so i just heard about this super interesting hearing that happened in the european parliament, and i'm still trying to process how cool it is. basically, there's this movement called stop killing games that's all about preventing game developers from shutting down their online servers once the game isn't profitable anymore. it's a huge issue for gamers like me who get really invested in games, only to have them taken away from us.



i think what's really interesting about this hearing is that it's not just some small group of gamers complaining - it's actually a pretty big deal, with people from the european parliament getting involved. the founder of stop killing games, ross scott, and one of the organizers, moritz katzner, were the ones who presented their case to the parliament. and apparently, it went really well - like, all the parliament members were responding positively, which is pretty amazing.



one of the things that was discussed during the hearing was how game shutdowns actually happen. apparently, it's often a business decision, and not just because the game is old or something. consultant daniel ondruška made a really good point that games from 20 years ago can still be played, but games from just a few years ago can't, and that's just because of design and business choices. it's pretty crazy to think about how some games can just be taken away from us like that.



ross scott also talked about how including end-of-life planning in a game's development budget can actually have a really small impact. and sometimes, game studios overestimate how much it'll cost to keep a game alive, because they're factoring in features that aren't even needed once the game is offline. it's pretty interesting to see the behind-the-scenes stuff, andRead more: Full article on www.pcgamer.com

What do you think about this?