Would the publishers not argue, though, that the consumer should've known that the company provided the only legal means for the required servicing of the client? That seems like the argument to make in response to the ToS expiration justification for gamers feeling entitled to private server services: "The customer knew that we were the only entity who could legally provide the servers needed to experience the client when they purchased the title, and that we made no guarantee the service would continue."
Playing devil's advocate with regards to my own position, of course, but you seem knowledgeable about the matter, so I didn't wanna miss the chance to bend your ear for more information while you were here.
Let me offer, then, a disclaimer of my own to say that I'm just looking at this as an interesting debate, and my responses shouldn't be taken as official legal advice.
It is not up to a private entity to determine who or what is "the only legal means for the required servicing" of anyone. That is a power reserved for public entities who perform public functions. What a private entity can do is create a contract granting the party an exclusive right to provide services. For example, a city might enter into an exclusive contract with a catering service to provide coffee. The terms might dictate that the contract prevents the city from going to other caterers to service their events.
However, a contract goes two ways. The exclusivity exists so long as the exclusive party provides the service. If the catering company does not provide coffee, and shows no willingness or ability to ever provide coffee, the catering service can't prevent the city from seeking somebody else to provide coffee. If the exclusive party does not provide the service, and the exclusive party has made it clear that it is unwilling or unable to ever provide the service, the contract will typically not be sufficient to prevent the city from seeking coffee elsewhere. The law will typically declare the contract is void.
Now in the example argument you would give, if somebody were to actually argue that, they would probably not fare well. Because nobody makes promises to others who can't guarantee they will uphold their side of an agreement; they make promises on the good faith assumption that the agreement itself guarantees compliance on both sides of the agreement. If, indeed, the publisher declares itself "the only legal means," then why aren't they providing those means? And if they cannot guarantee that they will provide those means, then they cannot equally say that other legal means may be employed to gain what the provider is unwilling or unable to provide.
One didn't sign a contract and one didn't buy a game. One did buy a software license + service. NCsoft gave notice before pulling the plug, so one could find a new "game". As their service ended, they terminated ones license to use their software aswell. The only legal point one could bring is the expected vs reasonable "lifetime" of the software. For example built-in car navigation is only as good as its maps, so how many updates can one expect before it can be abandoned by the carbuilder? Over 40 years will ones grandchildren be entitled to a working navigation when they take this car out for a spin?
I have always believed emulation should be allowed for shut down MMORPG. Offer the game at cost to consumer to run or source code.
I am heavily invested in Microsoft digital games because it is cheaper to buy digital most times than 2 disc in a dual Xbox household. What happens if MS decides to get out of console market. Will I lose rights to access all of my games?
Imagine Steam is forced to shutdown. Should they be forced to give there gaming services to the public to at least access their game library or are they just gone?
This is what I'm getting at: it isn't a binary choice for Pubs or Devs to either shut the server down or lose all copyright/trademark protection. That's a false dichotomy used to push the idea that private server administrators are all scumbags trying to steal precious IPs from pubs/devs.
In fact, there's literally a legal agreement created specifically to give the parties other options: licensing agreements.
Nobody is saying lose copyright. If I pay for a game I should be able to play. Fine you shut down the service then I should be able to run my game at cost since it has been abandoned. This is not playere creating a new game off the IP. Just using the software they purchased.
I'm pretty sure I payed for Win 95. It won't work today. Just because I bought a copy of Win 95 doesn't mean that Microsoft is still obligated to support it. If I tried to release a pirated version of Win 95 today, I would expect Microsoft (and their many, many lawyers) would have something to say about it.
The City of Heroes game you bought was a client version that allowed you to connect and process proprietary signals from their server. You couldn't buy a copy of that server then, nor now. They (NCSoft) decided it wasn't worth their time and effort to continue providing that service. Nowhere was it implied that you should be able to run your copy of the game past the date that the service was provided. So, your argument has a major fallacy -- you were never sold the right to operate the COH client indefinitely, only as long as the service was in operation.
Nailed it, I couldn't think of an applicable analogy but yours is pretty spot on.
People have long failed to grasp when "buying" an "online" game you only have a right to play it as long as the "service" is available.
Could be 20 years, perhaps only 6 months, its a risk you take unless the game has an offline component, but few do these days.
And maybe it shouldn't be that way. Nobody is ignorant of how things are. Just doesn't mean we have to agree with how they are.
My opinion is if you fail to provide the service any longer the players themselves should be able to step in. Windows 95 just isn't supported. Microsoft would not stop users from supporting Windows 95 with patches. They won't shut down computers running it if they log on.
But they didn’t fail the service or no longer support it, they terminated it. Which they have every right to do so, you even agreed that they could when you signed up.
Secondly, you didn’t buy a product, you bought access to a service through a client. In reality you don’t own anything. This contrary to owning an actual OS, supported or not.
COX players aren’t being owned anything, some are however tampering with the IP and thats illegal. It really isn’t hard to understand, and with the ‘sympathy factor’ taken out of the equation nobody would disagree. But, because of feelings some think the lines can be blurred. Understandable? Yes. Right? No.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Except you and many others are just spewing out propaganda made by companies like EA with "games as a service". When that never used to be the case, and if that mob mentality existed years ago...GOG wouldn't even be around. Games as a service is a new thing to make as much money as possible on short lived junk games. It isn't to make gaming better, its to actually make money at the expense of gamers.
Yet I see mostly the same people complain how bad games are today than they used to be lol. Like yeah duh, "games as a service", its what you asked for lol. But again, if everyone thought that, GOG wouldn't even exist.
With that said, CoH case is different since the actual source code was stolen and leaked by a developer. That seems the unique case and actual issue than private servers.
(edit: When I used the word "you" I meant a general person kinda "you" Just to clarify. Cause I see often people spreading games as a service, when they are digging their own grave so to speak with junk games and then complain how bad games are these days lol)
To be clear, I think these times are the best to be a gamer, not an MMORPG lover, but a gamer. I also love GoG to death ever since being involved in the first Beta tests for the platform. In this case I am not one of “them.”
But, and this is a big but, I am not just spewing out propaganda, I am laying out the actual situation as it is, it doesn’t matter what you, or I, think about it. I don’t mind emulation, I’ve played both WAR and Vanguard emulated but in the case of COH its simply theft.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I have always believed emulation should be allowed for shut down MMORPG. Offer the game at cost to consumer to run or source code.
I am heavily invested in Microsoft digital games because it is cheaper to buy digital most times than 2 disc in a dual Xbox household. What happens if MS decides to get out of console market. Will I lose rights to access all of my games?
Imagine Steam is forced to shutdown. Should they be forced to give there gaming services to the public to at least access their game library or are they just gone?
This is what I'm getting at: it isn't a binary choice for Pubs or Devs to either shut the server down or lose all copyright/trademark protection. That's a false dichotomy used to push the idea that private server administrators are all scumbags trying to steal precious IPs from pubs/devs.
In fact, there's literally a legal agreement created specifically to give the parties other options: licensing agreements.
Nobody is saying lose copyright. If I pay for a game I should be able to play. Fine you shut down the service then I should be able to run my game at cost since it has been abandoned. This is not playere creating a new game off the IP. Just using the software they purchased.
I'm pretty sure I payed for Win 95. It won't work today. Just because I bought a copy of Win 95 doesn't mean that Microsoft is still obligated to support it. If I tried to release a pirated version of Win 95 today, I would expect Microsoft (and their many, many lawyers) would have something to say about it.
The City of Heroes game you bought was a client version that allowed you to connect and process proprietary signals from their server. You couldn't buy a copy of that server then, nor now. They (NCSoft) decided it wasn't worth their time and effort to continue providing that service. Nowhere was it implied that you should be able to run your copy of the game past the date that the service was provided. So, your argument has a major fallacy -- you were never sold the right to operate the COH client indefinitely, only as long as the service was in operation.
Nailed it, I couldn't think of an applicable analogy but yours is pretty spot on.
People have long failed to grasp when "buying" an "online" game you only have a right to play it as long as the "service" is available.
Could be 20 years, perhaps only 6 months, its a risk you take unless the game has an offline component, but few do these days.
And maybe it shouldn't be that way. Nobody is ignorant of how things are. Just doesn't mean we have to agree with how they are.
My opinion is if you fail to provide the service any longer the players themselves should be able to step in. Windows 95 just isn't supported. Microsoft would not stop users from supporting Windows 95 with patches. They won't shut down computers running it if they log on.
But they didn’t fail the service or no longer support it, they terminated it. Which they have every right to do so, you even agreed that they could when you signed up.
Secondly, you didn’t buy a product, you bought access to a service through a client. In reality you don’t own anything. This contrary to owning an actual OS, supported or not.
COX players aren’t being owned anything, some are however tampering with the IP and thats illegal. It really isn’t hard to understand, and with the ‘sympathy factor’ taken out of the equation nobody would disagree. But, because of feelings some think the lines can be blurred. Understandable? Yes. Right? No.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
We all understand the law. The sympathy factor isn't really a sympathy thing so much as knowing the companies have other avenues infinitely more amenable to both themselves and the players if they just offer the avenue, bit they don't.
And, since I'm not naive enough to believe some true arbiter of justice determined the laws in place, I can avoid committing the crime myself while not giving two fucks about the woes of any company whose product was discontinued like this and now shows up in private server form.
I get it, but the sympathy factor extends well beyond it being COH. Those evil, greedy, faceless, manipulating and soul crushing companies versus the abused, tricked and poor customer has that factor as well. And when you take all of that away you end up with ‘somebody stole something from somebody else and got away with it for six years.’ Which is a completely different situation then many are describing, even though I can sympathize.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I have always believed emulation should be allowed for shut down MMORPG. Offer the game at cost to consumer to run or source code.
I am heavily invested in Microsoft digital games because it is cheaper to buy digital most times than 2 disc in a dual Xbox household. What happens if MS decides to get out of console market. Will I lose rights to access all of my games?
Imagine Steam is forced to shutdown. Should they be forced to give there gaming services to the public to at least access their game library or are they just gone?
This is what I'm getting at: it isn't a binary choice for Pubs or Devs to either shut the server down or lose all copyright/trademark protection. That's a false dichotomy used to push the idea that private server administrators are all scumbags trying to steal precious IPs from pubs/devs.
In fact, there's literally a legal agreement created specifically to give the parties other options: licensing agreements.
Nobody is saying lose copyright. If I pay for a game I should be able to play. Fine you shut down the service then I should be able to run my game at cost since it has been abandoned. This is not playere creating a new game off the IP. Just using the software they purchased.
I'm pretty sure I payed for Win 95. It won't work today. Just because I bought a copy of Win 95 doesn't mean that Microsoft is still obligated to support it. If I tried to release a pirated version of Win 95 today, I would expect Microsoft (and their many, many lawyers) would have something to say about it.
The City of Heroes game you bought was a client version that allowed you to connect and process proprietary signals from their server. You couldn't buy a copy of that server then, nor now. They (NCSoft) decided it wasn't worth their time and effort to continue providing that service. Nowhere was it implied that you should be able to run your copy of the game past the date that the service was provided. So, your argument has a major fallacy -- you were never sold the right to operate the COH client indefinitely, only as long as the service was in operation.
You have some valid points.
However, Win 95 CAN still be used. I can build a Win 95 machine and have it operate just fine. I can do so with DOS 6.21, too. Apple's OS may be a different story. I bought their Media Player (can't recall the title now) and when it changed versions, I no longer could run it, for Apple gave me messages I HAD to upgrade, for more money. The difference here, is that I don't expect Microsoft to support my old machine. Heck, my Win 7x64 current PC is no longer supported, though I seem to get updates once or twice a day.
I do agree that MMOs are a different ball of wax. The server is the difference. Without one, the game will not run. Just because I bought an MMO does not force a company to keep a server alive and running. I have hundreds of single player games that are no longer supported, but I can still run and play them, thanks to older OS machines or DOSBox
What gets me here is this. I know that the City of Titans folks (possibly others, too?) offered to buy the code from NCSoft first, before making their own game. NCSoft declined, which is their prerogative.
Personally, I'm torn. My "lawful" side says this is all wrong. It is intellectual property theft. My more "neutral" side is leaning towards trying to understand why NCSoft acts the way they do in this particular case. Since they have not let it be known they have any plans whatsoever with this IP, they have refused sale of it, they aren't making any money on the IP whatsoever, why make a fuss?
There are laws and legal precedence all in favor of NCSoft stomping on everything. It is within their right to do whatever they do. Sometimes, just because one CAN do something doesn't mean they should. But NCSoft is a business, not a human being...
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Yep, the Win 95 wasn't maybe the best analogy, from an operational perspective. But Microsoft still owns that code and has the intellectual property rights to pursue anyone trying to sell Win 95 code as their own. You could make and sell an emulated version of Win 85 (but why?), just not claim their code as your own work (again, why?).
This is the key for me: Money. NCSoft is not making any on CoH presently, nor announced any plans to in the future. I don't think anyone is going to try to pass their game off as their own, and I certainly hope that no one tries to make any money off of it.
If an artist (painter, in this case) makes copies of da Vinci's or Renoir's work and hangs them in their house, proudly pointing out how close to the original it is, is that "theft?" How about giving, not selling, those paintings to friends and/or family? Is that "theft?" Are these estates losing any money? After all, there is only ONE Mona Lisa
How about eBay or Game Stop? Do game makers make any money on the sales there? Do we, as consumers, have the "right" to resell games we no longer play?
There is a lot of "muck" to wade through here. The MMO server portion, though, makes MMOs a bit different from anything else. Servers are an important part of the game no one bought the rights to.
Sign me: Still Conflicted
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I do find it weird gamers will defend a game company to death (so to speak), no matter what. Companies are not someones friend, they are out to make money.
MY PERSONAL OPINION ONLY:
I'm pretty sure most people realize that, but those who are saying that this is theft of intellectual property are siding with the law. It's pretty simple. This code was stolen from NCSoft. This was distributed without any input from NCS, further exacerbating the theft exponentially.
Literally nothing in this world lasts forever and it's simply shocking how many believe they are somehow entitled to play a game forever if a company decides to stop its service irrespective of how popular it is at the time.
Do I think it would buy good faith if companies did release code for dead games? Absolutely. Do I condone the theft and distribution of the code just because they did not? Absolutely not.
Theft is theft and it's wrong.
That's a key point, too. The code was "leaked", not given, sold, or provided in any way by the creator, NCSoft.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Legal issues aside, it's a mistake to think that playing these old versions of the games will bring back the thing you had at the time that you played and loved it. You were a different person then, the world was a different place then, and the people around you were different. The particular game engine doesn't really matter, what mattered was the person who you were at the time that you played it... and that person is gone, and is never coming back. You are who you are now, and time spent longing for going back to who you used to be has never brought anyone anything except frustration and disappointment. Recognize what made the game's community great and how important it was in your life at that time, but then move on and focus on the person you are now.
This is the same thing that happens to old jocks who remember what it was like to be the team captain and can't let it go. Move on, find new communities to be a part of and make the next round of memories you'll look back on fondly. Don't live in the past.
So, is anyone actually playing yet? I read a server opened yesterday, a surprisingly quick turnaround IMO for "just released to the public" code, almost like they had been preparing for this turn of events for quite some time. (And knew in advance exactly what to prepare for)
My guess its run by folks involved with the original "secret" server and not just a bunch of randoms.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So, is anyone actually playing yet? I read a server opened yesterday, a surprisingly quick turnaround IMO for "just released to the public" code, almost like they had been preparing for this turn of events for quite some time. (And knew in advance exactly what to prepare for)
My guess its run by folks involved with the original "secret" server and not just a bunch of randoms.
Lots of people are on! 200 player limit was put onto the server temporarily because it kept blowing up last night.
I believe what happened is the original private server owner leaked just the code, and left us needing to recreate quests & NPCs, but he eventually leaked everything, it's basically a carbon copy of the private server that's been ran for 6 years in secret, except for everybody needing to recreate accounts & characters, (including the version 25 update) to a select group of people, 4-5, and so with everybody's help putting the code & databases together, this server was able to be put up a lot sooner than anybody else's & much quicker than originally anticipated.
Basically this means there's that one private server, and the one public server people are playing on, and I'd imagine other people are working with the code originally released, but it'll be awhile longer for them because of the coding required to make it actually a game.
When all is said and done, more is always said than done.
Would the publishers not argue, though, that the consumer should've known that the company provided the only legal means for the required servicing of the client? That seems like the argument to make in response to the ToS expiration justification for gamers feeling entitled to private server services: "The customer knew that we were the only entity who could legally provide the servers needed to experience the client when they purchased the title, and that we made no guarantee the service would continue."
Playing devil's advocate with regards to my own position, of course, but you seem knowledgeable about the matter, so I didn't wanna miss the chance to bend your ear for more information while you were here.
Let me offer, then, a disclaimer of my own to say that I'm just looking at this as an interesting debate, and my responses shouldn't be taken as official legal advice.
It is not up to a private entity to determine who or what is "the only legal means for the required servicing" of anyone. That is a power reserved for public entities who perform public functions. What a private entity can do is create a contract granting the party an exclusive right to provide services. For example, a city might enter into an exclusive contract with a catering service to provide coffee. The terms might dictate that the contract prevents the city from going to other caterers to service their events.
However, a contract goes two ways. The exclusivity exists so long as the exclusive party provides the service. If the catering company does not provide coffee, and shows no willingness or ability to ever provide coffee, the catering service can't prevent the city from seeking somebody else to provide coffee. If the exclusive party does not provide the service, and the exclusive party has made it clear that it is unwilling or unable to ever provide the service, the contract will typically not be sufficient to prevent the city from seeking coffee elsewhere. The law will typically declare the contract is void.
Now in the example argument you would give, if somebody were to actually argue that, they would probably not fare well. Because nobody makes promises to others who can't guarantee they will uphold their side of an agreement; they make promises on the good faith assumption that the agreement itself guarantees compliance on both sides of the agreement. If, indeed, the publisher declares itself "the only legal means," then why aren't they providing those means? And if they cannot guarantee that they will provide those means, then they cannot equally say that other legal means may be employed to gain what the provider is unwilling or unable to provide.
One didn't sign a contract and one didn't buy a game. One did buy a software license + service. NCsoft gave notice before pulling the plug, so one could find a new "game". As their service ended, they terminated ones license to use their software aswell. The only legal point one could bring is the expected vs reasonable "lifetime" of the software. For example built-in car navigation is only as good as its maps, so how many updates can one expect before it can be abandoned by the carbuilder? Over 40 years will ones grandchildren be entitled to a working navigation when they take this car out for a spin?
The contract is implied as part of the law underpinning a purchase. The publisher shows by its actions that, despite what you claim, the software was purchased. It was purchased because people own the disks, disks which were purchased at retail, disks that they had to use, store, and maintain at their own expense. Disks that they had the right to resell. Disks that contained files that the publisher sold them. Files that contained code which the consumer had the absolute authority to use and enjoy, like any work purchased under the UCC, so long as it wasn't duplicated and resold for commercial purposes.
Which is exactly one of the reasons, I think, the games went to FTP, and followed an online distribution model to download the free client. Because the status of purchases under the UCC is very clear and very settled stuff. And for those who came in during the days when the CoH client and access was given away for free, bypassing merchants, the explanation you provide may make better sense.
But not all players fit into that category.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
2.) Once you sign into your forum account proceed to the account creation portion of the website using the following link.
https://score.savecoh.com/account/
"
If NCSoft were smart (their past action however prove otherwise), they would immediately embrace the SCORE team and work with/hire them to fully restore the game, improve on it, and learn from all the F2P games that have come since and make CoX truly live again.
It's clear from all the hype that there is still a very strong interest in this game after all this time and any good company would want to take advantage of that if at all possible.
2.) Once you sign into your forum account proceed to the account creation portion of the website using the following link.
https://score.savecoh.com/account/
"
Seems like there a problem with creating a game account, it keeps giving an error with "ERROR: Could not connect to the Account Server Gateway. Try again in a few minutes."
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It's just a test server so wait for the real thing. This one is for testing plus it has sentinels a class I've never seen and MM had kinetic since when ?
It's just a test server so wait for the real thing. This one is for testing plus it has sentinels a class I've never seen and MM had kinetic since when ?
I think they said this is based off the private server which had updates the officail live server never had which included some new content and tweaks or something like that.
Just got on discord.
@everyone UPDATE 4/20/2019 1:40 PM CST The limiters the coders tried to put in place were not working, this means there is currently no population limit to the server. Current Server Stats: 600+ active connections 400+ were trying to connect while the server was still up As of right now the server is offline and is being moved to a new cluster, this means it will be offline until we get the new cluster up and running. The talk around the water cooler is that this new cluster should be better optimized than the previous one. So more of you should be able to get once it is up, this should also provide a more stable experience for those who do get in. At this time we ask that you all simply standby and wait for any more updates, join voice, talk in server channels, keep the community alive! Thank you for attending my TED talk.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It's just a test server so wait for the real thing. This one is for testing plus it has sentinels a class I've never seen and MM had kinetic since when ?
I think they said this is based off the private server which had updates the officail live server never had which included some new content and tweaks or something like that.
Just got on discord.
@everyone UPDATE 4/20/2019 1:40 PM CST The limiters the coders tried to put in place were not working, this means there is currently no population limit to the server. Current Server Stats: 600+ active connections 400+ were trying to connect while the server was still up As of right now the server is offline and is being moved to a new cluster, this means it will be offline until we get the new cluster up and running. The talk around the water cooler is that this new cluster should be better optimized than the previous one. So more of you should be able to get once it is up, this should also provide a more stable experience for those who do get in. At this time we ask that you all simply standby and wait for any more updates, join voice, talk in server channels, keep the community alive! Thank you for attending my TED talk.
NCSoft had all these updates they didn't put out and they shut all the servers down. Wow! That is quite staggering.
Comments
But, and this is a big but, I am not just spewing out propaganda, I am laying out the actual situation as it is, it doesn’t matter what you, or I, think about it. I don’t mind emulation, I’ve played both WAR and Vanguard emulated but in the case of COH its simply theft.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
However, Win 95 CAN still be used. I can build a Win 95 machine and have it operate just fine. I can do so with DOS 6.21, too. Apple's OS may be a different story. I bought their Media Player (can't recall the title now) and when it changed versions, I no longer could run it, for Apple gave me messages I HAD to upgrade, for more money. The difference here, is that I don't expect Microsoft to support my old machine. Heck, my Win 7x64 current PC is no longer supported, though I seem to get updates once or twice a day.
I do agree that MMOs are a different ball of wax. The server is the difference. Without one, the game will not run. Just because I bought an MMO does not force a company to keep a server alive and running. I have hundreds of single player games that are no longer supported, but I can still run and play them, thanks to older OS machines or DOSBox
What gets me here is this. I know that the City of Titans folks (possibly others, too?) offered to buy the code from NCSoft first, before making their own game. NCSoft declined, which is their prerogative.
Personally, I'm torn. My "lawful" side says this is all wrong. It is intellectual property theft. My more "neutral" side is leaning towards trying to understand why NCSoft acts the way they do in this particular case. Since they have not let it be known they have any plans whatsoever with this IP, they have refused sale of it, they aren't making any money on the IP whatsoever, why make a fuss?
There are laws and legal precedence all in favor of NCSoft stomping on everything. It is within their right to do whatever they do. Sometimes, just because one CAN do something doesn't mean they should. But NCSoft is a business, not a human being...
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
If an artist (painter, in this case) makes copies of da Vinci's or Renoir's work and hangs them in their house, proudly pointing out how close to the original it is, is that "theft?" How about giving, not selling, those paintings to friends and/or family? Is that "theft?" Are these estates losing any money? After all, there is only ONE Mona Lisa
How about eBay or Game Stop? Do game makers make any money on the sales there? Do we, as consumers, have the "right" to resell games we no longer play?
There is a lot of "muck" to wade through here. The MMO server portion, though, makes MMOs a bit different from anything else. Servers are an important part of the game no one bought the rights to.
Sign me: Still Conflicted
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
To shut down the servers, they don't need any of that.
Got to love stomping through the sewers with 8 masterminds.
My guess its run by folks involved with the original "secret" server and not just a bunch of randoms.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I believe what happened is the original private server owner leaked just the code, and left us needing to recreate quests & NPCs, but he eventually leaked everything, it's basically a carbon copy of the private server that's been ran for 6 years in secret, except for everybody needing to recreate accounts & characters, (including the version 25 update) to a select group of people, 4-5, and so with everybody's help putting the code & databases together, this server was able to be put up a lot sooner than anybody else's & much quicker than originally anticipated.
Basically this means there's that one private server, and the one public server people are playing on, and I'd imagine other people are working with the code originally released, but it'll be awhile longer for them because of the coding required to make it actually a game.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Which is exactly one of the reasons, I think, the games went to FTP, and followed an online distribution model to download the free client. Because the status of purchases under the UCC is very clear and very settled stuff. And for those who came in during the days when the CoH client and access was given away for free, bypassing merchants, the explanation you provide may make better sense.
But not all players fit into that category.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
1.) Sign into your score forum account at this link. http://score.savecoh.com/
2.) Once you sign into your forum account proceed to the account creation portion of the website using the following link. https://score.savecoh.com/account/ "
Then you just need to download the client & login via your game account: https://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index.php?topic=12479.0
It's clear from all the hype that there is still a very strong interest in this game after all this time and any good company would want to take advantage of that if at all possible.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
BTW thanks @OhhPaigey ; for bringing this to light . Great news.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.