preservation Network (SPN) on a petition to allow libraries and archives to remotely share digital access to out-of-print video games in their collections," VGHF explains in its statement. "Under the current anti-circumvention rules in Section 1201 of the DMCA, libraries and archives are unable to break copy protection on games in order to make them remotely accessible to researchers."
Essentially, this exemption would open up the possibility of a digital library where historians and researchers could 'check out' digital games that run through emulators. The VGHF argues that around 87% of all video games released in the US before 2010 are now out of print, and the only legal way to access those games now is through the occasionally exorbitant prices and often failing hardware that defines the retro gaming market.
If im reading it correctly only the sharing is prohibited not the preservation.
I can live with that and fight again another day. As long as they still exist in an archive they will see the legal light of day someday(im being optimistic)
The high seas will take care of retro gamers who want to play them im sure, as Gaben says piracy is a service issue.
Given the industry's "you aren't buying, you are renting" mentality.... very, very optimistic.
When they kill the games, they no longer make money on them. So playing without paying is not a lost sale, even if the player is corrupt enough to enjoy playing. So there's no problem yeah?
This reeks of selling games on a "pay per new game save" kind of move. If "replay" is a threat, how long until they move to eliminate that?
Why play old fun games, when you could subscribe to the latest bland live service FOMO skinner box masquerading as a game?
I don't know where this industry is headed but it isn't to a good place.
Don’t let them hear why a lot of people go to museums.
Simple solution: Just lend people games that aren't any fun
“No! They’ll enjoy preserving our history to muuuch!!”
They know the dark secret of book preservation. The people preserving the books… gulp READ THEM!
Libraries facilitate widespread piracy of books, by allowing people to read them without a distribution licence, or even take them home!
This is a clear violation of the DMCA, and thus must be stopped immediately!
There's a group called Improv Everywhere that used to do really creative flash mobs like the No Pants Subway ride where they would all claim to have forgotten to put on pants that day, or going into a cafe and lugging 90s desktops in and dialing in, or during the Great Recession they had a suicide jumper on a 2ft high ledge which they dramatically had to talk down.
They once tried to do a "writers against libraries" stunt but it ended up not being funny enough because people kinda went "oh yeah libraries are kinda weird in that they just give out books for free"
Criminal contempt of business model, indeed.
I get the sarcasm even if others don’t.
Someone else on Lemmy said you couldn’t invent libraries today. It’s true.
Love how the people don't get represented or supported because of corporations and their insatiable greed.
Capitalism
The weird thing is, corporations can't even make any money from these older games. I guess they think that means people who can't play older games will just buy their newer garbage, and yet that's not how it works at all lol people just end up buying indie games instead these days.
Depending on marketing & their dedication to bringing it to market...again... they can & they do. Digitally. Nintendo has sold old video games on the Wii, Wii U platform. Then, they packaged & released the NES & SNES Classic consoles, very smart move actually & it was a cute product that appealed to many consumers.
Since then, Nintendo's greed has grown. They no longer sell because they don't want you to own copies of old videogames....they want to rent them to you by the month or year. Via Nintendo Online subscriptions, you can browse the whole catalog & play all kinds of old games. It requires a Switch, an internet connection, and don't forget that sweet, sweet Nintendo Online subscription. Once you've gotten your fix & you cancel your subscription, you own nothing & they've got your money. This is their goal, everything is going according to plan. Subscription models for endless reven on old games.
You will give them your money, you will own nothing, and you will be happy.
gotta make them fear you
It's about preserving the consumption culture for the mainstream. If playing older games for free was easier and legal, more people that now only play the newest AAA garbage would start doing it, and corpos don't want to risk that culture change, because if it gets big enough it would definitely impact their sales.
Unfortunately not many people know or care about indie games and free games like Beyond All Reason, Shattered Pixel Dungeon, etc. as is.
They could and sometimes make a relatively small amount of money, but it's more about trying to legally protect their trademarks/intellectual property as I understand it. These days I'd much rather support an indie dev over a shitty "AAA" company for sure, tired of them price gouging people for games that aren't even that good.
Game makers that sell new games that aren't completed (DLC) with DAY 1 launch problems being not only expected but usually the only way a game gets media attention these days is catastrophic launch.
Actually explains a lot of decisions by game publishers the last 5-10 years if their official position is that games are meant to collect dust on a shelf rather than being played.
You can't have criticisms about the game if you put it on a shelf instead of playing it.
Sure you can, criticisms like "takes up too much shelf space" or "is too heavy for my shelf", "doesn't go with the color of my wallpaper behind the shelf".
They can dick about as much as they want, piracy will make sure to preserve the things they want gone. The reason they don't want older games to be preserved is that new generations, whilst playing them, may come to realize that you don't need gacha mechanics, stupid fomo, micro transactions, 6 different currencies, 3 different shop menus, 2 battlepasses and so forth to have a good game.
They really want to force gamers to buy their new games which are pretty much like the old games but now with extra helpings of ads, gambling mechanics and micro transactions on top
They really want to force gamers to buy the old games, just as they were, because those are next to free to adapt to a different platform and people will pay for them.
Not to be my usual old codger, but a lot of these game in questions were microtransaction-based to being with, in the very Farmville-y format of charging you a quarter for each set of three lives and then being ungodly broken and difficult to make sure those three lives didn't last any longer than a minute each and entice you to pay for three more.
This absolutely sucks, is based on unjustifiable logic and takes the side of business over a demonstrable common good, but let's not pretend the business logic behind it was invented in 2005. Game publishers have been game publishers longer than many of the nostalgic posters have been alive.
I don't think we're talking about arcade games at this point though. We're talking to a large extent about 3rd–6th generation home gaming consoles. For Nintendo, that's the NES to GameCube. Sony entered with the PlayStation in the 5th gen, and Xbox came out in 6th.
I think a lot of people would see this (and to a slightly lesser extent the 7th gen) as the high point where games came out in a completed state and you paid once and the just enjoyed the game.
They really want to force gamers to buy the old games, just as they were, because those are next to free to adapt to a different platform and people will pay for them.
Nah, if they had wanted that, they would continue to release them in that format. As it stands, they don't, so you can't buy those old games from the publisher either.
🐶 NO PLAY
🐶 ONLY BUY
Well that's fucking stupid.
.... but not surprising.
Corruption from potato supreme all the way down and back up to Orange Hitler
I don't think I'll ever buy a game from a AAA publisher again,they can't be trusted and the quality of their goods has fallen sharply the last few years.
Smaller dev teams have better/more interesting IP AND seem to care what I think as their end user.
The only AAA game I WAS interested in was GTA6, but after that they just did to GTA5 I’m not interested anymore. I use Linux and they just added anti-cheat that is compatible with Linux but never enabled compatibility. They don’t want me to buy their game.
God forbid we... checks notes preserve games so we can play them?
I wonder if the EU can somehow prevent DMCA being applied to European internet users.
Wouldn't hold my breath, they're just as rabid about copyright as the US is.
Guess I'll have to start hoarding games now
I guess people rent movies and books because they hate them!
How dare people use games for recreation! Why would they not think about the shareholders!
Someone's got to do something about these fucking chicken shit publishers. I think it's time for the industry to move on without them. Everything can be self published now. We have the technology.
Music publishers have been obsolete for two decades but they're still around. Don't need to provide a service when you have enough money to write the laws.
They're right though. Those archived games would definitely be played... For fun. The problem is that even though the graphics aren't as good, a lot of older games were fun and had great replayability. Eventually, there will be such a big historical catalog of games that people will be able to enjoy just legacy games without ever buying new ones.
The solution is simple: have some non-profit org manage the historical catalog, sell the old games super cheap, and send that way whoever holds the rights can still get profits off the old games. They could even give you different download options like game-only, or game in a VM that is guaranteed to actually be able to run the game.
Problem with their logic is that, as stated in the article, goods such as preserved books are already used for recreation. Your idea that a catalogue of old media would prevent consumption of new media is provably false by example. People read old books and it doesn't stop them from reading new ones. Can you imagine saying this exact same thing about music? People's tastes change over time and they like new things- old things don't stop us from consuming the new things. All the copyright lobbyists are doing is preventing the public from enjoying old games that can no longer be played because the hardware is dated or there are no viable copies left.
🏴☠️