← Back to context

Comment by dawnerd

3 days ago

They should release either the server component or documentation for how it works and a way to unlock any protections around it. I’ve seen people argue before that releasing the whole backend stack would be an issue and I agree, but documentation shouldn’t be an issue.

10 comments

dawnerd

Reply
pooloo  3 days ago

I would prefer that this become the standard for software, as a whole, to be open source after a while. Because there is a sustainability aspect, just like the rest of the tools in our world.

For example, a manual drill has no real draw backs it will always run. An electric drill with a cord, will likely always run and electrical components can be traced and sourced rather easily. A drill that was designed to use with a battery, will not always run, and has software/firmware with some other limitations likely buried in the software.

The moment support is dropped, it should be released to open source to allow others interested to maintain it. Such as with the Nvidia Geforce GTX 1080 Ti... no longer supported with driver updates (outside of "security updates"). The firmware should be supported by the people if the company doesn't want to support it, it still is an excellent card even 10 years later...

MMO or not, source code should just be released. Patents are not forever, source code shouldn't be either. Though patent might be too long as well. 15/20 years worked when things developed slowly, but now days its outdated within years and could benefit other advancements.

  • EvanAnderson  3 days ago

    If a company is willing to continue maintaining a piece of code their monopoly should continue. If they choose to stop (because they can't come up with a sustainable business model, can't find somebody to sell the monopoly to who will, etc) it should become, at minimum, source available (if not out right Open Source).

    This should be the case, especially, for software that drives long-lived hardware devices in infrastructure roles (public works, manufacturing, etc).

  • boredatoms  3 days ago

    The 1080ti support depreciation is a travesty. Its still plays games great. Makes it hard to justify future nvidia purchases for gaming rigs

maccard  2 days ago

But that’s not the same thing as supporting offline mode, at all.

> but documentation shouldn’t be an issue

Oh boy. I would bet that at any medium sized games company the number of people who can run the full stack of a game from client to backend locally is single digits, and that it is absolutely not documented.

baggy_trough  3 days ago

Documentation? In the video game industry? Surely you jest.

  • 6510  3 days ago

    seems a good price to pay, it gives that guy something to do before he can switch off the server/product.

    • whaleofatw2022  2 days ago

      I think part of the comment is related to the typically much more lackluster management of video game source code, historically.

      If I recall (as an example) Final Fantasy 8 had to be redone based on the PC port rather than original source code because, well, nobody cared about that back then.

      The situation has almost certainly improved since then. Still, we have to remember that cases like Doom and Quake where there was cleanish source code was an exception, not the norm.

      Doubly so when there are 'licensed' libraries or middleware involved, stuff coming to mind being:

      - DMX sound driver (Doom) - RAD tools (e.x. Warcraft/Diablo for cutscene video) - Renderware (GTA2/3 and Vice City, among others) - Console SDKs (in the case of console games)

      And, again, sure. It's possible that if the source code is clean enough, you can safely rip those things out without needing legal review. But if the source isn't clean enough (and a lot of games, its not) there is a concern.

      Doubly so when it comes to console only releases and not wanting to accidentally anger a manufacturer by unintentionally exposing an undiscovered exploit.