undefined

points

[-]

I understand where you are coming from, but look at what else copyright protection has brought: studios and publishers are so insecure that they want to lock consumers out of 10+ year old games so that they don't have to compete with (their own) past games.

Maybe putting some pressure on making games that are actually new and different isn't a bad thing.

by rvz6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> I understand where you are coming from...

I don't think you do. But please continue.

> Maybe putting some pressure on making games that are actually new and different isn't a bad thing.

That's not the point. It is what comes afterwards and software engineers cannot have it both ways.

This will make game studios move to world models with the real game being never released, but only simulated and streamed to you.

So let's see what happens.

by ThrowawayR25 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That genie escaped the bottle a couple decades ago when The Pirate Bay went online and game studios and publishers started focusing on MMOs and other live service games that couldn't be torrented to compensate. This is a pittance in comparison and it's for a long dead console platform to boot.

by Pannoniae6 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

And why do you think people won't be able to rip the streamed games too?

by flohofwoe5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It's a bit harder to reverse engineer a game from a video stream than from a binary+data dump ;) (of course an LLM can come up with a knock-off that roughly has the same theme of what it sees in the video-stream, but that would basically be "Italian Spiderman - the Game".

by Pannoniae2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Sure, but the LLM can either 1. recreate the assets from the good old "view it from multiple angles" trick 2. exfil the running game from the servers :P

by thereader126 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

I don't think reverse engineering or open source is creating the starving artists.

Also, video game programmers are already starving artists comparatively. To many people want to make video games to exploitation is rife. Only publishers benefit from your rhetoric. At least artists get royalties

by rvz6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Also, video game programmers are already starving artists comparatively.

So this is making it better for them?

> To many people want to make video games to exploitation is rife. Only publishers benefit from your rhetoric. At least artists get royalties

Now both the publisher and the artist (we can now include game developer) will get $0 and cannot have it both ways.

We can accept mass decompilation of games and existing ones being sold today and offered for free, and also accept significant layoffs and the collapse of an entire industry.

by nullify884 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Have you not seen the mass layoffs from Microsoft and other major publishers? And the toxic work environment they are often associated with? AI has nothing to do with that. I hope we see a resurgence in Indie studios and studios that care about their community and customers and not pulling rug pulls like Ubisoft do. Or the union busting Rockstar did.

The industry needs a shake up.