Perhaps a workaround is to just have 1 server online indefinitely. Technically the online services are still functional - the match queue times would just be very, very large.
Perhaps a workaround is to just have 1 server online indefinitely. Technically the online services are still functional - the match queue times would just be very, very large.
If bills like this pass, there'd be financial pressure on middleware providers to allow distribution at end-of-life (or for their component to be easily severed) else they'd lose out on all customers selling games in California/EU/etc.
From Day 1 any Doom client could be a multiplayer server and this is how it worked for almost all games - Descent, Quake, C&C etc...
I guess they could just strip our the parts of the server code that they don't have the rights to redistribute, but then it wouldn't be functional.
People far too often forget the absolutely vital aspect information plays in the free market, and anything that increases information (for example, how long a good should be expected to continue to function) is a net good, when compared to a complete lack of information about that.
That would violate the law.
> 60 days before a digital game operator ceases to provide services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game, the operator shall communicate all of the following information to purchasers and prospective purchasers of the digital game:
> (i) The date on which services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game will cease.
> (ii) Any services that will no longer be provided by the operator.
> (iii) Any game features that will no longer be available to the purchaser.
> (iv) Any known security risks that may result from the cessation of services.
> (v) How the purchaser can continue to use the digital game, or obtain a refund, pursuant to paragraph (2).
Scaling in the number of game servers isn't termination of service, though, and would not match the conditions laid out above.