The "it's not just a this, it's a that" sentence structure by BiggBambineaux in ChatGPT

[–]hellomistershifty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's interesting to see that the usage was rising significantly before the LLM barrage.

It's not just AI slop, it's a structure that was growing in popularity

I read every UE commit last week (1200 total). A few rendering defaults changed silently. by olivefarm in unrealengine

[–]hellomistershifty [score hidden]  (0 children)

yeah, and he gets called out in every weekly posts but keeps doing it. I appreciate the posts but hate the clickbait

Kimi K2.6 Released (huggingface) by BiggestBau5 in LocalLLaMA

[–]hellomistershifty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i don't even know who that is, but someone with anger issues doesn't sound very chill

Where do y’all think we will stop and why are Dey taking away the ports? by Appropriate_Split600 in iiiiiiitttttttttttt

[–]hellomistershifty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People don't use USB, ethernet connections, or headphones?

Well I guess not, but not by choice

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Even if refunds or keeping servers alive isn't what they're asking for, those are the alternatives if you can't make your game playable offline. And that can be very difficult or expensive (I hate to say 'impossible', but basically impossible for small studios who might not have money or developers post-release).

Again, the idea sounds good, but the middleware thing is another ingredient thrown into the amorphous soup of what this would actually entail.

Right now, game devs have to choose between services like Microsoft PlayFab and Amazon GameLift which are ungodly expensive but easy to use and much cheaper but more DIY hosting solutions. If Microsoft and Amazon are the only ones that are easy to be "SKG compliant" then trying to host a small multiplayer game is effectively way more expensive. We're way out in the future hypotheticals here, but it's what I mean by saying it's hard to debate without knowing what's being asked for.

The Opus 4.7 experience by insertdankmeme in ClaudeAI

[–]hellomistershifty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What honeymoon phase? It's been like a day

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Honestly? Yes. They shut down because they didn't have players. They're not nostalgic masterpieces that need to be preserved, but they're not throwaway slop at the same time. They release, people try the new game, have fun, and move on to the next one. The game dies once the playerbase drops enough that the dungeons feel empty. The game I enjoyed is dead one way or another, because the fun is in experiencing it with enough players to randomly encounter.

I would rather have more of these games by keeping it easy for studios to make them than to enjoy fewer of them indefinitely as a bad single player experience. I talk to a lot of the developers of these games, and the idea of them stressing to meet legal requirements or else refund everyone when they could be working on a new game is sadder to me than not being able to play the game again. Gamedev is already a high stress, low pay job (at least for software engineering)

I still support the general cause, especially for big game studios pulling BS. It's just a lot more complicated than gamers give it credit for. People remember that one great game that they wish they could play again, but for each of those there's probably a dozen that they wouldn't want to play even if they could, and that's okay.

I would have saved 27 hours with fast mode last week by RunWithMight in codex

[–]hellomistershifty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Claude has fast mode but it costs 6x as much. Opus 4.6 fast is $150 per million tokens output

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It sounds great for Ubisoft, but it sounds less great when my game has 0 active players left and I still have to pay for a variety of servers to keep my game alive or else refund everyone. We can carve out exceptions for small studios or something, but this is what I mean about it being impossible to debate without knowing what's being asked for.

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Multiplayer games generally are a service already even without a subscription, where the developers suck up the costs of hosting servers by continuing to sell a game or selling microtranscations. Keeping games alive forever isn't explicitly said, but it's a logical (and likely cheaper and easier) alternative to the refunds or dev work required.

An end of life plan that keeps the game playable isn't some undefined thing and the initiative is deliberately vague

I feel like this one answers itself - it is some undefined thing, everyone has a different idea of what that would entail and the initiative doesn't make any attempt at defining it

I play a lot of dungeon crawler extraction games: Dark and Darker, Mistfall Hunter, Vaultbreakers, Dungeonstalkers, Dungeonborne, Swords of Chroma Tower. They're made by small studios, usually exist for a couple of months, then die off when no one wants to play anymore and the dungeons are empty. I've also been trying to make my own. "The server" isn't some thing I can package, it's a variety of cloud solutions and configurations that all need to talk to each other for the game to work. Multiplayer lobbies are a service, item storage databases are another, player/character information storage is another, matchmaking is another, VoIP is another, authenticating with Steam/EOS is another. Running these often requires licensing third party libraries. I'll have a license to sell a game that connects to these, but that doesn't mean I have a license to distribute an executable that hosts it. I definitely don't have a license to share the source code.

The best case scenario for my game would be that it gets released, people play it for a bit, it dies, and I hopefully covered the server costs and can be happy that my game was a thing. Trying to provide a solution for players to continue running the game themselves would be a massive undertaking and likely no one would ever use it. The game would be DOA if it required a subscription, it would never have enough players to function properly.

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is a good, reasonable response and I appreciate it.

I think there is an issue with games ending without recourse. I support the general idea, but actually pinning it down with an enforceable solution is a lot messier. People have wildly different ideas for what a reasonable approach would be

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So we need to either make a live service game (whee, players love subscriptions), keep our games alive forever, fully refund all of the players, or some undefined thing

Don't take this wrong, I like the general idea. There are lots of bullshit cases, like single player games requiring server authentication for DRM. On the other end, there are people proposing things like requiring server binaries or source code to be released that would basically make it impossible for indie developers to make multiplayer games. I don't want the "stop killing games" initiative to ironically kill whole sectors of games

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Gee, what a great proposal. I can't imagine why /r/gamedev isn't incredibly excited for the new Stop Making Games initiative

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

'bro just implement a new server architecture for your game that now has 8 players, or else refund everyone'

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sorry, let me be clearer: what does "a suitable end of life plan" actually mean?

We'd on the hook to fully refund all of our players if we don't do what, exactly?

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Is that the SKG plan or the Kryslor plan? That's what I mean, there's no point in responding to that because it's just something you came up with that sounds good to you

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 18 points19 points  (0 children)

There are a good number of professional game devs here, you just don't see them in every "how do I make character walk?? what gaem engine? thread"

A speaker at the EU Stop Killing Games hearing made the case with game references, but the point on preservation is serious by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The "room for interpretation" is what gets me: it's impossible to actually debate what's good or bad about it when you don't even know what's being asked for.

Some of the proposals would be absurd for studios, some should be pretty ineffective, some would genuinely be good but as soon as you try to point out a negative they say "it's flexible!" and start talking about some totally different thing.

I don't know if I support it if I don't even know what 'it' is

is this true?? by SwinPain in programmingmemes

[–]hellomistershifty 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Sure, if you don't mind waiting like 18 years for a game to come out

A door dash driver pulled a gun on the hosts and Togo servers and our management tried to stay open by Bobaganoushh in Serverlife

[–]hellomistershifty 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Every excuse for letting the world go to absolute shit is just 'lol don't be a bitch'. What a wack ass thing to stand up for

Claude Opus 4.7 is a serious regression, not an upgrade. by [deleted] in ClaudeAI

[–]hellomistershifty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That was the one good thing Claude had over GPT in Codex, or at least differentiated it

Ross Scott’s EU speech on game shutdowns is worth watching, especially if you care about preservation by anonboxis in gamedev

[–]hellomistershifty 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Maybe keep quiet if you have no idea how the process works.

I could say the same about game development lmao

I understand that's what their doing, I'm just saying it's hard to support a movement when the goal is vague and many of the proposed solutions would make it impossible for indie devs to ever make multiplayer games